The nub of the issue

112 comments on “The nub of the issue ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Gosman 1

   19 June 2013 at 11:37 am

   Does Key support a lower and more stable dollar; if not, why not? – Unlikely. Basic market fundamentals mainly set the price of a floating dollar. Attempts to lower a dollar artificially can have drastic negative consequences which John Key wouldn’t be keen to see. Lowering a dollar via interventionist means doesn’t necessarily mean it is more stable either.

   Does Key support fixing taxes to direct investment away from housing speculation to productive companies; if not, why not? – Possibly but CGT do not seem to impact on productive investment decisions greatly in places which have them. Both the US and UK had large Housing price bubbles despite a CGT and other taxes like Stamp Duty. The Government has attempted to make other investment opportunities more interesting such as via the partial float of some SOE’s.

   Does Key support lowering infrastructure costs such as electricity prices; if not, why not? – Most likely yes. The best way to do this is via a market mechanism and not the Government coming in to dictate what the price should be. That way leads to shortages in supply that we experienced on numerous occasions prior to the Electricity reforms of the mid 1990’s. Electricity prices for businesses have trended downwards since then so they seem to be working in the regard of lowering infrastructure costs.

   Does Key support R&D tax credits; if not, why not? – Not if they are exploited by companies that would be likely to spend the money anyway or use it as a loop hole to not pay taxes. Although as far as I am aware National doesn’t mind providing support of a similar nature in this area.

   Does Key support the government buying Kiwi-made whenever possible; if not, why not? – Not if it would impact on the ability of our more competitive companies to bid for contracts in other countries because they follow a similar policy. It would also likely increase the cost of any work Government performs meaning a need for either increased taxes or less money to be spent on other areas.
   • bad12 1.1

     19 June 2013 at 12:15 pm

     A market mechanism to lower the price of electricity to consumers, i realise that during your time commenting here on the Standard you have been called every idiot under the sun,(probably the clouds as well),so there’s no need for me to expand upon the previous attached discriptives,

     But,

     Please oh please tell us all about this ‘market mechanism’, describe for us all the what and how of such a market mechanism,

     (it’s a dull day and i need a good laugh)…
     • Hennie van der Merwe 1.1.1

       21 June 2013 at 8:20 pm

       Sorry a bit off topic but look what is quietly happening to MRP shares. Down to $2.20 today.

       I would have thought it would make the news but then few things not to Key’s liking ever does.

       Hennie
       • Arfamo 1.1.1.1

         21 June 2013 at 8:25 pm

         Been picked up and discussed here today: http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-21062013/#comment-651793
   • Pascal's bookie 1.2

     19 June 2013 at 12:22 pm

     Possibly but CGT do not seem to impact on productive investment decisions greatly in places which have them. Both the US and UK had large Housing price bubbles despite a CGT and other taxes like Stamp Duty.

     Yeah, this is the stock standard response trotted out every time. Thing is though, usually the people trotting it out will say (at other times obv), that they believe incentives matter and that incentives should be part and parcel of setting tax policy. I’d be interested in hearing why it is that they claim incentives here don’t work, but that everywhere else they do.
     • Rob 1.2.1

       19 June 2013 at 12:58 pm

       On tthe CGT issue, what evidence is there from anywhere that CGT propells investment away from housing into manufacturing. Or does it just sound like a good idea as it involves taxing people.

       NZ also had a pretty good mezanine finance base to access untill the GFC came and the finance companies collapsed. Back then whilst they were in the big seat, Labour should have done a much better job putting better regulation and control on errant finance companies so that maybe we would not have experienced the clean out of NZ capital base in the way that we have, but that will be the single telling legacy for NZ of the Clark Govt.

       Its only very reecently that banks have become more open to new funding new innovations and assets. The last few years it has been very difficult to get anything from anyone as there was none.
       • Pascal's bookie 1.2.1.1

         19 June 2013 at 5:29 pm

         Can’t help but notice Rob, that you didn’t address what I was talking about in any way whatsoever. Any reason for that? Did you forget perhaps?

