I think this is an excellent policy, and a long time coming. This is done overseas with good effect. While I don’t think it’s a magic bullet, it is definitely a step in the right direction.

4 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
reply
6 points
*

I’m not convinced. If implemented, you could never reverse it because you’re just losing votes. That’s a good reason why it’s a thing overseas - they used it to buy votes and you can’t remove it without losing votes. I also think our duopoly of supermarkets is one thing that separates us from most other western countries that have GST exemptions like this.

What I’ve seen the past few years is complaints about how when things like this happen, companies just absorb most of the savings as profit. With a duopoly of supermarkets, I can’t see why after a few months fruit and veggies won’t be back at normal prices, with the saving taken by the supermarket as profit.

Any thoughts on this angle?

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

With a duopoly of supermarkets, I can’t see why after a few months fruit and veggies won’t be back at normal prices, with the saving taken by the supermarket as profit.

Fresh fruit and veges is one area where there is real competition in the marketplace. Plenty of independent vege shops around (in the centres of population at least).

I can’t remember the last time I bought veges from a duopoly supermarket. Fresh and Save, Fruit World, Tai Ping, etc are all good options.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I also don’t normally but fruit and veggies from supermarkets. But the vast majority of people do, and that’s what makes the duopoly.

And remember that every dollar exempted from GST is a dollar of tax that needs to be raised another way (or a dollar of government service that needs to be cut).

I guess I don’t understand the intent. Are they trying to provide cost relief? Wouldn’t removing tax on income under X amount be easier to administer?

Are they trying to encourage healthier choices? Maybe a sugar tax could help (a supermarket is unlikely to absorb a tax, but they will absorb a profit).

Although if this is a way to justify creating a commission to monitor supermarket profits (which they said they will do), then I could get behind that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I’ve just posted a story from RNZ, where every expert they came across though it was a stupid idea.

Yeah, it’s a dumb idea for sure.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Government either need to privatize or bring a government shopping way into the fray. Consumers are getting fleeced on every shop. No point allowing supermarkets the ability to bully the farmers. No one can fight the supermarkets and they make mega profits.

Food shops are second biggest expediture after rent. There are better ways than taking her off. Really need to break up the monopoly and stop the supermarkets price fixing. There’s no reason to bring prices down as there isn’t competition.

permalink
report
reply
2 points

So because it isn’t a perfect, one-stop, solution, we shouldn’t do anything at all?

Progress is made in small steps, not single giant strides.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

It is far from perfect. It’s a labour manifesto. If they get in. I’ve heard plenty from them about fixing housing and yet they refused to change the tax brackets and refused to hold the such accountable.

There was stuff In stuff calculating that you’d save $18 a month. Pretty pathetic. Better than nothing but still very pathetic.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

Again, it is a incremental change to add to other changes. It is not a magic bullet solution, and anyone who claims to have such a thing is lying. There is no reason to reject positive change just because it doesn’t do everything all at once.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

It’s a valid point, rather than taking on the supermarket duopoly or other bold measures, Labour is tinkering around the edges with a feel good policy that has been absolutely torn apart by experts.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Absolutely torn apart? GST free fruit and vegetables is the norm overseas. We’re the exception.

Sure there’s more they should have done. But I cannot see National or Act doing more.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Supermarkets don’t buy from the farmers directly.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Who do they buy from ?

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Not sure what your point is exactly?

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

This has been discussed and debated for years, and the point we keep coming back to is that our GST scheme is so cost effective to administer precisely because it doesn’t have many exemptions.

There are far better, more cost effective ways to help people than this, adjusting tax brackets for inflation would be an ideal start. Funding food banks and lunches in schools would be another.

permalink
report
reply
2 points

Introduce another tax bracket already!

Admittedly that’s tricky with most excess money not actually being earned but reinvested, maybe I’m advocating for a CGT (thanks for wholeheartedly trashing that idea, Jacinda!)

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Doing the easy stuff so they can avoid the hard stuff really sums up Labour, doesn’t it?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Kinda, but I get why she avoided the issue entirely…

It sounds really be left to us so that we can argue it out amongst ourselves though (rather than being tied to a party). I’m being naiive here, but a bit like the medical marijuana (hopefully without the disinformation!).

Because she categorically said “never, not on my watch” it means it’s never going to come up (unless national has a stroke)

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Commentators often make it sound as if it would be soooo overwhelmingly complicated

permalink
report
reply
2 points

I agree. It’s really not that complicated. The whole edge case argument is totally exaggerated. Yes, let’s no do something that benefits people’s health because we might get sued is such a weak argument.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

I’ve just posted a follow up article, there’s a lot of economists who think this is a bad idea.

permalink
report
parent
reply

NZ Politics

!politics@lemmy.nz

Create post

Kia ora and welcome to the NZ Politics community!

This is a place for respectful discussions about everything that’s political and kiwi

This is an inclusive space where diverse opinions are valued, but please don’t be a dick

Other kiwi communities here

 

Banner image by Tom Ackroyd, CC-BY-SA

Community stats

  • 108

    Monthly active users

  • 282

    Posts

  • 2.3K

    Comments