SA sitting on time bomb - FF Plus

Gnome said:
The report was compiled by MMI, they are an insurance group, it has nothing to do with economists or political parties.

FF Plus are simply relaying the results.
Click to expand...
Why is a politician even making the news on this? Oh right, because it's all doom and gloom.

I don't know if you've read the report, I myself have only scanned it, but even though there are trends - nothing seems overly worrying. Nothing that suggests a collapse. http://www.moneyweb.co.za/mw/action/media/downloadFile?media_fileid=15098
 
TheHiveMind said:
We are all feeling the sting, with many more increases in the pipeline, are you not feeling it?
Click to expand...

People seem to think it's normal. It's not. The cost of living is spiraling out of control in this country.
 
Garson007 said:
Sense. This makes none.
Click to expand...

your ability to comprehend economics - None

Less government = more money to spend = more job creation = more production = a higher standard of living!
More tax = less money to spend = lower standard of living!
 
Nicodeamus said:
your ability to comprehend economics - None

Less government = more money to spend = more job creation = more production = a higher standard of living!
More tax = less money to spend = lower standard of living!
Click to expand...
It's a nice hypothesis.

Sinbad said:
People seem to think it's normal. It's not. The cost of living is spiraling out of control in this country.
Click to expand...
I'm afraid it is normal. Been through this at least once before. And it's not just this country.

xrapidx said:
food R6000+
Click to expand...
What are you eating?

kingrob said:
Why must Conrad Beyers offer the solution?
Click to expand...
I know his agenda, so I didn't expect he would.

We all know that a "white" solution will always be the wrong solution for the cANCer government.
Click to expand...
The ANC's always wrong I know.

When the anc came into power, they closed everything down that the NP government has created, notably colleges - and now they want to reopen it again.
Click to expand...
So? You'd rather they did the usual government thing of putting pride first?

The solutions were already there, but the anc decided to create problems.
Click to expand...
Really, well then the world will be waiting because the problems are not unique to South Africa.
 
Nicodeamus said:
Less government = more money to spend = more job creation = more production = a higher standard of living!
More tax = less money to spend = lower standard of living!
Click to expand...
How does less government generate jobs, production and money? Please I'd love to know. In fact as far as jobs are concerned, public workers are being employed.

It is true that less money might be going into your pocket, but you won't have roads to go to work with. Your company would have no safety net and you'll lose your job when they do badly. There will be no labour laws - you'll lose your job or not get paid. Some foods might not even make it to your local market.

People should in fact be taxed higher, especially the big earners (capital gains/dividends/salary/etcetera all higher). Businesses should be taxed lower and include incentives from the government. More businesses = more products = more competition = lower prices. More businesses = more jobs = more money = more businesses. But you see, you probably follow the Austrian school of economics, so this argument is fruitless.
 
Last edited:
Garson007 said:
You can't trust an economist, even less a politician with something to win.
Click to expand...
With a PhD in Mathematics and with a strong financial background (actuarial) I think Conrad Beyers may be in a position to comment ;)
 
Well said Conrad Beyers. Someone needs to bring the plight of the increasingly taxed middle class to the fore.

It's jsut noit sustainable to have 6 million people (taxpayers) supporting the 16 million on social grants.

It's unsustainable and government needs to start realising it and doing something to support their tax base.
 
rpm said:
With a PhD in Mathematics and with a strong financial background (actuarial) I think Conrad Beyers may be in a position to comment ;)
Click to expand...

He's more qualified than all of our ministers. And the president. :p
 
rpm said:
With a PhD in Mathematics and with a strong financial background (actuarial) I think Conrad Beyers may be in a position to comment ;)
Click to expand...
Doesn't make him any less of a politician with something to win; understand the subject matter doesn't make your opinion unbiased.
 
noxibox said:
Welcome to earth Conrad Beyers.


I've been around long enough to say been there, done that. But I don't see that Conrad Beyers is offering any solutions (to what is a problem not just in South Africa).
Click to expand...

Thanks everybody for the interesting discussion. I thought that part of the solution was implied by many of the criticisms in my press release, i.e. regarding double taxation, unsustainable social grants, high petrol taxes, service delivery etc.

In a press release there is only so much space and it is impossible to fit in everything you want to say - otherwise the media loses interest ...

But you are essentially right, we should also offer solutions besides criticizing. Basically what we say is less Big Government and less centralisation, i.e. less socialism, government interference and more decentralisation so that taxpayers have a more direct say into how their tax money should be spent. This will imply a lower tax burden and an opportunity for the economy to grow.