         After you do that in some sort of semi-convincing matter, I’d be more than happy to address the nonsense you spouted.
         • Pascal's bookie 1.2.1.1.1

           19 June 2013 at 9:39 pm

           I guess not then.
   • Follow-the-money 1.3

     22 June 2013 at 7:07 am

     Are you John Key’s PR person, by any chance? Your in-depth knowledge of his psyche and beliefs suggest you might be.

     If so, can you confirm whether or not his being quoted as calling Shearer a “bozo” was a misquote? It’s a childish term that one would think beneath the prime minister of a developed country. Did he really mean “sozo”, being the Greek for ‘saviour’ or ‘salvation’?
2. Winston Smith 2

   19 June 2013 at 12:48 pm

   Because there isn’t a crisis, the numbers are increasing and confidence is up but hey keep trying to spin the line theres a crisis…repeat a lie long enough and people will believe it

   Though I’d imagine you’d need someone more believable than shearer to nail it
3. BM 3

   19 June 2013 at 12:53 pm

   Do I support a lower dollar, not really.
   I and most others don’t want to be hit with even higher living costs, fuck the exporters I’m not here to subsidize their businesses.
   They either adapt or die.
   • bad12 3.1

     19 June 2013 at 1:30 pm

     Through their business efforts ‘Exporters’ subsidize every aspect of the New Zealand economy along with every aspect of our lives,

     Your brainless dismissal of the export sector tho is par for the course and you would add more to the discourse here by sticking to watching the cheap flat-screen…
     • Rob 3.1.1

       19 June 2013 at 3:36 pm

       You have to understand that NZ also has to import a raft of raw materials and converted items that are used to manufacture.

       The impact of a much lower doller on those manufactureres would be very severe and huge levels of employment would be lost. But no one here seems to consider that and that is very concerning.
       • Rob 3.1.1.1

         19 June 2013 at 3:39 pm

         Enginered textyles, yarns, advanced co – polymer plastic resins, tooling steel and the list goes on a long long way. None of this is produced in NZ and yet is critical in many manufacturing processes.
         • lprent 3.1.1.1.1

           19 June 2013 at 8:15 pm

           Surprising how many of these have been produced in NZ in the past at some point in time or another and how many still are in small vertical market situations. None are that hard to produce here at a cost and price point. I have seen tool steel produced and co-polymer resins. The latter I have even made myself because there are remarkably wide range of them used for many purposes.

           I’d guess that you are not that aware of basic economics because otherwise you’d have carried on the argument into why they are not produced in quantity at the current exchange rates and why they might be at a different exchange rate. Which is a whole different argument than the one of technical feasibility that you appear to be trying to argue (badly).

           I’d suggest you look at the reasons that we no longer have a battery industry
           • Gosman 3.1.1.1.1.1

             19 June 2013 at 8:52 pm

             Or if he was really aware of basic economic theory that due to comparative advantage why we shouldn’t produce them and instead specialize and trade.
             • Draco T Bastard …

               19 June 2013 at 9:09 pm

               Comparative advantage is a load of bollocks. There isn’t even an absolute advantage for any industrial systems as all factories are designed to run as close to maximum efficiency as possible which means economies of scale go out the window as well. The only advantage of trade is to import something that we don’t presently produce while doing the R&D to produce it.
               • Gosman …

                 19 June 2013 at 9:28 pm

                 You’re such an old Mercantilist. I feel like I have been transported back to 18th century pre revolutionary France in any discussion with you. By the way, of the two major competiting theories in Economics at that time how did the countries that adopted one of the rival approaches fair against you tries who too the competing policy?
                 • KJT …

                   19 June 2013 at 10:01 pm

                   The UK, which refused to import anything but raw materials from their colonies and exported finished manufactured goods, became the most prosperous empire of the time. But you knew that didn’t you.
                   • Gosman …

                     19 June 2013 at 11:02 pm

                     Bzzzzt! Sorry wrong answer. The UK’s preferential trade arrangements with colonies was a late 19 th century policy prescription. From the loss of the US till then the dominant strand of thought in UK economic policy was free trade with all.
                   • Draco T Bastard …

                     20 June 2013 at 4:08 am

                     Oh god, you really have NFI WTF you’re talking about do you?

