>"As a rule, you don’t want people in >government ministries directing business >to relatives without providing options, and >I know they [Fyre Festival] were advised >of options.”
No. As a rule, you don't want people in government ministries directing business to relatives period.
If the new government that this Minister represents is actually serious about stamping out corruption and cronyism then they had all better quickly get to grips with the issue of nepotism and the concept of ethics. He is a new Minister, yes, but this really is a feeble train wreck of a response from him.
And in the end the festival was staged at Roker Point, not Norman's Cay or Black Point. I wonder who they talked to at Black Point with a chunk of land that big ($8.4 million is a pretty specific number which they must've picked up from somewhere...unless they are straight out lying...)
It alleges that a Ministry of Tourism employee created a business with her sister from the University of the Bahamas to cater the Fyre Festival event, they received payments in cash from festival Organizers, and the chefs they recruited were paid none of it.
If this story is correct then there are major questions to be asked of both the Ministry and the University concerning nepotism, undeclared conflicts of interest and cash payments received by their (public servant) staff.
Agreed. Its not shameful for people to admit they were mistaken and to change their tune rather than holding on to an old prejudice. The design of the broadbased VAT was never going to cause the sky to fall in, it has not precipitated a local economic or administrative meltdown, and we've got good consultants to thank for that. And a local business community who listened and adapted and have been big enough to admit when they were wrong.
One hopes that all political parties will jointly support tighty drafted legislation for fiscal transparency, accountability and responsibility in government spending. Along with a freedom of information act.
Regardless of a like or a dislike for consumption taxes, and whether you deem VAT a success or a failure in it's rapid implementation and effect on business and consumers, surely the key point from this story is that fiscal responsibility legislation remains on the table for consideration. All is not lost.
This is an opportunity for the community to move on from the adversarial debate on VAT, which neither side of politics has declared any intention to repeal and (now the revenues are flowing) are unlikely ever to manifestly alter, and instead push hard at every opportunity for transparency and accountability laws like FR and freedom of information. So on this basis the PM's comments here, as they relate to FR and public consultation, should be commended rather than slammed or niggled over.
To get the parliament to adopt a meaningful and effective FR act, as recommended by their VAT experts and the IMF and just about every other international economic organization, there needs to be broad based consensus. The public and news media has a big role to play here.
Well we know what sort of car the economy is - its a borrowed car. One that we do not own, lent to us by a moneyshark, and we have been driving around in it for years in all weather with the windows down, the convertible top off, with barely any gas, cutting corners, doing skids, with multiple drivers (some unlicensed), overloaded with passengers seeking a free ride, never stopping to check if there is enough air in the tires or oil in the engine.
So even a Lada wouldn't be too bad had we paid for it and properly maintained it with our own hard-earned money.
If a household borrows (or has in the past borrowed) to buy things they cannot really afford, the only way out of the debt spiral is to generate more income now to pay for the excessive (and often, on reflection, unwise) spending decisions of the past.
Maybe it was your ex-wife, long since departed, with a penchant for Gucci handbags; perhaps it was a "necessity" for the kids growing up like education costs, a new roof, or that "essential" overseas vacation to Disneyland; or perhaps it was just the dizziness of imagined wealth and the desire to prove something to somebody, to follow a fashion trend or to "keep up" with the next door neighbors or a more prosperous sibling. Either way, you have a debt in your household and you need to pay it back so the kids aren't lumped with it or, worse still, the lender forecloses, calls in your debt in full, or sells the debt to another less scrupulous lender.
Now re-read all of the first paragraph replacing the word **"household"** with **"government"**.
We have a $6 billion national debt. There is approximately 380,000 of us who are ultimately responsible for it. Its really no different to a national "mortgage" or an enormous credit card bill racked up by someone in our household. Its time to begin paying it back.
There is massive irony in both the Prime Minister chastizing moneylenders and members of the community complaining about VAT, duties and other revenue collecting by government to pay back decades of grossly irresponsible borrowing by a nation addicted to credit. The only way a government can "earn more income now" is to raise revenue through tax. And unfortunately that's the bitter pill we now need to swallow instead of expecting someone else to deal with it. We need to live within our means, by demanding balanced government budgets, and cut up the national credit card, via a comprehensive Fiscal Responsibility Act, instead of whining and buck-passing.
An interesting exercise to keep track of the VAT we pay each month, and to be encouraged more widely.
