sparkychap wrote:

Lol all round.

I reckon.....unflipping real innit?

Some people would rather whittle their money away on coffees and fake nails than provide for their kids!

Edited by lakeview3 at 9:59 pm, Sat 27 Mar

lakeview3 - 2021-03-27 21:57:00

apollo11 wrote:

We don't do realistic here.

or do we?

lakeview3 - 2021-03-27 21:59:00

apollo11 wrote:

We don't do realistic here.

so true. We don’t do facts either, it seems.

sparkychap - 2021-03-27 22:00:00

sparkychap wrote:

Please can anyone provide a realistic detailed worked example resulting in a $16k additional tax bill please?

yes of course I could, but i'm not your Mum. Familiarize yourself with wff. and then disprove $15 K. could be $14k to $16 or more depending on the number or children.

heather902 - 2021-03-27 22:01:00

lakeview3 wrote:

I reckon.....unflipping real innit?

Some people would rather whittle their money away on coffees and fake nails than provide for their kids!

it’s mostly you I’m laughing at.

sparkychap - 2021-03-27 22:01:00

lakeview3 wrote:

no, they don’t expect anything.

However, I believe I have a responsibility as their parent, I bought them into this world. Of course I will try and leave them some kind of reasonable inheritance, why wouldn’t I? It’s a damn shame a few more people don’t think like this. I must say, I am shocked by people’s comments. What a blimmen eye opener eh.

I think it's awful, children expecting to profit from their parent's death.

apollo11 - 2021-03-27 22:02:00

sparkychap wrote:

it’s mostly you I’m laughing at.

haha good. Maybe I am laughing too, just remember he (or she) who laughs last, laughs longest!

lakeview3 - 2021-03-27 22:03:00

lakeview3 wrote:

haha good. Maybe I am laughing too, just remember he (or she) who laughs last, laughs longest!

Stop laughing, people are looking at you funny.

apollo11 - 2021-03-27 22:06:00

apollo11 wrote:

I think it's awful, children expecting to profit from their parent's death.

who said I expected to profit from my parents or that my kids expect to profit from me?

I have taken it upon myself to be responsible for the kids I bought into the world. I haven’t discussed it with them, they don’t have any expectations.

lakeview3 - 2021-03-27 22:07:00

lakeview3 wrote:

who said I expected to profit from my parents or that my kids expect to profit from me?

You did.

apollo11 - 2021-03-27 22:10:00

apollo11 wrote:

You did.

where?

lakeview3 - 2021-03-27 22:11:00

apollo11 wrote:

Stop laughing, people are looking at you funny.

IDGAS

lakeview3 - 2021-03-27 22:11:00

lakeview3 wrote:

yes it is their money to spend, however it also states under New Zealand law that it is a parents responsibility to provide for their children and many wills have been contested on this basis.

Personally I think it’s blardy selfish to bring kids into the world and not leave them anything when you go. I mean they didn’t ask us to give birth to them so the least we can do is leave them something to make life a bit easier when we are gone.

Here.

apollo11 - 2021-03-27 22:12:00

apollo11 wrote:

Here.

um you misinterpreted my post.

I am talking about my kids.

lakeview3 - 2021-03-27 22:15:00

lakeview3 wrote:

um you misinterpreted my post.

I am talking about my kids.

Pass the fudge.

apollo11 - 2021-03-27 22:17:00

apollo11 wrote:

Pass the fudge.

I don’t eat that cr@p

lakeview3 - 2021-03-27 22:20:00

lakeview3 wrote:

I don’t eat that cr@p

ahhh so tempting, but I'd better not...

apollo11 - 2021-03-27 22:28:00

apollo11 wrote:

ahhh so tempting, but I'd better not...

I too could let loose if I really wanted to.....

lakeview3 - 2021-03-27 22:30:00

lakeview3 wrote:

I too could let loose if I really wanted to.....

Poor thing, hope your diarrhea clears up quickly.

apollo11 - 2021-03-27 22:37:00

lakeview3 wrote:

who said I expected to profit from my parents or that my kids expect to profit from me?