                     Britain was mercantilist until the beginning of the 19th century. It was that mercantilism which allowed her to become the British Empire upon which the sun never set. It was after taking on the free-trade practices that she went into decline resulting in the inevitable loss of empire in the beginning to mid of the 20th century although in this case it was more of a passing of the flag to the US which had greater protections on it’s financial economy and was thus in ascendance.

                     http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercantilism#Great_Britain
                   • KJT …

                     20 June 2013 at 9:15 am

                     “Free trade” (sarc) works great when you can enforce favourable trade terms at gun point.
                   • r0b []

                     20 June 2013 at 9:19 am

                     KJT – quiet here this morning so I moved your post forward a bit – now published – hope that’s OK. And welcome aboard!
                   • KJT …

                     20 June 2013 at 9:52 am

                     Thanks. Appreciated.
                 • Draco T Bastard …

                   19 June 2013 at 10:18 pm

                   Me, a mercantilist? lol
           • Rob 3.1.1.1.1.2

             19 June 2013 at 9:17 pm

             Whether I don’t grasp basic economics or whether we don’t have the technical skills doesn’t solve the fact that the stuff is not available from local supply . However I am sure you will now go on to lecture us all on how to fabricate it.
             • GarethGee …

               19 June 2013 at 10:58 pm

               Well played, Rob. Don’t assume because he runs a website, lprent knows anything practical about manufacturing. Apparently he even knows the competitive price point compared to foreign suppliers. Remarkable! And all this time manufacturers had no idea, because, you know, what possible incentive could they have to find this out?
               • Draco T Bastard …

                 20 June 2013 at 4:09 am

                 Not well played at all – just Rob showing his ignorance.
       • Draco T Bastard 3.1.1.2

         19 June 2013 at 9:01 pm

         You have to understand that NZ also has to import a raft of raw materials and converted items that are used to manufacture.

         No we don’t. We have all the needed raw resources within our own borders although we would need to develop the infrastructure for processing them. This is known as developing the economy.

         The impact of a much lower doller on those manufactureres would be very severe and huge levels of employment would be lost.

         Actually, it would tend to encourage the development of the economy because importation would be too expensive and thus produce more jobs.
         • GarethGee 3.1.1.2.1

           19 June 2013 at 11:02 pm

           Ahhh import replacement strategies. Go ask Argentina in the 90s how that worked out for them. Cue IMF conspiracy theories ad nauseum.

           And no, New Zealand doesn’t have all the materials. You need skill and knowhow. and you need someone to finance it. You keep using “we” in developing this capability. By which, I assume you mean, the government invests in these processes rather than private sector initiative. Again, Argentina much?
           • Draco T Bastard 3.1.1.2.1.1

             20 June 2013 at 4:16 am

             And no, New Zealand doesn’t have all the materials.

             Yes we do – go check out the governments minerals website on it.

             You need skill and knowhow.

             Yep, got those too – that’s what all those universities are for. In fact I believe we’re presently leading the world in some fields.

             and you need someone to finance it.

             Easy – the government prints the money and spends it into the economy specifically to make use of those resources.

             By which, I assume you mean, the government invests in these processes rather than private sector initiative.

             Of course, the private sector comes with the dead weight loss of profit which leaves the majority working hard and going nowhere and a large percentage in outright poverty all so that a few sociopaths can be rich. We know this because it’s what has always happened when the private sector (read, rich pricks) takes over the economy and only uses it to their own benefit.

             BTW, we the people are the government. The government is not a separate entity.

             Again, Argentina much?

             Using a single word isn’t an argument.
         • Rob 3.1.1.2.2

           20 June 2013 at 9:10 am

           at 3.1.1.2 and thus the lecture starts.
4. tracey 4

   19 June 2013 at 12:55 pm

   When the Pm calls the Greens hippies and their funny money policy (quantitative easing it’s called elsewhere) how do his supporters (who agree with him) reconcile that against things like this?

   “Markets rally as Ben Bernanke backs further quantitative easing”

   http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2013/may/22/markets-rally-ben-bernanke-qe-stimulus

   “The US economy was improving, but “headwinds” including government budget cuts were dragging on the recovery, Bernanke told the US Congress.”