The government spends approximately a third of its income on social grants. Apart from the fact that this amounts to election bribery by the ANC, it is unsustainable and creates a disastrous culture of entitlement. This needs to be phased out and there should be a focus on education, job creation and other essential government functions.

As I said in the press release - the government must realise that by burdening the middle class with taxes up to breaking point is a threat to the whole economy - themselves included.

Conrad
 
Last edited:
beyers said:
Thanks everybody for the interesting discussion. I thought that part of the solution was implied by many of the criticisms in my press release, i.e. regarding double taxation, unsustainable social grants, high petrol taxes, service delivery etc.

In a press release there is only so much space and it is impossible to fit in everything you want to say - otherwise the media loses interest ...

But you are essentially right, we should also offer solutions besides criticizing. Basically what we say is less Big Government and less centralisation, i.e. less socialism, government interference and more decentralisation so that taxpayers have a more direct say into how their tax money should be spent. This will imply a lower tax burden and an opportunity for the economy to grow.

The government spends approximately a third of its income on social grants. Apart from the fact that this amounts to election bribery by the ANC, it is unsustainable and creates a disastrous culture of entitlement. This needs to be phased out and there should be a focus on education, job creation and other essential government functions.

As I said in the press release - the government must realise that by burdening the middle class with taxes up to breaking point is a threat to the whole economy - themselves included.

Conrad
Click to expand...

What you know as fact and what the masses vote for is a totally different ball game. Bottom line is we are farked and this country is going to hell in hand basket just like the rest of darkest africa.
 
Garson007 said:
How does less government generate jobs, production and money? Please I'd love to know. In fact as far as jobs are concerned, public workers are being employed.
Click to expand...
Ok erm here is the flaw in your logic: government CANNOT create jobs, they can only take jobs from the public sector because everything that government does he has to take from someone else. So every R1 spend by government is R1 spent less by the public sector, if the public sector makes to less profit entrepreneurial and business activity goes down and then eventually less jobs are created.


It is true that less money might be going into your pocket, but you won't have roads to go to work with. Your company would have no safety net and you'll lose your job when they do badly. There will be no labour laws - you'll lose your job or not get paid. Some foods might not even make it to your local market.
Click to expand...
labour laws also cause unemployment, it raises the price of hiring someone and makes cheap work more expensive, it only protects those currently employed and not the unemployed. There is an argument for government providing basic services, like Roads, the police, the judiciary, it has some merit and God forbid, we do not need the state to do 90% of the things that it is currently doing, it is strangling the middle-class.

The foods making it towards the 'local' market will be cheaper relative to income if government doesn't subsidize it. The same goes for 90% of the things that they try and 'stimulate'.

The so called 'safety net' and social grands and what have you nots that our government currently hands out encourages unemployment. You know with every economic policy there is an unintended consequence (which is just ignored by most people, either blatantly or in ignorance).

People should in fact be taxed higher, especially the big earners (capital gains/dividends/salary/etcetera all higher). Businesses should be taxed lower and include incentives from the government. More businesses = more products = more competition = lower prices. More businesses = more jobs = more money = more businesses. But you see, you probably follow the Austrian school of economics, so this argument is fruitless.
Click to expand...

if people are taxed more then they won't be able to buy from businesses! (once again a logic failure from you, so how are these businesses going to survive without customers!). Not to mention investment will go down and capital circulation will be slower. (unless you believe that government knows how best to invest into the economy, the Gautrain and E-toll gantras are a good example that they are not capable of doing so).

The austrian school of economics isn't the only one that agrees with this approach, so does the Chicago school of economics and there are many many other that follows a same train of thought. The Austrians only differ because they derive their theories by means of formal logic, the Chicago guys usually add empirical evidence towards it. (I tend to look towards both nowadays).

Also you're once again assuming that if government doesn't spend money in basic needs then people won't do it at all, this is also simply not true and not even provable.
 
Last edited:
xrapidx said:
I'm assuming by minority you're refering to whites? If so, you're wrong, any colour with a brain can see the ANC is ****ing SA up.
Click to expand...
No, yo're assuming wrong - I'm referring to the educated minority in the country being of all races.

Nicodeamus said:
your ability to comprehend economics - None

Less government = more money to spend = more job creation = more production = a higher standard of living!
More tax = less money to spend = lower standard of living!
Click to expand...
Maybe also less wives for certain presidents....(every bit helps)
 
Last edited:
Nicodeamus said:
ah yes, government spending at its best, it provides economic stimulus and job creation to the wives and the families (them being full time spenders), obviously any person with a bit of logic can see that it doesn't create any wealth, but who are we to argue with that!
Click to expand...
Non-polygamists :D

EDIT: Also that "government spending" for the wives is actually coming from OUR pockets!! Bastids!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X