Let's look at this spending though. There are many ways to measure incomes in the Bahamas but for the sake of simple comparison let's use the average wage figures released by the Department of Statistics on 31 December 2014 (the figures from their *Occupational Wage Survey* are from 2011, but are the most recent official figures available we can reliably use).
They show an annual average wage on New Providence of $25,141 (or **$2,095 income per month**), and an annual average wage on Grand Bahama of $19,459 (or **$1,622 income per month**).
Based on the letter writers extrapolated **$460 in VAT** paid in one single month, his monthly household *expenditure* on VATable goods and services is approximately **$6,100**. Therefore he is *spending* between three and four times the total monthly *earnings* of one average Bahamian over the same period.
By comparison, were that average Bahamian spending *all* of their monthly income on VATable goods and services (and saving absolutely nothing) they would be paying a maximum of around **$157 in VAT** per month (New Providence) or **$122 in VAT** per month (Grand Bahama).
OK, these calculations are very simplified, I accept that, and we cannot know whether the letter writer is a single, double or triple income household for the purposes of comparing to an average Bahamian worker who may be raising a family in a single income household. But we do need to be careful, more realistic and transparent about who is actually paying what, and how much, when it comes to consumption tax.
Similarly we need realism and transparency over how VAT revenues are to be used by government, and that is why we still need Fiscal Responsibility and Freedom of Information legislation enacted as a number one priority.
chairarranger says...
>"As a rule, you don’t want people in
>government ministries directing business
>to relatives without providing options, and
>I know they [Fyre Festival] were advised
>of options.”
No. As a rule, you don't want people in government ministries directing business to relatives period.
If the new government that this Minister represents is actually serious about stamping out corruption and cronyism then they had all better quickly get to grips with the issue of nepotism and the concept of ethics. He is a new Minister, yes, but this really is a feeble train wreck of a response from him.
On Minister admits Fyre Fest conflict ‘doesn’t look good’
Posted 30 May 2017, 6:18 p.m. Suggest removal
chairarranger says...
And in the end the festival was staged at Roker Point, not Norman's Cay or Black Point. I wonder who they talked to at Black Point with a chunk of land that big ($8.4 million is a pretty specific number which they must've picked up from somewhere...unless they are straight out lying...)
On Fyre Festival organisers wanted free Crown Land
Posted 26 May 2017, 7:55 p.m. Suggest removal
chairarranger says...
How about this...
https://www.foodyou.today/single-post/2…
It alleges that a Ministry of Tourism employee created a business with her sister from the University of the Bahamas to cater the Fyre Festival event, they received payments in cash from festival Organizers, and the chefs they recruited were paid none of it.
If this story is correct then there are major questions to be asked of both the Ministry and the University concerning nepotism, undeclared conflicts of interest and cash payments received by their (public servant) staff.
On Customs ‘on hook too’ over $10m in Fyre Festival gear
Posted 22 May 2017, 6:09 p.m. Suggest removal
chairarranger says...
Agreed. Its not shameful for people to admit they were mistaken and to change their tune rather than holding on to an old prejudice. The design of the broadbased VAT was never going to cause the sky to fall in, it has not precipitated a local economic or administrative meltdown, and we've got good consultants to thank for that. And a local business community who listened and adapted and have been big enough to admit when they were wrong.
On Super Value chief: We have ‘lowest and simplest VAT’
Posted 10 January 2016, 4:17 p.m. Suggest removal
chairarranger says...
One hopes that all political parties will jointly support tighty drafted legislation for fiscal transparency, accountability and responsibility in government spending. Along with a freedom of information act.
On Fiscal Responsibility Act ‘not panacea’ if no Gov’t discipline
Posted 20 February 2015, 1:50 a.m. Suggest removal
chairarranger says...
Regardless of a like or a dislike for consumption taxes, and whether you deem VAT a success or a failure in it's rapid implementation and effect on business and consumers, surely the key point from this story is that fiscal responsibility legislation remains on the table for consideration. All is not lost.
This is an opportunity for the community to move on from the adversarial debate on VAT, which neither side of politics has declared any intention to repeal and (now the revenues are flowing) are unlikely ever to manifestly alter, and instead push hard at every opportunity for transparency and accountability laws like FR and freedom of information. So on this basis the PM's comments here, as they relate to FR and public consultation, should be commended rather than slammed or niggled over.
