Yes, Jens, either way;

1. Taxes used directly to fund much needed infrastructure, (hospitals, schools, roads, rail, forests, state and community housing, insulation and solar energy schemes) which will reduce the need to pay benefits, and boost spending and savings.

2. By handing over taxes to retirement funds for investment in the above infrastructure which of course would have the same immediate benefits but would require pay-back with interest at some later stage but would be there for pensions in future. I guess.

Both have their pluses and minuses - the greater plus for me is to increase the numbers of New Zealanders in work; earning, learning, spending, saving and paying taxes NOW.

Yes, Hero, austerity is stifling every economy as it always has - and the US, UK and EU are beginning to realise it. I hope we do too before it's too late.

I think if all NZers who can work, do work and are paid a decent living wage, then the worry about the affordability of pensions is completely alleviated.

And creating infrastructure to benefit NZ in the future when costs will have risen again if the economy ever gets to be truly strong again makes obvious economic sense. 'The market' will only do what profits them short-term. The government is there to do the long-term planning and funding on behalf of its people.

arandar, your point # 1 way of raising more revenue for govt. to spend on consumption or investment was actually practised with the 1/6 extra in the pound of taxation on income 60 years ago - credited nominally into the Universal Super Fund, but actually invested in public works, state housing etc not as a debt to, or ownership by, the Super Fund (and later just in public debt to finance welfare consumption, which is a more clear cut form of having it done wrong) - with the result, that there were no wealth reserves to help to pay for our superannuation - but only public ownership of the assets built, and just public debt for the rest.

Trying to sell public assets to finance NZ Super (apart from perhaps state houses)would have probably been even more unpopular and certainly economically worse than our current assets sales, which are supposed to be re-invested and not consumed on superannuation etc.

(I am somwhat less critical of assets sales now since hearing that up to 20% might be taken up by the NZSF and ACC , both with vital public services that cannot be delivered without substantial capital reserves)

So - the scenario #1 is just the mistake to be corrected by scenario #2.

The priority of unspecified jobs creation through taxation - just like freely consumable tax reductions - does not necessarily lead to accelerated wealth creation, and most likely leads to accelerated consumption, helping mostly some "luxury" consumption industries, because basic consumption demand is fairly stable.

But there cannot be any doubt whatsover, that despite EVERYTHING,
( "white elephants", etc.), it is steady investment which creates higher earning and consumption sustainability - which is not guaranteed at all by higher incomes alone for just consumption only - especially from the moment the productivity generating that income ceases.

Arandar - isn't option #2 demonstrably more appropriate for us in our current situation?

A Bill to keep New Zealanders getting free access to public libraries has today been lodged into the Parliamentary Ballot by Megan Woods M.P. For Wigram. With the Governments new Local Government Amendment Bill pressure will be on councils to make revenue like charging for books in libraries.This must not be allowed to happen.

Isn't nice when the prime minister proves you are right all along.

Anne Tolley, when education minister, always said national standards would not lead to league tables of schools. I have been saying that with the Official Information Act league tables were ineveitable.

Now John agrees with me and says that league tables will be ineveitable because of the Official Information Act.

Cheers

Hero42, I also see that the data is very narrow, unreliable and flawed Schools yesterday called for a review after it emerged that the number of Pakeha attending low decile schools has halved in the past decade-but argued funding should remain

Aranda,

AUSTERITY: from the dictionary, STRICT ECONOMY

Perhaps if previous governments around the world, including our own, weren't so loose with their economies to start with austerity measures would not be needed now

Doogie,
Perhaps you should tell the Banks and Financiers that - it was irresponsible (even dishonest) lending that got them into the mess in the first place.

Why do we have low decile schools, DR. L. Is it to accommodate low achieving teachers. These teachers will never come up to par if they have no good teachers for role models.

There are bright pupils amongst these underfed children of the ghetto who are being denied good teachers because of the poaching by high decile schools. When our kids can't even receive an equal class of education it smacks of English class system.

Joybel, the 'Decile' of a school is based entirely on the Census. It is based on a grid in which the Census shows the income levels of the grid squares residents.

So a school in Remuera or Karori or whereever is the highest earning area of Christchurch is likely to be Decile 10, while a school in Otara or Cannons Creek or whereever is a low-income area of Christchurch is likely to be Decile 1.

Deciles have absolutely nothing to do with the Educational achievements of the schools at all.

Many low Decile schools achieve well above average results for their students and many achieve far above their (misunderstood) Decile rating.

Can anyone tell me the latest on PALMERSTON Norths bid to save "CAPITAL Connection their rail service. Gerry Brownlee is not listening.

Arandar

Are the banks not under the jurisdiction of goverments?

I thought they were zoned. My great grand daughter started school this year. There are two schools within walking distance plus a Catholic school which has stopped accepting non Catholic. However she is going to a top school at least three kilometres away because her mum has the car to get her there. Hope the car does not break down as there is no public transport available.

My daughter was able to bypass the local intermediate in her suburb and enrol her boys in a high decile one in the centre of the wealthy sector. They went on to a Catholic boys high school to avoid the two local ones which were hotbeds of strife.

A grandaughter, a teacher had a relieving job at a low decile school in the Eastern suburb. She found it rewarding though many pupils were too tired to concentrate as the homes have very slack parents. She had to strive hard to get them motivated.

Today she is living in a higher economic suburb in Hamilton relieving at the school her children attend and she loves it. Teachers are entitled to enjoy their work but many are rowing against the tide. Much is expected of them, but sometimes there are only a few pupils who wish to learn.

As long as there is inequality in living standards and parents who have lost the will to do better we will have these schools that attract the best and brightest.