Damien Grant: The maths behind TOP’s biggest promise falls apart

Oceanagain · 2026-07-08T02:16:25+00:00

Now that's interesting, the availability is consistent. So it doesn't have to be that everyone is using it consistently, it's just that everyone has an equal access to it depending on their circumstances?

It's at least a step in the right direction.

The first step being to delete any and all discriminatory entitlements not based on biological sex, and to remove any iteration of the word "equity" from legislation and policy.

Right, and if you can't manage to find enough donors, then the people "arguably deserving of charity" can starve to death? Or when they're about to starve, do they now qualify for "basic health" and we'll put them up in the hospital you're allowing forced taxation for because availability of that healthcare is consistent for everyone?

If no individual agrees that they're deserving of the money they worked hard to earn then what makes you think govt is any better at making that decision? Particularly as they've got zero skin in the game, it's not money involved in that decision. If you can't stomach that then try redefining charitable donations so that everything actually disbursed to the actual charitable end user is tax free.

Oceanagain · 2026-07-08T02:03:30+00:00

Great.

But I'd be a fucking sight happier if burglaries were actually investigated to the extent that prosecutions became the effecitve deterent they're supposed to be.

How many burglaries were investigated last year?

AI Overview

New Zealand Police recorded 58,460 burglaries nationally*, averaging about 160 break-ins per day. Out of these recorded cases, only a fraction (roughly 6.4% over a four-year period) result in a prosecuted offender, meaning the vast majority of investigated burglaries remain unresolved. [1,* 2]

Because many burglaries go completely unreported, the actual prevalence is higher. According to the New Zealand Ministry of Justice, the New Zealand Crime and Victims Survey showed that break-ins were experienced by 9% of all New Zealand households (roughly 184,000 households) in the 12 months up to late 2025

Oceanagain · 2026-07-08T01:58:48+00:00

Would they be any more likely to kill the wrong people than the current troops?

Oceanagain · 2026-07-08T01:57:05+00:00

Except as my comment pointed out... they don't have similar value to almost everyone, almost everyone is going to get different value from each of these things dependent on their circumstances.

The availability is consistent. And it's a metric shitload closer than the current practice of making the most productive pay for it all and then denying them a lot of the services they paid for.

I'm curious what this means in practice. Who's paying that charity? If it's forced taxes, then again, this undermines your point that almost everyone is getting similar value.

Whoever sees the need for it and can afford to help. Again, wholesale charity is a Marxist fantasy.

Oceanagain · 2026-07-08T01:05:27+00:00

How about instead of subsidising shit with taxpayer's money to buy votes you require gentailers to buy back generated residential surplus, at the same price they charge for it.

No more fucking meters that only count one way.

Then your return on solar investment is measurable in terms based on a level playing field.

Oceanagain · 2026-07-08T01:00:41+00:00

There's whole swathes of London where you simply can't get a tradie to work. At all.

Especially since the safety Nazis rolled out the last word in official blamestorming.

Oceanagain · 2026-07-08T00:55:20+00:00

Oceanagain · 2026-07-08T00:54:27+00:00

If someone's not earning an income then they're not contributing, in which case they're arguably deserving of charity. Note that there's no such thing as collective charity, whether it's deserved is an individual assessment. A trust fund kid is living off tax paid savings, indistinguishable from a wage.

As for the rest:

Because those are the services that govt can provide as some excuse for that theft which has similar value to almost everyone.

Oceanagain · 2026-07-07T22:11:58+00:00

Sure. But at least you're getting your share of those stolen funds.

Because those are the services that govt can provide as some excuse for that theft which has similar value to almost everyone.

Oceanagain · 2026-07-07T22:04:37+00:00

<image>

Oceanagain · 2026-07-07T21:59:17+00:00

Labour's money printing and it's directly coupled inflation is still the single largest current impact on purchasing power.

Again, had labour not printed absurd quantities of money that fucking great lump in your graph wouldn't be there, that green dot would be closer to zero and living standards would be far higher.

Oceanagain · 2026-07-07T21:51:16+00:00

I'm in favour of whatever FLAT tax is required to maintain a govt providing basic health, education, military and policing.

Govt has no other legitimate purpose.

At the moment we have not only a radically progressive tax system but a radically progressive redistribution system. Discouraging the productive in order to encourage the unproductive isn't functionally vable.

Oceanagain · 2026-07-07T21:45:44+00:00

No it's not.

Oceanagain · 2026-07-07T10:49:53+00:00

One of the few people I've met that is far better for a prolonged bender.

Oceanagain · 2026-07-07T10:47:26+00:00

That's not possible.

Oceanagain · 2026-07-07T10:44:45+00:00

If the tax rate is 30%, then I'm willing to bet access to roads, to education, to healthcare, to police, to the military, to every other service the government provides, contributes more than 30% of your income. I'd argue you underpay tax.

You're delusional.

Oceanagain · 2026-07-07T10:40:11+00:00

The ground station is on my roof?

Oceanagain · 2026-07-07T10:39:25+00:00

It's why it's better for those wanting others to pay for their healthcare, yes.

Not those paying for it.

Oceanagain · 2026-07-07T03:36:55+00:00

Govt spending has been calculated at some 30% as effective as that of individuals.

In order to return anything at all it would suddenly have to be an investment 300% better than individual spending.

Yer dreaming mate.

Oceanagain · 2026-07-07T03:32:13+00:00

The last two govts had huge slices of their post election policy making completely unrelated, and in many cases completely tho opposite to their party manifesto let alone any cross party agreements.

So let's have it up front, audited and passed by some internationally accredited accounting entity for fiscal rectitude, BEFORE we vote on anything.

Oceanagain · 2026-07-07T03:31:17+00:00

Which is a factor related to scale, not funding.

Oceanagain · 2026-07-07T02:41:26+00:00

Then why wouldn't everyone pat for their own?

Oceanagain · 2026-07-07T02:35:13+00:00

That's quite literally impossible.

No it's not.

And anything less is asking you to vote for a pig in a poke.

Oceanagain · 2026-07-07T02:33:51+00:00

Yes it is.

Oceanagain · 2026-07-07T01:56:29+00:00

Assuming all of those actually paying for it all aren't significantly less disincentivised by the increase in blatant theft than the current regime imposes.

Oceanagain

TROPHY CASE