   “Bank of England pressed to increase quantitative easing as confidence sags”
   http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2013/mar/04/bank-of-england-qe-confidence

   I bet the bank of England would be surprised to be icalled hippies and supporters of “funny money”
   • Gosman 4.1

     19 June 2013 at 1:17 pm

     Horses for courses. Regardless the Greens aren’t pushing this policy anymore because they can’t get backing from Labour or NZ First. Why would Labour and NZ First be so anti it do you think?
     • vto 4.1.1

       19 June 2013 at 1:21 pm

       Why would John Key call the Bank of England and Ben Bernanke and the Federal Reserve loopy hippies with funny money policies do you think?

       Is it because the Bank of England, the Federal Reserve and Ben Bernanke are hippies with funny money policies or is it because John Key just keeps talking absolute bullshit?
       • Gosman 4.1.1.1

         19 June 2013 at 1:32 pm

         Have you got the quote where John Key directly called the Bank of England and Ben Bernanke and the Federal Reserve “loopy hippies with funny money policies”?

         I’d expect the quote to include all of those various people/organisations by name rather than by inference.
         • vto 4.1.1.1.1

           19 June 2013 at 1:40 pm

           Ha ha – have to pull out the pinhead dance again eh gosman? Let me rephrase it for you if that help…

           Why would John Key describe money printing policies like those of Ben Bernanke, the Federal Reserve and the Bank of England as loopy and funny money policies do you think?

           Is it because the money printing policies like those of Ben Bernanke, the Federal Reserve and the Bank of England are loopy and funny money policies or is it because John Key just keeps talking bullshit

           next pinhead coming to you in 3… 2… 1…
           • Andrew 4.1.1.1.1.1

             19 June 2013 at 2:00 pm

             Printing money is one of last resort. The US and the UK are printing money as they have an effective 0% – 0.5% base rate and deflation. They are trying to inflate their economies. NZ, on the other hand, still has a base rate of 2.5% and no deflation, rather we still have inflation, albeit at the lower end of the scale.

             Printing money with a 2.5% base rate, when your economy is expanding, is likely to cause more inflation and a decline in real money purchasing power.

             That is why it’s idiotic/loopy in ‘NZ’. It’s arguably not idiotic/loopy in the UK or the US. The same effect can be used here by lowering our base rate. The US and the UK cannot lower theirs any more.
             • Gosman …

               19 June 2013 at 2:02 pm

               Thank you Andrew.

               Over to you vto.
             • vto …

               19 June 2013 at 2:05 pm

               I understand that is, partly, correct Andrew, but the point is around John Key and his shit talking. He deceives and avoids and minces and… simply talks bullshit. This is one example.

               edit: the funny thing is that the policies are still actually funny money policies. The world’s greatest ponzi scheme running amok all over the whole place. Do you ever wonder why actual real assets like power companies, land, gold, knitting machines, farm animals, etc etc are valued above printed paper money??? And by those who print that money? It is all the great deception….
               • Gosman …

                 19 June 2013 at 2:08 pm

                 The policy is one for loonies in the NZ context. Why is this a difficult concept for you to grasp?

                 The Greens have finally understood they aren’t going to make any head way on this. If the Hippies can understand this why can’t you?
                 • vto …

                   19 June 2013 at 2:19 pm

                   Already answered to Andrew above.

                   And btw, you shold always listen to the hippies as they are usually one step or generation ahead of the rest……

                   And their recognition of this policy as a useful tool in certain circumstances, just like the US, UK, Japan and Europe, (albeit the same circumstances do not quite exist in NZ at the monent) is one example of that.

                   Another example is recognition of Omaha and Waiheke and Coromandel as superior places to live before the rich rabble…

                   Another example is recognition of organic food as superior to corporate food before the rich rabble….

                   Another example is recognition of alternative energy before the rich rabble…

                   Go the hippies I say
                   • Gosman …

                     19 June 2013 at 2:25 pm

                     Another example is the lack of use of basic hygiene before the rich rabble.

                     Another example is the belief in the power of ‘energy’ (Like Homeopathy) to cure illness before the rich rabble.

                     Another example is the belief in the power of free love to solve the worlds problems before the rich rabble.

