With NZ in Dire Economic Straits, Key Spends $36 million of Taxpayer’s Money on America’s Cup

Stuff reports

Team New Zealand will get another $36 million from the Government to contest the 2013 America’s Cup, the Government has announced. Acting Economic Development Minister David Carter said the Government was contractually obliged to give the money to Team New Zealand to fight for the 2013 America’s Cup in San Francisco.

Carter said “the eyes of the world” would be on San Francisco for the elite yacht race. “We will use the America’s Cup to our full advantage by showcasing New Zealand’s technology, products and services, and encouraging tourism,” Carter said.

What was that headline the other day from Key??

Key: We can’t help your price pain

Prime Minister John Key yesterday acknowledged New Zealanders were “feeling the pinch” as prices rose at their fastest rate in two years led by fuel costs, something he said the Government could do little about.

I am so sick of these worthless lying socialists. Watch for the apologetic propaganda post on Keywiblog.

Update: The story is that it was a watertight contract introduced under Labour and driven by Trevor Mallard. Fair enough. However, does anyone reading this think that if National had have been able to cancel they would have? I would venture that National would have no problem with this expenditure. On the grounds that it may generate taxable income for the country. My complaint still stands. National are still not concerned that this payment breaches their founding principles. To wit-

“to oppose interference by the State in business, and State control of industry”

National have no view on this that differs in any substantial way from Labour’s.

22 thoughts on “With NZ in Dire Economic Straits, Key Spends $36 million of Taxpayer’s Money on America’s Cup

  1. It is one thing to say that this payment is an expense simpliciter; but is it possible, just possible, it is an investment which may yield a handsome return? I am not even slightly interested in the competition just the possible economic benefits.

    Like

  2. “but is it possible, just possible, it is an investment which may yield a handsome return?”

    To hell with that. If Key wants to make investments, let him do it with his own money. The government has no business appointing itself as “investors”, and it has no business putting money into private sector events like World Rugby Cups, Stadiums, America’s Cup etc. Whether it makes profit or not from so doing is not the damn question.

    When it does these things, it is far exceeding its brief as a government. Core services are all we need, not this kind of socialist bullshit.

    What does it take to get through to these arrogant melon heads that they absolutely have to reduce the size of government, return that organisation to its core duties, and stop borrowing?

    Like

  3. Cadwaller – if there was any return to be had private business would be all over it. All this is is another grandiose wastage of money that will do nothing but secure the elite front row seats and vip treatment. Stated differently, they grab your dollars from your pocket with but one objective: to hang their dicks in the bubbly during top notch events.

    Like

  4. Agreed Bez, the question I ask is how many boat manufacturers have hit the wall in this recession? NZ Marine Inc is over. It has suddenly become too expensive, boats are now being built far cheaper by the Yellow Peril.

    Priceless, Mr Key, just slap it on the slate!

    Like

  5. Bez: Private business is all over it!

    I have never endorsed Governments investing taxpayer funds in jaunty enterprises, all I questioned was whether this is an expense in the sense that there is likely to never be a return…ever!

    Like

  6. For me it’s the principle of forcing people to pay (by their time and labour) for sports they have no interest in that makes this immoral…

    Namely me and yatching..! 🙂

    Like

  7. Don’t get me wrong, I love yachting and don’t mind the bubbly thing either, I just can’t see why anybody else would have to pay for my ticket. If there is any role in this for government at all, it is to repeal a whole raft of nonsense regulations and legislation that reduces these events to what they can potentially be.

    Like

  8. I did some research, it’s about $8.30 per person in NZ but technically kids aren’t paying taxes, but GST etc… So over that is going to this. I could rent a DVD or two for that seeing as I can’t download anymore.
    It could have a return but am I, an art student working part time in a call center for surveys gonna see any of that? No.

    Like

  9. Pingback: With NZ in Dire Economic Straits, Key Spends $36 million of … | Today Headlines

  10. Pingback: With NZ in Dire Economic Straits, Key Spends $36 million of … | Today Headlines

  11. And, of course, Red of those 1.2M there are quite a few that are sucking off the teat one way or another. My guess is that there may be 750,000 productive tax payers tops.

    Like

  12. All you need for the equations is the stats for:

    The number of people working in the Armed Forces, Police, etc. (proper governmental functions)
    +
    the number working in the private sector

    minus those working the private sector on government contracts
    =
    productive citizens

    Like

  13. Yep Pinko, the formula ain’t that hard, but getting your little paws on the data will be a different question, as there are heaps of people working in the private sector who effectively are doing nothing but delivering goods and services to the gummint. Then you have all those people working strictly in the private sector and B2B environment, but who are doing work that wouldn’t exist without gummint or which would be much less. Think about accountants, tax consultants, patent attorneys, environmental consultants etc etc. I know we are drifting to another topic altogether, but nevertheless..

    Like

  14. RB: I seem to recall that there are barely 1,000,000 income taxpayers in NZ. There are many more including children paying GST.

    Like

  15. A question for you Cadwallader- if you receive your income from the government, and whether you pay tax by GST or any other means, is it true that you are indeed paying tax?

    Like

  16. I can answer that for Cad, RB. The answer to the question depends on whether you look at the micro- or macro- level. At the first you are, as in your personal sphere the tax is reducing the amount you receive for your work. From a macro level the answer is no, the tax only has the effect that it reduces the nett cost for government to employ somebody.

    Like

  17. “All you need for the equations is the stats for:
    The number of people working in the Armed Forces, Police, etc. (proper governmental functions)
    +
    the number working in the private sector

    minus those working the private sector on government contracts
    =
    productive citizens”

    Pinko, as others have pointed out the equation is a little more difficult than that. Especially if your definition of ‘productive’ means ‘those who are nett tax PAYERS’, because it basically rules out anyone sucking from the WFF teat.

    I think the actual proportion of payers propping up the takers is around 1 in 6. Maybe a little less.

    Like

  18. That’s a good point Gantt, and I suspected this would be the case. But, kind of like the BMWs, why didn’t Key do something to change it? Not as if they haven’t had enough time. They have passed a lot of legislation. Surely some tinkering with this agreement was possible. Maybe not. But I find that difficult to understand given the government’s power to legislate and the altered state of government finances since the agreement was signed.

    Like

  19. Yeah I know it isn’t a good look, but the stuff article says Mallard was gloating he’d signed up a ‘water-tight’ contract with Dalton. Any contract can be broken, but I wonder at the cost of breaking vs that of proceeding.

    I remain convinced the contract with BMW could easily have been rescinded, perhaps for a small penalty. Why the fuck they’re using BMWs instead of (e.g.) Calais still baffles me but that’s a different argument.

    And, notwithstanding the difference in the amounts involved, I reckon it would have been politically easier to cancel the BMW contract than the America’s Cup one, given the massive trade in what disgracefully passes for ‘patriotism’ every time ‘we’ compete in the field of sporting endeavour.

    Like

Comments are closed.