| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 140101 | 2015-08-18 01:37:00 | GST on overseas goods and services | Terry Porritt (14) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 1406921 | 2015-08-19 01:49:00 | So GST is already charged on iTunes giftcards. Double-dipping come purchase time? No, You don't pay GST twice. |
nmercer (3899) | ||
| 1406922 | 2015-08-19 02:35:00 | is this a trick question? think about it the US market is 300M people the NZ market is 4M people NZ is at the ass end of the world I know all that, which is why I have been saying for years that we need 20 million good people here, to give us some economies of scale. But its like Payless Plastics. They have higher prices than everyone else and their stores are empty. If they had lower prices, they might be full and sell twice as much. |
Digby (677) | ||
| 1406923 | 2015-08-19 02:40:00 | I know all that, which is why I have been saying for years that we need 20 million good people here, to give us some economies of scale. I'd rather live in a country without population problems and all the stuff that goes with it myself and if that means things cost a bit more, so be it. You can always move to one of those wonderful countries with a large population, no need to wreck this one for your cheap shoes. The world needs less people, not more. Meanwhile I'll keep buying cheap stuff on Ebay while I can. :) |
dugimodo (138) | ||
| 1406924 | 2015-08-19 02:49:00 | I'd rather live in a country without population problems and all the stuff that goes with it myself and if that means things cost a bit more, so be it. You can always move to one of those wonderful countries with a large population, no need to wreck this one for your cheap shoes. The world needs less people, not more. Meanwhile I'll keep buying cheap stuff on Ebay while I can. :) Yep, you know what would happen.. it would be 19.5Million living in Auckland with enough housing for 2Million 20Million isnt a huge population, plenty of NZ size countries easily manage that , without overpopulation issues |
1101 (13337) | ||
| 1406925 | 2015-08-19 03:11:00 | Yep, you know what would happen.. it would be 19.5Million living in Auckland with enough housing for 2Million 20Million isnt a huge population, plenty of NZ size countries easily manage that , without overpopulation issues Yes and plenty of cities with a population more than all of New Zealands. Are they all ruined? No they have cheap shoes, plenty of entertainment, plenty of art, plenty of jobs. |
Digby (677) | ||
| 1406926 | 2015-08-19 03:22:00 | Yes and plenty of cities with a population more than all of New Zealands. Are they all ruined? No they have cheap shoes, plenty of entertainment, plenty of art, plenty of jobs. You forgot the rest, plenty of crime, plenty of murders, plenty of pollution, plenty of noise. I'm not trying to be smart here, I really don't understand why people like or want to live like that. I never will. Just because others do it, doesn't mean we should. I don't support population growth for economic reasons. I had more but realised I'm dragging the thread OT, sorry. |
dugimodo (138) | ||
| 1406927 | 2015-08-19 03:57:00 | Well maybe someone would like to explain to me the following. How was it that when we had less than two million population we were one of the richest countries per capita in the world? You could get two American dollars for NZ10/- and you couldn’t cash Australian money because it was worth so much less than NZ’s. Then we often hear that it is our distance from the markets that disadvantages us. Well, believe it or not, our distance from the markets is exactly the same as it’s always been. The only difference is they used to have to use Sailing Ships and old Tramp Steamers to get the goods to market instead of today’s ships that can cut out Auckland to London in 3 Weeks as opposed to 3 Months. Big difference when you’re transporting perishables. ;) Interesting read HERE (en.wikipedia.org). So you see when I hear all the excuses of why something can’t be done, I reflect on whether our ancestors managed to do it and if so the argument doesn’t wash with me. Take a look at the reconstruction of Christchurch. Hell our forefathers would have rebuilt the place in the time it’s taken them to get the right coloured sticker on the damaged properties. |
B.M. (505) | ||
| 1406928 | 2015-08-19 04:19:00 | looking at a currency's worth at a single point in time is meaningless, you need to watch it in relation to other currencies over time. Supply, demand, inflation and heaps of other economic factors change a currency's relative worth |
nmercer (3899) | ||