                     Those Hippies got everything just right before everyone else no doubt about it, Man.
                   • vto …

                     19 June 2013 at 2:33 pm

                     ha ha, we each make our own nests gosman.

                     and btw, your hygiene one is false. The other two are matters of the mind, if you like, whereas what I was talking about was daily physical realities (land, food, heating and power).

                     but you know – hairs to split and all that.
               • Andrew …

                 19 June 2013 at 2:20 pm

                 “Do you ever wonder why actual real assets like power companies, land, gold, knitting machines, farm animals, etc etc are valued above printed paper money??? And by those who print that money? It is all the great deception….”

                 Because paper money has no intrinsic value. The paper means nothing. The guarantee of goods or services give it value. So the paper is only worth what you can exchange for it in the way of goods and services.
                 • vto …

                   19 June 2013 at 2:28 pm

                   True.

                   Note what people with lots of paper money do – exchange it as quickly as possible for actual real assets like power companies, land, gold, knitting machines, farm animals, etc etc

                   Kind of points to the true game play being game-played out around the globe right now – witness Mighty River Power, witness moves by ECB to push places like Greece and Cyprus to exchange their real assets for paper money…

                   I think we wll need to look, think and evaluate, with big wide open eyes and minds, much more than we do.
                   • Andrew …

                     19 June 2013 at 2:51 pm

                     “Note what people with lots of paper money do – exchange it as quickly as possible for actual real assets like power companies, land, gold, knitting machines, farm animals, etc etc”

                     exactly, they do this to hedge against inflation. if the banks paid any real interest on saving, then money in the bank will beat inflation, but not at the moment. poor people that run out of money week to week are the real losers of inflation. this is why printing money will always hurt those with the least money the most, as their precious few $$ they have to spend each week are worth less with an inflated money supply.

                     “I think we will need to look, think and evaluate, with big wide open eyes and minds, much more than we do.”

                     couldn’t agree more.
                   • Draco T Bastard …

                     19 June 2013 at 9:20 pm

                     exactly, they do this to hedge against inflation.

                     Nope, they do it to get real assets that can then be held over the heads of everyone else so that they can become even bigger bludgers on society.

                     this is why printing money will always hurt those with the least money the most, as their precious few $$ they have to spend each week are worth less with an inflated money supply.

                     And you still fail to understand that the private banks print vast amounts of money every year and so hurt those poor people. The government printing money won’t do that because:

                     1.) It doesn’t have interest on it and so can actually be paid off
                     2.) Can easily be offset by taxes and so the money supply can be controlled more easily
                     3.) The money printed by the government will actually be spent into the economy rather than accumulated by the few

                     What we need to do is stop the private banks from printing money as they’re the ones causing all the problems.
                   • KJT …

                     19 June 2013 at 10:22 pm

                     Unless it is paid to them in increased wages, of course.
                   • Draco T Bastard …

                     20 June 2013 at 4:19 am

                     Increasing wages won’t stop the collapse of the economy brought about by the charging of interest on created money.

                     BTW KJT, I’m not really sure what you’re replying to there.
                   • KJT …

                     20 June 2013 at 9:19 am

                     Replying to Andrew. Poor people do not lose out when inflation increases their wages in relation to costs.

                     When the spending is on wages, not on tax cuts for Hawaii holidays for the rich, for example..
                   • Gosman …

                     20 June 2013 at 9:56 am

                     Inflation does not increase wages. Inflation is a measure of the increase in the price of goods and services not wages. Wages may go up due to higher inflation but they are quite separate things.
             • bad12 …

               19 June 2013 at 2:25 pm

               Your joking right, there is only one reason that the NZ economy is running at 2% inflation, it’s called Government BORROWING,

               For the moment i will leave out of the inflation equation private sector borrowing, BUT, tell us all what exactly would be the difference in the Government having ‘printed’ the 100-300 million dollar weekly shortfall in Government revenue for the previous 4 years,

               Of course the economy is showing 2% inflation, it was showing similar to that prior to the Global Financial Crisis and Slippery’s National Government have refused to face reality and borrowed somewhere in the realm of 60-80 billion dollars in 4 years to prop up it’s spending hence the 2% inflation,

               IF the Slippery Shysters had of instead of borrowing that 60-80 billion dollars simply printed the same amount of money the same amount of inflation, (2%), would have occurred,

               Only the blind and/or stupid cannot see this simple truth…
               • Andrew …

                 19 June 2013 at 2:36 pm

                 as far as i am aware, government borrowing does not cause inflation. although i am not an economist, so i would concede to being wrong if proved otherwise.

