Unless you're not a student, never had a student loan, and don't plan on sitting in a lecture theatre for three years.
Then you don't really care about this policy except for what it costs you as a taxpayer.
The unfortunate thing about democracy is that we're all taxpayers.
It'll cost almost half a billion dollars next year, totalling almost $600 million over five years.
This is an old trick in Labour's playbook.
Helen Clark secured a third term in power after introducing interest-free student loans in 2005.
But this week, the Nats will hit back with their own little sweetener.
The books are open tomorrow for everyone to have a peek under the hood.
Listening to the sounds Nicola Willis was making yesterday, and to the bank economists on Friday, growth and the surplus should be looking a bit better than they did in the last update in May.
And then Nicola Willis will use those numbers to release policy: tax cuts.
She dropped hints about this at the BusinessNZ election conference a few weeks ago.
She's going to try to do something about bracket creep.
Which, unlike Labour's student loan bribe, is a bribe that almost all Kiwi taxpayers will benefit from.
Ryan Bridge is a New Zealand broadcaster who has worked on many current affairs television and radio shows. He currently hosts Newstalk ZB's Early Edition - where this article was sourced.
8 comments:
It will resonate primarily with D- 'achievers'......Labour supporters
Ryan obviously a fan of the brain drain. Use YOUR brain, Ryan!
and the diligent ones who paid their student loan back?
And who pays for this 10% bribe ? Taxpayers of course. Do you want to pay more tax so students can have more parties and then go overseas anyway ? Bloody fools are Labour and its voters.
Yes - e.g. Indian immigrant taxi driver ( charming hard-working chap) - will vote Labour this time as he lost over $200K on the value of his house under National . Such people think like this - i.e. quick profit or move on. The immigrant story since time immemorial. Our political elite are a rotten lot
clocking up huge pension for detroying a great nation.
Ryan you are giving far too much credit to the left leaning voters. The problem with that lot is that most people don't have the cognitive processing power to remotely understand these policies and what it actually means for the country. Their smarts extend to 'my pops voted labour and so do i'.
When ever im with lefties, they usually kick off whinging about something, so i cajole them along and I have asked these people to name 3 MPs in the parties they vote for. The vast majority cant. So they are not going to understand the ramifications of such a policy. All these people hear is 'FREE'. And that's all that pretty much motivates these types
The smart people have a deeper understanding and vote accordingly. The dumb people just tick the labour, greens or tpm box. So to answer your question, yes it will work, but not for the reasons you mentioned.
The "introduction" of Student Loans was, with out doubt, a Political Party (by the Govt of the day) "bribe" to University Students into voting for them.
The whole deal was to allow more Senior High School leavers to engage in University Study, the end goal to increase their ability to attain a high working level (on basis of Uni degree obtained) and potentially wages, that would then, part thereof, be used to pay the loan back
What, pay it back, where in the paperwork did it say that.
Oh shit, my final year at Uni, first year wasted on booze and whatever and my chances of getting a job slim, an I have this debit.
Thinking, "abscond to London".
Yup, no Govt of past years thought of how the money would be repaid, but it will was their thinking.
It will won't it, that is be paid back?
Yup - NZ IRS had the "eye on the ball" -
- some money was obtained (thanks IRS) from those who worked within NZ
- much money was obtained, when said "absconder's" came home and fronted the Immigration desk at a NZ Immigration desk.
Me thinks IRS "leaked" such data as it appeared in our NZ MSM, when they reported such news.
The question that should be asked -
" Just how much money -
- since inception has been paid out
- on an annual basis is paid out
- is paid back and over what time period
- is now owing"?
Disclaimer - as an "older" student I was not able to obtain a student loan for the studies I undertook, so had to pay for them out of "my own pocket". I still achieved a viable end result, without an end debit.
What does National have against education anyway? I know ACT hates it because it gives them more voters in the long term, but I remember National used to hold the premise of big tent. Times are changing.
Post a Comment
Thank you for joining the discussion. Breaking Views welcomes respectful contributions that enrich the debate. Please ensure your comments are not defamatory, derogatory or disruptive. We appreciate your cooperation.