I have taken it upon myself to be responsible for the kids I bought into the world. I haven’t discussed it with them, they don’t have any expectations.

I can see parents moving away from the standard Will setup, to trusts etc.
So the $ are not Claimable by ’short term partners' ( Gold diggers of any sex) tax advantages, long term investments governed by a trained responsable person with timely returns & investment advise. While also setting the expectations that one still has to work hard & save & invest as well.

marte - 2021-03-28 00:18:00

lakeview3 wrote:

yes it is their money to spend, however it also states under New Zealand law that it is a parents responsibility to provide for their children and many wills have been contested on this basis.

Personally I think it’s blardy selfish to bring kids into the world and not leave them anything when you go. I mean they didn’t ask us to give birth to them so the least we can do is leave them something to make life a bit easier when we are gone.

So are you saying my parents were selfish not to leave me anything after they died? So a lady who never smoked, touched alcohol, biked everywhere and ate healthily all her life as my Mum did, was selfish to have a massive stroke and use up all her money in 24 hour care after my Dad died? She would have preferred death to years of what she had, she was too healthy to die. You have no idea what some people go through do you? At least she paid for her care from the results of years of paying off a house and saving and did not have to be subsidized by the Govt. Do you really think she would have chosen to live that way? She was the most unselfish person I ever met so please don't generalise as people's circumstances are different even if it doesn't fit into how you think things should be.

Edited by kacy5 at 2:01 am, Sun 28 Mar

kacy5 - 2021-03-28 02:00:00

smallwoods wrote:

I know of a young chap, who as an apprentice has saved for his house.
Just turned 21 and is about to be a dad.
Should be out of his apprenticeship soon too.
The world is his oyster.
So as a generalisation, since he could do it, there is nothing stopping any young person doing it too!
Case closed, move on.

Yet I look at my daughter and her partner-,21 years old. They are in Uni both doing double degrees doing very well. They both also work around 15-20 hours in jobs to live, they also like at home as renting is too expensive. There student loans are huge and are very concerned how they will ever save enough for a house. Their degrees will lead them in great careers but not for many years. I do worry

chiz - 2021-03-28 04:58:00

lakeview3 wrote:

yes it is their money to spend, however it also states under New Zealand law that it is a parents responsibility to provide for their children and many wills have been contested on this basis.

Personally I think it’s blardy selfish to bring kids into the world and not leave them anything when you go. I mean they didn’t ask us to give birth to them so the least we can do is leave them something to make life a bit easier when we are gone.

Lakeview I doubt the law intended that the "parents provide for their children" be extended to those children as adults whose responsibility is now to provide for themselves. Didn't realize they exploited that in court. Its playing catch up anyway. If the world is "in a mess" dont bring a child into that mess in the first place. Most of us miss that one, have met a few bright sparks that didn't.

mkr_ahearn - 2021-03-28 07:16:00

kacy5 wrote:

So are you saying my parents were selfish not to leave me anything after they died? So a lady who never smoked, touched alcohol, biked everywhere and ate healthily all her life as my Mum did, was selfish to have a massive stroke and use up all her money in 24 hour care after my Dad died? She would have preferred death to years of what she had, she was too healthy to die. You have no idea what some people go through do you? At least she paid for her care from the results of years of paying off a house and saving and did not have to be subsidized by the Govt. Do you really think she would have chosen to live that way? She was the most unselfish person I ever met so please don't generalise as people's circumstances are different even if it doesn't fit into how you think things should be.

I don't think thats got anything to do with it. Of course the family money gets spent on the person that has it first. If there is none left so be it. Had you mother passed earlier it's likely some would have been left to her children. I think the fact parents have changed this attitude of saving for their children and passing down wealth is actually contributing to the number of homeless or unhoused we now have. It was once common for parents to give a helping hand to their children in buying a home. Now it becomes less common, with parents spending on themselves more and children that can't quite make the grade to acquire loans missing out. And yes, like lakeview I intend to help house my children. I didn't have them to toss onto the streets when I expire and hope they survive. I personally have not received family money but potentially could. It's not something I have spent over 60 years waiting for however and may not happen as it could be spent on care as above.