                 “Slippery’s National Government have refused to face reality and borrowed somewhere in the realm of 60-80 billion dollars in 4 years to prop up it’s spending”

                 to prop up its spending? or the previous governments spending? also, according to all in sundry here, we have had nothing but austerity budgets over the past 4 years? Maybe its borrowing is because of the ChCh earthquake, and to keep the economy going since the GFC? A good thing, no?

                 How bad would things be if the government decided that it wouldn’t borrow any more money?

                 edit: “IF the Slippery Shysters had of instead of borrowing that 60-80 billion dollars simply printed the same amount of money the same amount of inflation, (2%), would have occurred,”

                 bullshit
                 • Gosman …

                   19 June 2013 at 3:12 pm

                   Government borrowing can cause inflation if you add to the amount of money in circulation as a result. But you are correct that borrowing in its own right doesn’t have a large impact. It is resultant government spending which has the bigger impact on inflation. Nowhere near the impact though if you funded the spending shortfall via printing money. The fact bad12 doesn’t understand this is a biting indictment on his/her left wing view of the world.
                   • Andrew …

                     19 June 2013 at 3:19 pm

                     so i guess that when the loan is repaid the money is no longer in circulation.
                   • KJT …

                     19 June 2013 at 3:26 pm

                     There is absolutely no difference in the initial effect on inflation between QE, insurance money coming in, like CHCH, and Borrowing.

                     The difference is later when borrowing has to be paid back, with interest!

                     The difference is the banks charge us for “printing money”.

                     See comment below.
                   • Colonial Viper …

                     19 June 2013 at 3:55 pm

                     so i guess that when the loan is repaid the money is no longer in circulation.

                     Correct. Money is effectively destroyed from the economy, until a new loan is originated, recreating the money in the economy. A fact inferred by this cartoon

                     http://thestandard.org.nz/toles-on-economic-recovery/
                   • KJT …

                     19 June 2013 at 9:58 pm

                     So Gosman, Governments borrow money without necessarily spending it?

                     I suppose you are right when they borrow it for tax cuts for Hawaii holidays. AND The money is not spent here.

                     However, say 300 million is spent in Christchurch
                     In borrowed money, QE or taxation.
                     Only taxation has a neutral effect on inflation.

                     However inflation is not a given. If the extra money soaks up otherwise unused resources, such as previously unemployed people. Which we have far too many.
                   • Gosman …

                     20 June 2013 at 10:09 am

                     Do people use NZ dollars when they are on Hawaii on Holiday?
                 • bad12 …

                   19 June 2013 at 8:24 pm

                   Government borrowing does not cause inflation, Government spending does, even frigging Gosman knows that, i get the feeling we have been debating with a slightly retarded 5 year old…
         • bad12 4.1.1.1.2

           19 June 2013 at 1:44 pm

           Splitting hairs??? If Slippery the PM thinks the Green Party ‘printing money’ is the policy of ‘loopy hippies with funny money policies’ then by inference the Governments of Japan, the US, the UK and Europe must also be ‘loopy hippies’,

           Or, perhaps you see some fundamental difference in a Government of NZ ‘printing money’ as opposed to borrowing other countries freshly printed scrip…
           • Gosman 4.1.1.1.2.1

             19 June 2013 at 2:04 pm

             See Andrew’s reply above.

             BTW why have The Greens recently abandoned their big push of this policy, (or at least acknowledged it isn’t going to happen anytime soon)?
             • bad12 …

               19 June 2013 at 2:34 pm

               See my reply to Andrew’s snippet of low intelligence above, answered in full and debunked for the rubbish it actually is,

               Failing to address the true picture of the Slippery National Governments intentions to hand to the next Government a set of Government accounts mired in 60-80 billion dollars of debt is simply low browed lies by omission we have come to expect not only from this abysmal Government but it’s supporters as well,

               Seems really sensible for the Green Party to stop pushing it’s ‘printing money’ policy as neither Labour or NZFirst, party’s that are likely to form the next Government agree with such a policy…
               • Andrew …