| 1406929 | 2015-08-19 04:56:00 | We manufactured here, the wars helped us at the time. Exports was booming. Well maybe someone would like to explain to me the following. How was it that when we had less than two million population we were one of the richest countries per capita in the world? You could get two American dollars for NZ10/- and you couldn’t cash Australian money because it was worth so much less than NZ’s. Then we often hear that it is our distance from the markets that disadvantages us. Well, believe it or not, our distance from the markets is exactly the same as it’s always been. The only difference is they used to have to use Sailing Ships and old Tramp Steamers to get the goods to market instead of today’s ships that can cut out Auckland to London in 3 Weeks as opposed to 3 Months. Big difference when you’re transporting perishables. ;) Interesting read HERE (en.wikipedia.org). So you see when I hear all the excuses of why something can’t be done, I reflect on whether our ancestors managed to do it and if so the argument doesn’t wash with me. Take a look at the reconstruction of Christchurch. Hell our forefathers would have rebuilt the place in the time it’s taken them to get the right coloured sticker on the damaged properties. |
Kame (312) | ||
| 1406930 | 2015-08-19 05:41:00 | looking at a currency's worth at a single point in time is meaningless, you need to watch it in relation to other currencies over time. Supply, demand, inflation and heaps of other economic factors change a currency's relative worth Nooooo, don't think so. Take a look at this: (Whole article HERE (en.wikipedia.org)) On Monday 10 July 1967 ("Decimal Currency Day"), the New Zealand dollar was introduced to replace the pound at a rate of two dollars to one pound (one dollar to ten shillings, ten cents to one shilling, 5⁄6 cent to a penny). Some 27 million new banknotes were printed and 165 million new coins were minted for the changeover.[5] Exchange rate The New Zealand dollar was initially pegged to the US dollar at US$1.43 = NZ$1. This rate changed on 21 November of the same year to US$1.12 = NZ$1 after the devaluation of the British pound (see Bretton Woods system), although New Zealand devalued more than the UK.[6] In 1971 the US devalued its dollar relative to gold, leading New Zealand on 23 December to peg its dollar at US$1.216 with a 4.5% fluctuation range, keeping the same gold value. From 9 July 1973 to 4 March 1985 the dollar's value was determined from a trade-weighted basket of currencies. The NZ$ was floated on 4 March 1985 at the initial rate of US$0.4444. Since then the dollar's value has been determined by the financial markets, and has been in the range of about US$0.39 to 0.88. The dollar's post-float minimum average daily value was US$0.3922 on 22 November 2000, and it set a post-float maximum on 22 July 2011 of US$0.8666. Much of this medium-term variation in the exchange rate has been attributed to differences in interest rates.[citation needed] The New Zealand dollar's value is often strongly affected by currency trading,[citation needed] and is among the 10 most-traded currencies.[7] On 11 June 2007 the Reserve Bank sold an unknown worth of New Zealand dollars for nine billion USD in an attempt to drive down its value. This is the first intervention in the markets by the Bank since the float in 1985. Two suspected interventions followed, but they were not as successful as the first: the first appeared to be initially effective, with the dollar dropping to approximately US$0.7490 from near US$0.7620. However, within little more than a month it had risen to new post-float highs, reaching US$0.8103 on 23 July 2007. After reaching its post-float record high in early 2008, the value of the NZ$ plummeted throughout much of the 2nd half of 2008 and the first quarter of 2009 as a response to the global economic downturn and flight by investors away from "riskier" currencies such as the NZ$. The NZ$ bottomed out at approximately US$0.50 on 6 March 2009.[8] However, it rebounded strongly as the year progressed, reaching the US$0.75 range by November 2009.[8] By late 2012, the dollar was holding above 80 US cents, occasionally reaching 85c, prompting calls from the Green Party for quantitative easing.[9][10] Unions also called on the Government and the Reserve Bank to take action, but as of February 2013, both have so far declined.[11] So you see the currency value really revolves around a few that can manipulate it to their own advantage and have a Batch in Hawaii. ;) |
B.M. (505) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 | |||||