When Labour launched their failed Three Waters scheme in 2021, which aimed to confiscate council water services and amalgamate them into mega-authorities controlled by Maori, one of the major concerns raised was over the financing of the scheme. The quantum of the proposed debt was eye-watering – some $180 billion was to be borrowed. Their figures were made more attractive because the repayment of that debt fell outside of their 30-year cash flow projections!
This controversial funding arrangement was likened to a Ponzi scheme – one day the chickens would come home to roost and the money would have to be paid back.
As Frank Newman outlined at the time, “To explain how the government has made the figures look compelling one needs to understand what a ‘Ponzi’ scheme is. In essence, it is a deception that generates returns for earlier investors with money taken from later investors.
“This is essentially what the government model does. It is shifting the water rating burden from current ratepayers to future ratepayers by accumulating debt that it assumes does not need to be repaid.
“It’s a fake reality. Borrowing to fill the shortfall can only go on for so long – there will eventually be a day of reckoning – as there is with every Ponzi scheme.”
Fortunately, in the end those concerns did not need to be addressed, because the scheme was axed by the new Government.
However, it turns out that New Zealand has had something similar running for decades, as this week’s NZCPR Guest Commentator, former Labour Finance Minister and ACT Party founder Sir Roger Douglas explains:
“We started down the wrong path almost 50 years ago in 1976 – when the National Government repealed Labour’s 1974 New Zealand Superannuation Act and replaced it with a Pay-as-you-go system. We currently operate under a ‘Pyramid Scheme’.
“In 1976 the cost of retirement was shifted onto future generations – in other words, our children.
“It is these liabilities, created by the unfunded Pay-as-you-go system, that is placing today’s unsustainable burden onto all of us. Hence the numbers in Treasury’s long-run projections paper.”
The forecasts in that Treasury paper predict that if we carry on funding super and healthcare for retirees in the way we do currently, by the year 2061 New Zealand’s operating deficit will rise to an unsustainable 13.3 percent of GDP, and net government debt will escalate to 197 percent of GDP.
In other words, if nothing changes, New Zealand will be bankrupt by 2061 – or before.
Sir Roger explains that over the years, politicians have essentially misled the public about the country’s financial position by refusing to provide for the future cost of healthcare and superannuation for retired New Zealanders in the Crown’s balance sheet.
He makes the point that for this year alone those accrued retirement liabilities would amount to almost $40 billion dollars. He says if a private sector company failed to record an item of this magnitude in its books, the directors would end up in jail!
The cause of the problem we face is, of course, the inexorable rise in expenditure on super and healthcare as our population ages. While we currently have around 800,000 retirees, by 2061 this number is expected to approach 2 million. At that time the number of workers per pensioner will fall from around four to one today, to just two to one.
The reality is that the forecast rise in government expenditure on superannuation, healthcare and education over the 40 years from 2021 is in the region of 8.1 percent of GDP or $120 billion.
It is this unaffordable increase in government expenditure, from 2021, that is pushing New Zealand into the massive, yearly fiscal deficit position predicted by Treasury. These deficits will incur ever-larger interest costs, adding further to New Zealand’s financial woes.
So, what can be done to rescue the country from this mess?
Essentially there are three options for dealing with the escalating costs of super and healthcare for retirees. The first two approaches involve increasing funding to cover the escalating costs, whilst the third option involves changing the system itself.
Firstly, taxes could be raised to pay for the increasing costs of super and healthcare for retirees.
This is an option that Labour appears to favour as they once again consider introducing a capital gains tax as a key party policy. In contemplating this, they seem to have forgotten the warning succinctly articulated by a former Labour Prime Minister, David Lange, who said, “A capital gains tax policy is one that is likely to lose you not merely the next election, but the next three.”
In fact, the last time a capital gains tax was recommended – by Labour’s Tax Working Group in 2019 – the public response was so hostile that Jacinda Ardern was forced to distance herself as far from the policy she had unilaterally promised to introduce in her first term of Government as she could, by pledging there would be no capital gains tax while she was Prime Minister.