                 19 June 2013 at 2:58 pm

                 “See my reply to Andrew’s snippet of low intelligence above, answered in full and debunked for the rubbish it actually is”

                 wow, that’s pretty harsh. straight into the ‘low intelligence’ meme. Nice one.

                 in actual fact, yours is the rubbish. Nowhere above did you debunk anything. In actual fact, the “why don’t governments just print money instead of borrowing it” meme, has been well and truly debunked the world over. Of course, there are a few economists out there that actually believe the way you do, but i certainly wouldn’t call it a consensus as they are very much in the minority.
                 • bad12 …

                   19 June 2013 at 3:54 pm

                   The Governments of the UK, the US, Japan and Europe print the stuff at their whim but you and other neanderthals know better of course,

                   So tell us all again, what would have been the difference, if in the last 4 years the Government had of ‘printed’ the 60-80 billion dollars it has so far borrowed,

                   Your claim is that because there is 2% inflation in our economy ‘printing’ this money so far borrowed would have lead to undue inflation, you are blind to the fact that by borrowing that 60-80 billion dollars in this 4 year period this government has not only kept the dollar growing in value against the US dollar it has also ensured that inflation will be 0-2%,

                   If the Government had not borrowed that 60-80 billion dollars and spent this into the NZ economy it would have tanked and inflation would be at zero%,

                   So really your argument is able to go round in a loop, the argument of the loopy, the truth is that if this Government had of printed that 60-80 billion dollars over that 4 year period we would still have inflation at 2% without having the debt mountain chalked up unnecessarily by this Government…
                   • Colonial Viper …

                     19 June 2013 at 4:12 pm

                     I actually what Andrew’s agenda is. It is common knowledge that the big central banks i.e. BoJ, ECB, Federal Reserve, BoE and several other smaller ones, have been creating money at a massive, unprecedented rate since 2008.

                     The Fed’s ZIRP policy means that the Primary Dealers can access that money at essentially 0% interest.

                     What is in it for Andrew to deny these facts?
                   • Andrew …

                     19 June 2013 at 4:42 pm

                     see:

                     http://thestandard.org.nz/the-nub-of-the-issue/#comment-650820

                     I have already said that is it absolutely necessary for the big central banks to be printing money due to fighting deflation, so your “you and other neanderthals know better” comment is unnecessary.

                     so, if i understand you correctly, you are saying that if the NZ govt printed 60-80 billion dollars over the last 4 years, while we have positive inflation and a central bank rate of 2.5%, then we would only have the same rate of inflation that we do now ….

                     and i’m saying bullshit.

                     edit: and BTW, “kept the dollar growing in value against the US dollar”. The NZD is growing in value against the USD due to the USD devaluing, not the other way around.
                   • bad12 …

                     19 June 2013 at 8:18 pm

                     What i have said and it’s in plain English so even the slightly retarded should understand it =,

                     There is but one reason that the NZ economy sailed through the Global financial crisis without going into deflation and that is that the current Government has since 2009 spent into the economy 100-300 million dollars weekly that was not direct Government revenue, ie: it borrowed that 100-300 million dollars a week,

                     Therein lies the root of your 2% growth/inflation and therein lies 1/2 the reason for the high NZ$ the other half being the continuous devaluation of the US$ by you guessed it, printing money,

                     This of course leaves the next Government with a 60-80 billion dollar debt, i am sure you can follow me thus far,

                     Now if we as a country had of followed those big central banks in printing money to fight off deflation instead of borrowing 100-300 million dollars weekly to achieve exactly the same thing we would be in exactly the same position vis a vis the 2% inflation/growth now being experienced except we as a country would not have a debt mountain of 60-80 billion dollars, a lower valued NZ$, far higher export earnings and far more manufacturers and manufacturing jobs,

                     The fact that you can only muster ‘bullshit’ as an interjection is meaningless drivel and you know that i am correct in my analysis unless that is you think borrowed dollars have some form of ‘magical qualities’ that printed dollars do not possess…
                 • Draco T Bastard …

                   19 June 2013 at 9:42 pm

                   wow, that’s pretty harsh. straight into the ‘low intelligence’ meme.

                   It’s not a meme, it’s solid research – RWNJs are stupid.

