| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 61841 | 2005-09-18 07:57:00 | Your Election Policies | Winston001 (3612) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 389185 | 2005-09-18 23:08:00 | TAX: A flat rate of TAX. The first half up to the median wage is tax-free. As the median wage increases so does the threshold. GST: No GST on essentials as determined by parliament (e.g. Food, Water, Power and Local Phone Line and calls.) WELFARE: A compulsory 5% of wages is paid into fund for you should you become unemployed. If you have not drawn on this fund it is paid to you as part of your superannuation. DPB Mothers must declare the father's name and their upkeep (30% of wage or salary) is paid for by the father until the child is at primary school. This upkeep then reduces (to 15% of wage or salary). If no father, e.g. a victum of crime than the state will pick up the costs. SUPERANNUATION: 10% of your wage is paid into a fund and this income is not taxed. The income of this fund is not taxed. The income from the fund is not taxed. And if you have not being unemployed this is tpped up by the 5% you also saved. A sort of bonus for working well. DEFENCE: 5% of Government income is spent on defence requirements. This is the average over a 5 year period. Meaning some years it is below, and some is above, when buying capital items (vehicles, ships, planes as required) LAW AND ORDER: No parole or home detention for violent criminals. All criminals must make reparations, from their assets. This includes family trusts, which should not be immune to criminal trustee actions. All detainees must pay for their costs, by working in prison. TREATY: All claims submitted by end 2006 and resolved by 2008. Any claims unsettled by 2008, will be deferred to the courts. |
KiwiTT_NZ (233) | ||
| 389186 | 2005-09-19 00:45:00 | This is one for Winston :) A major overhaul of the criminal judicial system. The following cases give rise to grave concern about whether justice was fairly carried out at the time or subsequently, and even whether there has been police corruption to get verdicts at all costs. Arthur Allan Thomas John Barlow David Bain Peter Ellis Scot Watson Should elements of the European 'inquisitorial' system be introduced, with a reduction of the 'adversarial' system. Should 'truth' be the main purpose of the system rather than (apparently) getting a conviction 'regardless' ? Should the verdict of 'not proven' be introduced? Should a person be tried 'endlessly' ( like John Barlow) until the police get the result they want? I think there may be sufficient concern for this to be be thoroughly debated by the law makers, but of course it is not as interesting as tax cuts :) |
Terry Porritt (14) | ||
| 389187 | 2005-09-19 02:48:00 | Oh goody, thankyou Terry although a bit OT . This is one for Winston :) A major overhaul of the criminal judicial system . The following cases give rise to grave concern about whether justice was fairly carried out at the time or subsequently, and even whether there has been police corruption to get verdicts at all costs . Arthur Allan Thomas He was pardoned, not acquitted . Thomas may very well have murdered the Crewes but he was convicted on tainted evidence . The theory is that a police detective spread shell casings to bolster the case . John Barlow An apparently very clever murderer who almost got away with it . He had the motive and the means . David Bain An odd one but the evidence points plainly to Bain . Peter Ellis Agreed . An unsafe conviction . Scot Watson No mystery . How otherwise did Olivia Hope's hair get on a towel on his boat? Should elements of the European 'inquisitorial' system be introduced, with a reduction of the 'adversarial' system . Should 'truth' be the main purpose of the system rather than (apparently) getting a conviction 'regardless' ? It may suprise you to learn that justice, not truth, is the purpose of the legal system . Thus a suspect who is abused or tortured by police, whatever the truth of the allegations against him, need not answer the allegations . It would be unjust to allow the evidence to be presented . This is what the Bill of Rights is all about - to protect criminals as well as the innocent . The European system is more concerned with truth and I can't say whether it is better or not . Should the verdict of 'not proven' be introduced? Scottish law so only in Otago and Southland . :D Yes, why not . |
Winston001 (3612) | ||
| 1 2 3 | |||||