A second option to fund the future cost of retirees would be to increase tax revenues through economic growth. This is the Coalition’s favoured approach. But the challenge they face is that funding demands are increasing at a rate that would require spectacular growth on a scale not seen before.
Experience from high growth economies like Singapore suggests the only way to seriously increase economic growth is through low interest rates, low taxes, and less regulation.
Increasing productivity is also a key factor, especially as New Zealand currently sits near the bottom of the OECD on this vital economic measure: Kiwis work around 15 percent longer than the OECD average to produce about 20 percent less output per person!
While the Coalition is moving to improve economic opportunity, they will need to be much more ambitious and courageous if they are to transform the country into a high growth economy.
A third option to address the retiree funding problem is to change the system itself – and there are three basic ways to do this: increase the retirement age, reduce the super entitlement, or fundamentally transform the way retirement healthcare and pensions are funded and delivered.
National and ACT have both signalled their intention to raise the age of retirement. While Labour has advocated raising the age to 67 in the past, their present position is to keep it at 65.
And as far as superannuation entitlements are concerned, they have been adjusted many times over the years – especially switching between indexing pensions to wage increases or to inflation. Pensions were also means tested in the eighties through a surcharge, but this proved to be so unpopular that it is unlikely any political party will consider it again as a viable future option.
With raising the entitlement age the only policy change that’s being seriously debated at the present time, very little attention has been given to investigating alternative solutions to the problem.
As a former Finance Minister, however, Sir Roger Douglas views things differently.
With no-one presently in government with the foresight to recognise that the problems associated with future retirement funding can be solved if the system is changed from a pay-as-you-go scheme to a contributory scheme that takes advantage of the power of compound interest, he’s calling for fundamental change.
Compound interest is, of course, what drives the massive increases in the value of long-term investments.
It’s the magic of compound interest that would have led to the value of Labour’s 1974 New Zealand Super Fund reaching $500 billion – if it hadn’t been axed by Prime Minister Robert Muldoon.
The chief executive of the KiwiSaver fund Simplicity, Sam Stubbs, described the decision to cancel the Fund as one of the worst ever made by a New Zealand politician:
“Few economists would disagree that Robert Muldoon’s decision to cancel the fledgling New Zealand Superannuation Scheme was probably the worst financial decision ever made. Why? Because had it continued, New Zealand would now be one of the richest countries in the world. We would have at least $500 billion saved in our own individual retirement accounts.”
To put it into perspective, the value of the 1974 Scheme would have far eclipsed the combined value of the New Zealand Super Fund at $79 billion, KiwiSaver at $110 billion, and the Stock Exchange at $165 billion.
Sir Roger believes that if every New Zealander was helped into their own retirement savings account in their own name, then over the decades, not only would their personal investment funds grow to be worth millions of dollars in retirement, but the amount the government would need to spend on retirees would reduce so substantially, that this country could end up with one of the lowest tax rates in the world.
Imagine how profoundly that would change our future prospects as a nation – it would transform us from our current low-growth, falling living standards path, into one of the world’s most prosperous and desirable nations.
Underpinning this new way of thinking is the concept of seamlessly redirecting a portion of the money that individuals would pay to the government in income tax directly into their own personalised retirement savings accounts so they can earn compound interest.
Sir Roger demonstrates that regular contributions over a working lifetime would accumulate into a substantial sum that would meet the financial needs of a retiree.
But he doesn’t stop there. Having watched the quality of social services delivered by State institutions decline over the years he believes transformative change is needed there too.
There is no disputing the fact that our health system is teetering on the verge of collapse, our education system is struggling to even get kids to turn up at school let alone excel, and our welfare system is creating entrenched dependency instead of independence from the State.
Having observed how other countries ensure quality services through competition, Sir Roger’s answer is to empower New Zealanders through choice.
He’s proposing that a further portion of the tax individuals pay should be channelled into personalised social service provision.
Individualised health savings accounts would fund universal health insurance cover for treatment with a provider of choice in either the public or private health system, along with funding to cover other incidental medical costs.