To get the parliament to adopt a meaningful and effective FR act, as recommended by their VAT experts and the IMF and just about every other international economic organization, there needs to be broad based consensus. The public and news media has a big role to play here.
On PM says VAT will be a ‘major success story’
Posted 13 February 2015, 3:46 a.m. Suggest removal
chairarranger says...
Well we know what sort of car the economy is - its a borrowed car. One that we do not own, lent to us by a moneyshark, and we have been driving around in it for years in all weather with the windows down, the convertible top off, with barely any gas, cutting corners, doing skids, with multiple drivers (some unlicensed), overloaded with passengers seeking a free ride, never stopping to check if there is enough air in the tires or oil in the engine.
So even a Lada wouldn't be too bad had we paid for it and properly maintained it with our own hard-earned money.
On ‘Premature’ to tell if VAT a Ferrari or Lada
Posted 5 February 2015, 2:31 a.m. Suggest removal
chairarranger says...
If a household borrows (or has in the past borrowed) to buy things they cannot really afford, the only way out of the debt spiral is to generate more income now to pay for the excessive (and often, on reflection, unwise) spending decisions of the past.
Maybe it was your ex-wife, long since departed, with a penchant for Gucci handbags; perhaps it was a "necessity" for the kids growing up like education costs, a new roof, or that "essential" overseas vacation to Disneyland; or perhaps it was just the dizziness of imagined wealth and the desire to prove something to somebody, to follow a fashion trend or to "keep up" with the next door neighbors or a more prosperous sibling. Either way, you have a debt in your household and you need to pay it back so the kids aren't lumped with it or, worse still, the lender forecloses, calls in your debt in full, or sells the debt to another less scrupulous lender.
Now re-read all of the first paragraph replacing the word **"household"** with **"government"**.
We have a $6 billion national debt. There is approximately 380,000 of us who are ultimately responsible for it. Its really no different to a national "mortgage" or an enormous credit card bill racked up by someone in our household. Its time to begin paying it back.
There is massive irony in both the Prime Minister chastizing moneylenders and members of the community complaining about VAT, duties and other revenue collecting by government to pay back decades of grossly irresponsible borrowing by a nation addicted to credit. The only way a government can "earn more income now" is to raise revenue through tax. And unfortunately that's the bitter pill we now need to swallow instead of expecting someone else to deal with it. We need to live within our means, by demanding balanced government budgets, and cut up the national credit card, via a comprehensive Fiscal Responsibility Act, instead of whining and buck-passing.
On Money lenders ‘have created modern day slaves’
Posted 5 February 2015, 2:03 a.m. Suggest removal
chairarranger says...
An interesting exercise to keep track of the VAT we pay each month, and to be encouraged more widely.
Let's look at this spending though. There are many ways to measure incomes in the Bahamas but for the sake of simple comparison let's use the average wage figures released by the Department of Statistics on 31 December 2014 (the figures from their *Occupational Wage Survey* are from 2011, but are the most recent official figures available we can reliably use).
They show an annual average wage on New Providence of $25,141 (or **$2,095 income per month**), and an annual average wage on Grand Bahama of $19,459 (or **$1,622 income per month**).
Based on the letter writers extrapolated **$460 in VAT** paid in one single month, his monthly household *expenditure* on VATable goods and services is approximately **$6,100**. Therefore he is *spending* between three and four times the total monthly *earnings* of one average Bahamian over the same period.
By comparison, were that average Bahamian spending *all* of their monthly income on VATable goods and services (and saving absolutely nothing) they would be paying a maximum of around **$157 in VAT** per month (New Providence) or **$122 in VAT** per month (Grand Bahama).
OK, these calculations are very simplified, I accept that, and we cannot know whether the letter writer is a single, double or triple income household for the purposes of comparing to an average Bahamian worker who may be raising a family in a single income household. But we do need to be careful, more realistic and transparent about who is actually paying what, and how much, when it comes to consumption tax.
Similarly we need realism and transparency over how VAT revenues are to be used by government, and that is why we still need Fiscal Responsibility and Freedom of Information legislation enacted as a number one priority.
On The first month of VAT
Posted 4 February 2015, 7:42 p.m. Suggest removal
chairarranger says...
Remember Y2K.
On VAT misunderstanding
Posted 1 February 2015, 7:10 p.m. Suggest removal