Edited by bryalea at 7:49 am, Sun 28 Mar

bryalea - 2021-03-28 07:47:00

It makes me really cross that the government have only gone 1/3 of the way with this.

As others have said there are three basic needs - food, shelter and clothing . They forgot healthcare but never mind that...

It’s time we slammed those bastard supermarkets, restaurants and clothing stores with these measures as well. No tax deductions for their loans either, those greedy bastards are profiting from the need of humans and this needs to stop.
They only ones who should get a free ride with tax are the wonderful people who take peoples money for stuff we don’t need. They are the True Heroes.

rmdstar - 2021-03-28 08:08:00

rmdstar wrote:

It makes me really cross that the government have only gone 1/3 of the way with this.

As others have said there are three basic needs - food, shelter and clothing . They forgot healthcare but never mind that...

It’s time we slammed those bastard supermarkets, restaurants and clothing stores with these measures as well. No tax deductions for their loans either, those greedy bastards are profiting from the need of humans and this needs to stop.
They only ones who should get a free ride with tax are the wonderful people who take peoples money for stuff we don’t need. They are the True Heroes.

we can grow our own food and make or get cheap clothes from an op shop. We can’t just build our own house because of all the rules and we need somewhere to put it.

So there goes that theory.

lakeview3 - 2021-03-28 08:29:00

kacy5 wrote:

So are you saying my parents were selfish not to leave me anything after they died? So a lady who never smoked, touched alcohol, biked everywhere and ate healthily all her life as my Mum did, was selfish to have a massive stroke and use up all her money in 24 hour care after my Dad died? She would have preferred death to years of what she had, she was too healthy to die. You have no idea what some people go through do you? At least she paid for her care from the results of years of paying off a house and saving and did not have to be subsidized by the Govt. Do you really think she would have chosen to live that way? She was the most unselfish person I ever met so please don't generalise as people's circumstances are different even if it doesn't fit into how you think things should be.

I think you are completely taking it the wrong way. Of course I don’t think your parents were selfish. Clearly poor health has impacted their situation as it could any of us. It is what it is.

I can’t speak to your situation, I don’t know what your parents did for jobs etc. clearly all that affects people’s outcomes too.

lakeview3 - 2021-03-28 08:33:00

lakeview3 wrote:

we can grow our own food and make or get cheap clothes from an op shop. We can’t just build our own house because of all the rules and we need somewhere to put it.

So there goes that theory.

Then get rid of the rules. . Far better than having any greedy individuals making a profit from human need.

rmdstar - 2021-03-28 08:37:00

bryalea wrote:

I don't think thats got anything to do with it. Of course the family money gets spent on the person that has it first. If there is none left so be it. Had you mother passed earlier it's likely some would have been left to her children. I think the fact parents have changed this attitude of saving for their children and passing down wealth is actually contributing to the number of homeless or unhoused we now have. It was once common for parents to give a helping hand to their children in buying a home. Now it becomes less common, with parents spending on themselves more and children that can't quite make the grade to acquire loans missing out. And yes, like lakeview I intend to help house my children. I didn't have them to toss onto the streets when I expire and hope they survive. I personally have not received family money but potentially could. It's not something I have spent over 60 years waiting for however and may not happen as it could be spent on care as above.

well said.

People should research as to why inheritance taxes became a thing, it’s because people were NOT passing wealth down. This created inequality and poverty. Inheritance tax was introduced to force people to start parting with their money before their death.