For those with dependent children, education vouchers would be available to fund their education provider of choice.
And tax-funded risk cover would ensure that income support would be available if someone became ill, had an accident, or lost their job.
Sir Roger believes that enabling Kiwis to choose the social service providers that best meet their needs would result in a substantial lift in the performance of public and private providers as well as a significant improvement in service delivery.
Just as the present KiwiSaver scheme enables workers to accumulate funds for their retirement through contributions made by both employers, employees, and the government, so the universal savings scheme Sir Roger is advocating will allow all New Zealanders to not only save for their own retirement, but to benefit from universal health and risk insurance cover, as well as funding for school choice, through redirected taxes that result in vastly improved social service outcomes.
With the government setting up personalised accounts on the birth of a baby through a $100 deposit to kick things off, as well as acting as ‘insurer of last resort’ for those individuals unable to save sufficient in their individualised savings accounts, this scheme has the ability to transform our future – if politicians have the vision to make it happen.
I will leave the last word to Sir Roger:
“Savings held by individual New Zealanders, for their future health and income needs in retirement, would exceed nine trillion dollars by 2074, under my policies. Compared to unfunded liabilities of five to six trillion dollars, if we stay with the current pay-as-you-go-based welfare system, favoured by Treasury and all of New Zealand’s current political parties.”
Please note: To register for our free weekly newsletter please click HERE.
THIS WEEK’S POLL ASKS:
*Do you agree with Sir Roger Douglas that competition with private providers through a universal health insurance and education vouchers would help to improve the performance of government-run health and education services?
*Poll comments are posted below.
*All NZCPR poll results can be seen in the Archive.
THIS WEEK’S POLL COMMENTS
| Look at ALL THE NEW DATA, that has been covered -up by the COVID/SARS 2, SCAMDEMIC..! do your own research, and draw your own conclusions… our health system has been TOTALLY BOTCHED, CAN’T TRUST ANY OF IT NOW !! | David |
| Competition drives efficiencies and improves delivery of services. This is a fairly well recognised commerce /business statement. | Paul |
| It comes down to two things, if the world economy and our economy grow, if either of the above stagnate we will be struggling to stay afloat. | Sven |
| None of the recent governments have been able to manage the health system and if this was to happen , hopefully the managers exorbitant salaries will be stopped | Chris |
| Something must be done. The current situation is not an option | John |
| Absolutely.Muldoon lacked vision | gale |
| The TOW is a historical oddity which has far outlived any usefulness it might have had and as such it needs to be scrapped and consigned to history | Flip |
| Isnt hindsight a wonderful thing, Douglas had his chance and blew it. He also did extreme damage to NZ with the 20% inflation that he engineered. He is a charlatan | Allan |
| Of course this makes sense. But it will never happen. Too many want to kick the can down the road. Which is why we left NZ 13 years ago for Oz where we have exactly this already in operation. One key benefit that has been left out here is the multi-trillion dollars in super accounts looking for an investment home. This means there%u2019s no shortage of capital to invest in the things that need doing – and share/investment markets are a decent size. | Juliet |
| What a genius idea. Please, lets do this | Mark |
| A well thought out scheme .Apply immediately | Cyril |
| How come it appears the bulk of general Government Health Services appear to be in absolute fiscal and staff disarray? THUS, Yes,I agree, with a massive proviso – All contributions MUST BE fully tax deductible for private inverters PLUS the private investors – as a major group – determine the medical direction and placing of such investments and subsequent services. Another major question: How come this government, with their massive tax revenue is sending absurd amounts of money overseas at the very expense of medical services in New Zealand? | Stuart |
| New Zealand has a great healthcare system. The biggest problem is under funding by respective governments over many years. Competition with private providers only brings in another level of bureaucracy. We just have to buckle down and increase spending to get back to a world ranked system. | Peter K |
| Rapid action is needed to identify a long term system. To do this, NZ needs visionary statesmen – not self-serving politicians. | mary |
