this post was submitted on 15 Jul 2025
17 points (100.0% liked)
Aotearoa / New Zealand
1953 readers
45 users here now
Kia ora and welcome to !newzealand, a place to share and discuss anything about Aotearoa in general
- For politics , please use !politics@lemmy.nz
- Shitposts, circlejerks, memes, and non-NZ topics belong in !offtopic@lemmy.nz
- If you need help using Lemmy.nz, go to !support@lemmy.nz
- NZ regional and special interest communities
Rules:
FAQ ~ NZ Community List ~ Join Matrix chatroom
Banner image by Bernard Spragg
Got an idea for next month's banner?
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
No we shouldn't.
If we want to subsidize a set of foods; well why not just do that. A subsidy also will not limit you to 15%; it will not complicate a very simple tax.
We can get the effect we want in a more targeted and logical manner. We can also target any subsidy at NZ producers and make our locally produced foods more competitive against imported produce.
Flat taxes are regressive and generally bad; but making a bad tax worse by adding carve outs will not give us the outcome we really want.
Dude. Hiting that nail on the head with a full swing there. If the government wants to help people at the low end of the economy buy food then... Do That! Use targeted subsidies to promote cheaper food.
The economy isnt some Rube Goldberg Machine that you can reliably judge your effect on. If you want to affect a thing in the economy you are often far more effective directly affecting it.