Of course we have a situation where inheritance tax is no longer applied but mark my words, it’s a tool the govt could implement if this excessive self indulgent spend marathon continues. Of course it’s not everyone doing it, but there are many who are and it’s literally bankrupting the next generations before they even get out of the starting blocks. I am talking not just not being able to afford housing, but healthcare, and other basics things this country needs. If the overall population is less wealthy, who will pay for roads education and health?

lakeview3 - 2021-03-28 08:39:00

rmdstar wrote:

Then get rid of the rules. . Far better than having any greedy individuals making a profit from human need.

already there are houses I see with portacabins, old buses caravans and converted garages and sheds littering the back yards. Desperation ain’t stopping them. There’s one place I drive by frequently, it’s an old shop. The front is literally on the footpath. There are people living in it.

We are past the point of something had to give.

lakeview3 - 2021-03-28 08:42:00

lakeview3 wrote:

well said.

People should research as to why inheritance taxes became a thing, it’s because people were NOT passing wealth down. This created inequality and poverty. Inheritance tax was introduced to force people to start parting with their money before their death.

Of course we have a situation where inheritance tax is no longer applied but mark my words, it’s a tool the govt could implement if this excessive self indulgent spend marathon continues. Of course it’s not everyone doing it, but there are many who are and it’s literally bankrupting the next generations before they even get out of the starting blocks. I am talking not just not being able to afford housing, but healthcare, and other basics things this country needs. If the overall population is less wealthy, who will pay for roads education and health?

Why are roads and healthcare and education not free? If we’re gonna do this let’s go the whole hog. Nobody should make money out of anything, everything should be free.

Edited by rmdstar at 8:45 am, Sun 28 Mar

rmdstar - 2021-03-28 08:44:00

rmdstar wrote:

Why are roads and healthcare and education not free?

last week I picked up my son from his free school and drove him on a free road to a free hospital where he received free treatment.

sparkychap - 2021-03-28 08:50:00

rmdstar wrote:

Why are roads and healthcare and education not free? If we’re gonna do this let’s go the whole hog. Nobody should make money out of anything, everything should be free.

I think you are missing my point.

If we cause housing to be so unaffordable that the youth can no longer afford to buy a house, who is going to pay for the roads etc? Because these poor people will be working to pay rent, pay tax to the system to help pay for health/roads/education/pension-
s for retired people, supposedly try and bring up kids (future tax payers) and do a good job of it, save for their own retirement as well.

If people can’t see the danger of that situation then I really feel sorry for this country and mainly for the young people living in it.

lakeview3 - 2021-03-28 08:54:00

sparkychap wrote:

last week I picked up my son from his free school and drove him on a free road to a free hospital where he received free treatment.

My Word! Such freedom!!!

rmdstar - 2021-03-28 08:59:00

rmdstar wrote:

Why are roads and healthcare and education not free? If we’re gonna do this let’s go the whole hog. Nobody should make money out of anything, everything should be free.

Do you want to hear something that I think is grossly unfair? Some people live longer than others. Where is the fairness in that? I propose that we have a cutoff date for life expectancy, say sixty years of age? On your sixtieth birthday you have a party and go to the euthanasia clinic for your send-off.
This would have the added benefit of fixing lakeview's housing problem, and also ensure that resources are passed to the next generation while they are young enough to appreciate it.

apollo11 - 2021-03-28 09:00:00

sparkychap wrote:

last week I picked up my son from his free school and drove him on a free road to a free hospital where he received free treatment.

We need to work on your definition of 'free' lol.

apollo11 - 2021-03-28 09:02:00

apollo11 wrote:

We need to work on your definition of 'free' lol.

Well its not user pays, is it.

sparkychap - 2021-03-28 09:04:00

apollo11 wrote:

Do you want to hear something that I think is grossly unfair? Some people live longer than others. Where is the fairness in that? I propose that we have a cutoff date for life expectancy, say sixty years of age? On your sixtieth birthday you have a party and go to the euthanasia clinic for your send-off.
This would have the added benefit of fixing lakeview's housing problem, and also ensure that resources are passed to the next generation while they are young enough to appreciate it.

nah maybe just stop finding drugs for self inflicted medical conditions....that will help save money

lakeview3 - 2021-03-28 09:05:00

apollo11 wrote:

Do you want to hear something that I think is grossly unfair? Some people live longer than others. Where is the fairness in that? I propose that we have a cutoff date for life expectancy, say sixty years of age? On your sixtieth birthday you have a party and go to the euthanasia clinic for your send-off.
This would have the added benefit of fixing lakeview's housing problem, and also ensure that resources are passed to the next generation while they are young enough to appreciate it.