| Looks too good to be realistic. Chances are private providers would only make the situation worse as they seek unreasonable profits. Witness the electricity situation. | Graham |
| where money is concerned the govt would stick their greedy fingers into the fund as they have done before, I wouldnt trust Douglas as far as i could kick him, why not let people take out private health insurance and not tax them for ANY ACC fee on their savings , earnings, or why not try the Australian system as that seems to work ok, plus stop all the non NEW ZEALAND CITIZENS from getting ACC help when they have a accident/injury and make them pay up front when they go to a hospital, would save this country a huge amount. | Richard |
| The need to change the system is dire and we need to get on with it without the continual dithering that has persisted for so long. | margaret |
| I really don’t know. In my view changes with such huge implications would need comprehensive research, especially including international investigation of comparable schemes. | Colin |
| All agreed | JUDITH |
| Instead of CGT, how about all Maori tribal organisations pay the same rate of tax as everyone else, no hiding behind charities. New Zealand is certainly in a mess | Monica |
| Just don`t think so. | Colin |
| the sooner the better. | Pattie |
| Education vouchers is definitely the way to go. | Roger |
| Private enterprise always delivers more efficient outcomes than beaurocratic monsters. | Chris |
| Reduce Govt control of pensions and our health. Govt’s job is to to make laws plus ensure the Judiciary is non-political and follow the law as intended. Private providers must be dealt to immediately if they step outside their brief in providing those services, example, indoctrination such as gender, language or climate rubbish as is taking place in education and interfering in the patient and doctor relation as we are still currently experiencing. Sadly we have too many scared people to keep doing the same and still expecting a different results. National are wet blankets with no vision. In my view only a major catastrophe in New Zealand could offer any hope of Real Change. | Sam |
| Sir Roger has been so right so many times it is weird that his ideas are not prominent in the public domain | Graeme |
| The current situation needs to change urgently. Unfortunately most of the current crop of politicians are too interested in self preservation to consider worthwhile change. | David |
| Should have done it years ago. Take it out when paid and can’t take the money out of the savings accounts. | S |
| Only if the scheme is protected so that it cannot be easily changed each time the government changes. | Paloma |
| Only time will tell | tony |
| Why would anyone take any notice of this man. | Gary |
| I’m all for it, but the politicians would consider it poloitical suicide for their party. | DICK |
| it seems to be the salvation of this country. Surely the present govt. can see the urgent need for a complete change. | Peter |
| For a start, all the free loaders who do not pay taxes and do not pay rates should now be compelled to pay these legitimate financial charges like the rest of us have to do. No individuals or businesses should be exempt from contributing to New Zealand’s financial needs. Sir Roger Douglas’ ideas need to be investigated by a qualified neutral panel. The public need to have such qualified support information to be comfortable in accepting the significant changes that Sir Roger suggests as the path we should take. We definitely need to come up with a viable plan for the promise of a long term arrangement for financial redemption for the good of our county’s ability to enable our living standards to keep up with the rest of the developed world. This should be the current Government’s urgent project to plan and action without any procrastination. However it takes courage to undertake such forward ideas and we know that this National led centre right Government is lacking in this department. So???? | Garry. |
| All NewZealanders, including those on social welfare schemes, should contribute to a health insurance scheme that covers both medical and dental needs that arise during a lifetime. I was so surprised when I arrived in NZ to find there was no dental insurance available and no retirement saving schemes. | Sharon |
| Just look at what Lee Quan You did in Singapore….massive. | mark |
| the challenge is that most voters cannot think beyond the very short term. Rogers intellegent and intellectual approach just cannot be sold to the public in an election cycle. Same applies to other strategic needs maybe some universally supported framework outside the political arena but supported in concept by all parties ..could communicate in single sentences the aim. No-one likes paying tax…but paying into a protected personalised fund may be the way forward.The tax free threshold concept does allow for all income from all sources to be taxed..when that income is received/transferred -far better than a wealth tax payable …far better than wealth tax paid annually | gavin |
