17 Comments
User's avatar
Andrew Riddell's avatar

Can someone tell Treasury Secretary Ian Rennie that we are a sovereign currency issuer, and that the public economy is not the same as a household (currency-user) economy.

Tim's avatar

Please show us with facts how qe worked well for middle and lower class New Zealand. Ill wait

Andrew Riddell's avatar

QE wasn't designed to benefit the lower class at all, but indirectly benefit middle class house owners via a housing bubble.

Andrew Riddell's avatar

Clarification question - is external debt the private debt issued by overseas owned banks and financial institutions?

Tim's avatar

Looking forward to you telling us tomorrow Bernard how this cut is good for middle and lower class NZ, and how much productivity and employment benefits it will deliver vis a vis the (proven) benefits to the rentier/asset owning class!

John Laver's avatar

Note to the garrulous toothpaste salesman and his sourpuss sidekick, the First Rule of Holes is unequivocal; stop digging.

Neil's avatar

Ha ha! You beat me to it!

Neil's avatar

Oh dear! I can do nothing other than grit my teeth at listening to this indictment of our government's "strategy" and the impoverished advice they are receiving.

It's like they have gone into the back yard to dig for gold and the hole is already quite deep but no glittering stuff has materialised yet, so they just have to keep on digging....

Sarah Melville's avatar

Love this. Where is the resilience on the ground? investment in the communities?

YES!

Greg's avatar

Whats this "saving for a rainy day" comment?. Currency issuing govts are technically unable to save Ie put money aside for later. When rain comes they simply issue more as needed, constrained by inflation not income.

Kevin Mayes's avatar

Purely an appeal to hillbilly logic.

Raewyn Brockway's avatar

Thank you for this. As a non-economist, I remember my non-economist father saying when I was a child (about 60 years ago) that the most important factor in recovery from a natural disaster is the country's productive capacity. You need a workforce that can build houses, repair roads and pipes, restore power and communications, cope with casualties. You need thriving, resilient businesses and institutions that can weather a shock without going under - not systems and infrastructure that are already on their last legs. And - what a coincidence - these are things that make life better for everyone in "normal" times, too. By supposedly "saving for a rainy day" this government is creating years of miserable weather right now.

Em Simes's avatar

Thank you Ganesh for the analogy of emergency 'grab' bag as preparing economic resilience, rather than a singular focus on financials. Helpful. We do need public infrastructure physical and social systems to unleash individual optimal output and wellbeing.

Summerhaze's avatar

Thank you. Listening to Ganesh Nana clarified a lot for me about Willis's and Luxon's abysmal ignorance. They could sit down and listen to the two of you for half an hour or so - but it wouldn't do them any good. Either they wouldn't understand, or if they did, they would say you were wrong. Sigh.

Colly66's avatar

Yes wouldn't it be great, however I think Willis & Luxon seem to be in need of hearing aids first to even listen. I also seem to be sighing a lot these days.

Gowan Duff's avatar

It is a bit of a worry that the advice the Government is receiving on the economy is the same as for the last 30 years> "get your debt down to 30% and your spending down to 30% of GDP!" If that is the answer, what is the question? Can someone tell me whether the "books" respond differently to Capital investment in new Buildings, Infrastructure, and day to day administration and welfare payments like my superannuation?