You're also missing that some people are fitter, healthier, more attractive and therefore likely to be more successful (Zuckerburg is the notable exception to this). This is grossly unfair to the average ugly person.

sparkychap - 2021-03-28 09:06:00

sparkychap wrote:

Well its not user pays, is it.

I wish there were more toll roads.....would certainly make some road blockers think twice before driving down the road to get a pie and a paper......

Edited by lakeview3 at 9:11 am, Sun 28 Mar

lakeview3 - 2021-03-28 09:06:00

lakeview3 wrote:

nah maybe just stop finding drugs for self inflicted medical conditions....that will help save money

What drugs and what self inflicted medical conditions? Examples please?

sparkychap - 2021-03-28 09:06:00

sparkychap wrote:

Well its not user pays, is it.

Only if you are driving without current registration,

apollo11 - 2021-03-28 09:08:00

Example of how much rents are going up by:

Assume a 33% tax rate and an interest cost of $30,000.
The tax impact is $9,900. (30,000 x .33).
How much extra income needs to be generated to cover new cost.
That additional income also gets taxed, so it needs to be grossed up.
(9,900 / 0.67) = $14,776.

Divide by 52 weeks - need to earn $284.15 extra income to replace loss of interest deductibility once the tax law fully kicks in.

Rents are going up a lot - thanks Labour.

pcle - 2021-03-28 09:09:00

sparkychap wrote:

What drugs and what self inflicted medical conditions? Examples please?

type 2 diabetes for a start.

https://theconversation.com/new-zealand-needs-urgent-action-
to-tackle-the-frightening-rise-and-cost-of-type-2-diabetes-1
57581

lakeview3 - 2021-03-28 09:09:00

sparkychap wrote:

You're also missing that some people are fitter, healthier, more attractive and therefore likely to be more successful (Zuckerburg is the notable exception to this). This is grossly unfair to the average ugly person.

It’s also tough for short people who struggle to reach things. None of this is fair. I wish Jacinda would fix more stuff around here.

rmdstar - 2021-03-28 09:10:00

apollo11 wrote:

Only if you are driving without current registration,

I don't drive a diesel.

sparkychap - 2021-03-28 09:11:00

sparkychap wrote:

You're also missing that some people are fitter, healthier, more attractive and therefore likely to be more successful (Zuckerburg is the notable exception to this). This is grossly unfair to the average ugly person.

Now I'm getting really angry. We need to spend equal time on the couch. I'm not sure how we are going to fix the looks thing, perhaps compulsory plastic surgery?

apollo11 - 2021-03-28 09:11:00

pcle wrote:

Example of how much rents are going up by:

Assume a 33% tax rate and an interest cost of $30,000.
The tax impact is $9,900. (30,000 x .33).
How much extra income needs to be generated to cover new cost.
That additional income also gets taxed, so it needs to be grossed up.
(9,900 / 0.67) = $14,776.

Divide by 52 weeks - need to earn $284.15 extra income to replace loss of interest deductibility once the tax law fully kicks in.

Rents are going up a lot - thanks Labour.

Labour will put restrictions in place once that starts happening.

rmdstar - 2021-03-28 09:12:00

sparkychap wrote:

I don't drive a diesel.

You have paid tax in the cost of your petrol, so you pay to use the road even if you aren't driving on a road. I pay to use the road when I'm mowing the lawns.

apollo11 - 2021-03-28 09:13:00

apollo11 wrote:

Now I'm getting really angry. We need to spend equal time on the couch. I'm not sure how we are going to fix the looks thing, perhaps compulsory plastic surgery?

and free stilts.

rmdstar - 2021-03-28 09:14:00