| I am relieved and grateful for this inspirational reading by Sir Douglas. Thank you for your time in this matter insuring all New Zealanders have quality of life not enslavement. Bless | Sky |
| Well worth serious consideration. | Gavin |
| common sense one would have thought, why is not common sense in the halls of power?? | neville |
| Douglas nails it again. | Coiln |
| No. I agree with Roger Douglas on very little, His actions over the years have cost NZers many services in the name of big business and money sharks, His governments guarantees to Kiwis of no loss of services to Kiwis weren’t worth the paper they were written on.;Examples: banking services in smaller town and city suburbs, postal delivery guaranteed??? 6 days a week, rural mail services , health services etc etc etc. Thanks for nothing Roger! The companies and shareholders in the so called replacement “services” no doubt no no doubt have a better opinion of your past contribution to the “improvements’ of these and other services than I do. God Defend New Zealand.” | Bruce |
| I do. | William Clive |
| Need to explore new ideas and options across parties that will be implemented and not robbed and scrounged from. I will suggest there would be monumental challenges to set the rules and then adhere to them. But, have to start somewhere, the sooner the better. | Graham |
| most definitely would but any private provider would need some certainty that successive govts arent going to reverse and or meddle with the scheme | john |
| Can’t be worse than now. | Pam |
| most likely | Colin |
| Remember the ACC going to private Insurance Companies. | Ranald |
| Anyone who thinks the government can be trusted with retirement or health fund, has their head in the sand! Sure Muldoon stole our retirement funds, but I don’t doubt someone else would have been tempted, even Douglas. With that amount of cash in an account, no politician could be trusted. Certainly not the lying deceitful lot we have now and the previous bunch of criminals. As for R. Douglas it’s a bit rich of him proposing another tax, because that’s all it is in the end, he bought us gst and told us our income tax would come down, it never did, it just went up! So we end up amongst the highest tax theft payers in the world. As it is the government already sets up a trust when we are born and as it grows they clip the ticket and steal from us even after we are dead, but most are completely unaware of that, they keep it very secret, oh yes! People need to take some personal responsibility for their health and welfare, instead of expecting corrupt governments to give a dam. We’re just slaves to extract wealth from, even the queen called us useless eaters! | peter |
| What a load of waffle about nothing. | Geoff |
| Hopefully yes, though that would depend on the degree to which Sir Roger’s recommendations were to be implemented, if at all. Having read the full version of his submission, there are some estimates which may not stack up including the average rate of compound interest over the period being assessed. Generally though, well done Sir Roger! | Peter |
| Not necessarily. | Terry |
| You just have to look at how SINGAPORE & OTHER countries have done their citizens are well off so WHY are our MP,s & GOVT. so BLIND. Its OUR CHOICE NOT THEIRS,we elected them so it,s WAY OVER TIME THEY LISTENED TO WHAT WE WANT.Email ALL MP,s & the GOVT> & REMIND THEM THEY ARE ONLY IN GOVT. BECAUSE WE THE PUBLIC VOTED FOR THEM but if they dont listen to what we want they are history never to be trusted ever again. | Cindy |
| As with many other things, the stand-out example is Singapore which has virtually no natural resources yet has one of the highest living standards in the world – achieved in little more than 75 years. | mark |
| too little too late | Chris |
| I really like the idea of some genuine competition in the health sector. I had surgery 15 years ago and repeat earlier this year in the public sector. The only differences, I shared a ward with 3 others compared with having a suite to myself, a couple of months waiting, and $13,000. Currently private Healthcare is a rip-off, bring on the competition. | Allen |
| I think it seriously needs reconsideration. | Jackie |
| But NOT a Government run scheme. Muldoon was right getting rid of that socialist idea. | John |
| NOT the answer but better than what we have now. | Alan |
| It’s just common sense | Lindsay |
| Absolutely. All of us should be focused on learning and working to ensure we are able to sustain ourselves instead of lazily handing that responsibility off to the state. Never in history has any state ever made its people better off, the state always drives people into poverty, communism in all its guises has always been a spectacular failure. | Steve |
| Yes. If you leave these politicians and their advisers to their own devices , things go wrong. In general politicians have never listened to good advise given in the first place. A country has to be run like a multi layered business with experts at the helm. Not a bunch of mealy mouthed morons!!! | michael |
| We are stuffed with what we have got. | Evans |
| Totally support Sir Roger’s proposals. | Doug |
| We are going backwards under the pay as you go scheme. | IA |
| As a Nation for the future we should always ‘Agree and to go easy on each other ‘. | Chris |
| No because a private scheme has to make money for its investors/share holders. Look at Australia, because of rising costs people are dropping out of their private health schemes. | Gary |
| But Im doubful if this will work | Carl |
| Bring it On | Clinton |
| If it will get our appalling heath sector back where it should be.. | ROB |
| This system should have been set up years ago if our politicians had the foresight to do it. | Gifford |
| well worth considering… | Gill |
| Improve the productivity of nz workers first ..remove the free loaders on benefits second .. remove government departments & replace with multi private entities | Mike |
| private master word – i disagree with the claim that Muldoons cancelling of the 1974 scheme was a bad decision. The previous Givt Super Scheme and National Provident were both left empty by raiding Governments! hence, private Kiwi Saver is a goer, pollys cannot rob the funds. | murray |
| Anything that improves our leftist Government services would be a good thing. Take decisions away from those wankers in Wellington. | Alan |
| Sir Roger has good ideas. | Kelly |
| Too late for me but my children would benefit from Sir Roger’s plan. | Glenn |
| I think Sir Roger’s ideas are very sound and if David Lange hadn’t stopped him back 40 odd years ago NZ would have been a much more prosperous country. In my opinion Sir Rogers ideas have always been great.We need A Government with BALLS to impliment these things beore it;s TO LATE!!! | Frank |
| Up untill 76 we had a good retirement scheme and them the Govts started robbing the coffers to pay for there mistakes, They need a pension scheme that no way can the Govts touch. it would have to be invested in gold plated stocks etc . Up until then a percentage of everyones wages went into the pension fund | Colin |
| Privat Business WOULD PERFORM BETTER – QUICKER Not like the GOVT SERVICES WAIT & WAITE & WAIT _ETC | Bill |
| No brainer. Should of been reintroduced by Lange’s Labour government. | Dennis |
| I agree | Peter |
| Roger Douglas had it right way back then and still has it right, now. If we don’t sort this stuff out now, New Zealand will continue to slide backwards into financial oblivion | Trevor |
| The NZ Public must be educated as to what is happening to our democracy and to use the 6 months of public input to the first reading of Acts treaty bill | Stan |
| Private enterprise and competition will ALWAYS trump inefficient government bureaucracy. | Geoffrey |
| Needs to be spelt out clearly to get the message needednow | leo |
| More modelling needs to be done. But looks very interesting and more research. Like the idea | Derek |
| Yes, for sure. Health insurance is so expensive and waiting on the public list is terrible. | Kim |
| The alternative is the same as we have now with National Super. An unfunded time bomb. | Grant |
| current private health insurance is a scam and very expensive. I have cancelled my Southern Cross membership. | RICHard |
| Early opportunity lost. Resurrection now! | alan |
| We have to change–getting poorer is not the answer | Margaret |
| Common sense really. | Jim |
| What !!! | Colleen |
| The idea of giving Kiwi’s choices is enough to give the left wing luvvies a heart attack. Nanny knows best! Everybody knows that! That aside what a wonderful way to encourage people to take some responsibility for their future. My only concern is that any such funds need to be so well protected no future Grant Robertson clone could get their hands on them to fund a pet project or two. | Allen |
| Sir Roger was and still is one of the most forward thinking Finance Ministers ever. He and David Lange were what the National Party used to stand for and had the courage of their convictions. | John |
| This plan seems to be so logical why has no one in our current Govt taken a look. I will watch with interest to see if and when someone runs with these ideas. | Roger |
| Obvious and rational | Dennis |
| Competition is the essential driver of capitalism and a healthy, creative democracy | Tony |
| Hard to believe we are so stupid … that we allow this stupidity | Phil |
| A superannuation scheme funded by tax breaks makes a lot of sense. | Mark |
| The Government of any colour abuses our hard-earned tax dollars on pathetic projects, fanciful fads and fritters away our cash on scams and hoaxes like Climate Changefutile “renewable” energy, and EV Mandates to the equivalent tune of as many lost $Billions via WEF and one world and reset directives. Also, by the time Bill Gates and John Kerry’s daughter have removed billions of humans through their global depopulation Agendas there will be heaps of cash left over. BUT, only IF you belong to the “Elites”. If you are simply a “useless eater” you won’t get anywhere near a pensionable age anyway. So why fret over finance 35 years away when the Weather and global debts can’t be accounted for today. Another total rort for Insurance stockholders. Sounds like he’s another barmy Marxist! | Graham |
| What we are doing now is not working. My Grandchildren could manage this country better than this Govt and the last one. I really dont follow their logic sometimes | Barbara |
| I think something has to be done about this as the present situation is unaffordable | Warren |
| It makes a lot of sense – far better than the present situation which cannot be allowed to last | Laurence |
| Muldoon’s decision to scrap the retirement scheme, can only be described as stupidity. However we have had numerous governments since who all had the opportunity to reinstate the excellent scheme. The Lange government that included Roger Douglas would have been more beneficial, than introducing the globalisation that is now entrenched. | A.G.R. |
| Douglas was part of creating the problem, when he was in the Labour Government. Now he has answers? | David |
| depends on staff numbers and pay | ian |
| Competion is always good. | Ann |
| I don’t know enough about this scheme. | Janet |
| Anybody’s guess. | Hugh |
| makes sense | Brian |
| Should have been addressed years ago as soon as Muldoon was ousted. As a retiree, I fear for the future of my children and grandchildren | Dave |
| Many other countries have a similar scheme – and I agree Muldoons petulant decision was stupid. | Gerry |
| WE need a change from established failing systems | peter |
| As long as the bureaucrats involved in any such schemes are efficient and tightly controlled. | Alan |
| Population should be educated as to value of this proposed system once they understand, it would be all systems go. | Karen |
| And make iy tax deductable for health and private scool fees | RAY |
| Am not convinced that quasi privatision is always a solution. Electricity a good example. ECNZ was reasonably efficient, very innovative and with much lower prices before a fabricated market was created. We’re just too small. However some clear rules are needed on how to keep state industries innovative and efficient. Difficult but not impossible. | Ron |
| Sir Roger Douglas has the most responsible scheme anyone has proposed. By the time it would be put into motion, I expect to have passed onwards from this world. | Ian |
| Over the years, politicians have essentially misled the public about everything, so why believe one now? Governments never tell their people that they consistently destroy the value of the people’s money, nor that gold is the real money and everything else is credit (debt). Fiat currency is as barbaric as the IRS. When it comes to weaponizing money, the biggest weaponization has been the use of fiat currency as a tool of dilution, used by governments and central banks to destroy the purchasing power, via inflation, of the people’s currency. Central banks (except for the west) are betting against their own debt-based system and are hoarding gold, breaking all previous central bank gold holding records. When it comes to supreme money gold, most of China and virtually all of India have the answer: All that matters is getting more of it! Don’t rely on the government, be your own central bank. | neil |
| Just another system | Frank |
| Go Sir Rog! | peter |
| These proposals always come caveats. Like can these also be labeled a ponzi scheme? What happens when the government runs out of money in other ares and decides that this scheme is worth raiding? And if another Muldoon type decides to cancel it? Governments are predictable on these things. I am concerned that Roger Douglass has couched his idea too simplistically and it would need to be somewhat more refined | Ian |
| With some hesitation., as I do not fully understand how it would work. | Harvey |
| Yes – the pity of all this is that the solution to the problem was carelessly cast aside by a previous Government nearly fifty years ago and they wonder why hardly anyone trusts governments any more! | Scott |
| The existing system is not sustainable and the suggested change seems sound. Borrowing, or more taxation are answers worth contemplating. | Peter |
| No brainer. ! The sooner a scheme like this is introduced the better for everyone and it must include everyone in NZ. !! | Andrew |
| What we need are srabke policies and management that can operate services cost effectively. All public services are presentlg burdened with ineffective management thst need gutting out. | Mike |
| It’s a no brainer this should have been done years ago many people have no idea how to save so it needs to be taken at source but of course you nead everyone to be working and that’s the problem so many don’t want to to lazy to get out of bed | Peter |
| Government has proven time and time again that they cannot beat private enterprise in business. | Peter |
| Now | Wiremu |
| Got to do something different as it is obvious we can’t continue down the path we are going. Result is the country will be broke in the future. | lLawrie |
| Let’s get it started without delay… | Simon |
| The current system is obviously failing and needs to change | Gavin |
| Yes Excellent policies. Next step is remove intergenerational welfare & solo mothers welfare. Follow Singapores , compulsory retirement & health care & minimal welfare other than to the blind, deaf & severely disabled. | Derek |
| Sir RD’s argument is coherent and logical. The problems lie with politicians who seek election and re-election by NOT acting in the country’s longer term best interests. And with those who vote for them. | tony |
| Involving private providers is the first step to being taken over by what should be a government role. | David |
| The only sensible way to go. | Lee |
| Would need protection from future governments making changes or diverting funds for other purposes | Carol |
| It couldn’t be worse than the current regime, so yes lets try something new because the old way of funding this will bankrupt the taxpayers. Can I also make the suggestion that ACC pays for far too many treatments that aren’t accident related & a fine toothy comb needs to taken to Elective Surgery as I for one do not want to pay for the likes of transgender surgery & the lifelong cost of the drugs required to maintain this masquerade | John |
| yes,all of the points he makes are very valid,the sooner the better. | gale |
| Competition for every business is good | Greg |
| It’s a no brainer to proceed as Sir Roger Douglas has been advocating for years ! | Hylton |
| Muldoon stole my retirement | Bryan |
| Getiwi OUT of OUR health | mike |
| Common sense not politics please. | Doug |
| No real reason why that should happen. May just weaken the whole thing. | Hugh J |
| 100% yes. | Andrew |
| Makes Sense | Andrew |
| A chance for user pays to thrive | Peter |
| Isn’t this what happens in Australia? My brother has paid into his Super fund all his life and is considerably better off than I am now. There is a super that is means tested, for those less fortunate. Always made sense to me. | Elizabeth |
| I was at one time one who believed that a limited number would provide the best results. How wrong I was. Competition is great and MUST be encouraged. Roger was in the wrong party at the time he first proposed these changes and Muldoon was the biggest socialist ever | Cookie |
| Sir Roger is and was a visionary which is why I joined ACT as a candidate in 1996 | chris |
| Universal health insurance is a must | Murray |
| Absolutely and make private insurance premiums tax deductible | John |
| ned reduce the friction of Government by removing the monopoly behaviours. | Gavin |
| Absolutely! Competition with the private sector by allowing the funding to follow the patient in healthcare and student in schooling, would transform performance and outcomes, as government agencies stepped up to ensure they became the provider of choice. | David |
| This should have happened years ago, instead of forcing Kiwis to suffer from the disaster that health and education have become. | Marion |
| You just have to look at the health system in countries like Singapore where everyone has a health insurance to see how much better it would become. Bring it on! | Paul |
| We have choice in education at pre-school and tertiary level, so why not at primary and secondary level as well? Oh yes, I forgot – they are in the grip of powerful teachers unions! Break the unions, I say, and improve schools by introducing choice. | Henry |
| Right now, if public hospitals can’t cope, patients will often be sent to private hospitals, so the concept of patients being able to choose between public or private is already working to some extent. A social insurance scheme would build on that and ensure better outcomes for everyone. | Simon |