                   Of course, there are a few economists out there that actually believe the way you do,

                   The average run of the mill economist (most of them) wouldn’t know what an economy was if they tripped over one. It’s the one time I’ll say that listening to the academics is worse than useless as doing so leaves everyone worse off.
           • Andrew 4.1.1.1.2.2

             19 June 2013 at 2:14 pm

             Oh, i forgot about Japan, thanks for reminding me. Japan have been fighting deflationary stagnation since their economy imploded in the 90’s. Printing money in Japan would seem like the only option. From the financial times:

             “The BoJ will double Japan’s already expanded monetary base, taking all imaginable measures to achieve 2 per cent inflation in about two years”

             So once again, they are printing money like there is no tomorrow, among other things, to try and achieve ‘inflation’. We already have inflation, our economy is expanding.
             • vto …

               19 June 2013 at 2:24 pm

               Andrew, when you say this … “our economy is expanding”, which many measure seem to say at the moment, I have to disagree. The money is expanding perhaps, thanks to pretty much debt issued by the banks (which is also most all printed), but the amount of personal activity and production (actual goods etc) by people in their daily lives, which is a true measure of an economy is stagnant.

               The whole expanding economy meme is a myth. It is purely a money measure and we are all awre of the fragile and slippery nature of “money”.

               This measure is all part of the global monetary system. Trust in it at your peril.
               • Andrew …

                 19 June 2013 at 3:16 pm

                 smarter people than me work out the inflation rate, i don’t know if banks extending credit has anything to do with it.

                 for more info on how banks (not including the reserve bank) don’t actually print money can be found here:

                 http://www.positivemoney.org/how-money-works/advanced/
                 • KJT …

                   19 June 2013 at 3:32 pm

                   And the same people who claim the high interest rates in New Zealand attracting fast loan money from overseas feeding into land prices does not cause land price inflation, claim that QE will cause runaway inflation.

                   Well, both can’t be right.

                   Unless you have the typical RWNJ cognitive dissonance, of course!
                 • Colonial Viper …

                   19 June 2013 at 3:52 pm

                   for more info on how banks (not including the reserve bank) don’t actually print money can be found here:

                   The link says that they don’t usually print the money, they simply electronically create it out of thin air.
                   • Draco T Bastard …

                     19 June 2013 at 9:55 pm

                     Yeah, was surprised by him linking to Positive Money while saying that the banks didn’t print (create) money. Seems he wasn’t paying attention while reading the page.
             • Draco T Bastard …

               19 June 2013 at 9:51 pm

               Just because we have inflation doesn’t mean that our economy is expanding. Inflation can also be driven by a lack of demand.
     • bad12 4.1.2

       19 June 2013 at 1:26 pm

       ”A market mechanism to lower the price of electricity”, we are all waiting with bated breath for you to expand upon this telling us what this ‘market mechanism’ is and exactly how it will work to lower the price of electricity,

       Perhaps tho you really have no knowledge of such a ‘market mechanism’ and other’s who view you as nothing but the dumb shill of Slippery’s National Government have your measure down to a T….
       • vto 4.1.2.1

         19 June 2013 at 1:44 pm

         bad12 that will be the same “market mechanism” that gave us leaky homes, no affordable housing, the inability to provide for dairying irrigation, and 29 dead men at Pike River.

         “Market mechanisms” are only good for undies and car tyres. Important shit it is proven hopeless at.
         • bad12 4.1.2.1.1

           19 June 2013 at 1:47 pm

           Yeah i am just picking on that clueless empty suitcase in an effort to get ‘it’ to make a bigger fool out of ‘it’self’ than it already has….
         • Gosman 4.1.2.1.2

           19 June 2013 at 2:06 pm

           Yeah like in Computer Hardware and Software. Industries dominated by the State sector.

           Oh hang on a minute……
           • vto 4.1.2.1.2.1

             19 June 2013 at 2:10 pm

             fair enough mr clever – undies, car tyres and computers. You can probably add paint, chainsaws and hats too
           • KJT 4.1.2.1.2.2

             19 June 2013 at 3:06 pm

             Who started the internet, Gossy.

             Clue.

             It wasn’t the private sector!
             • Gosman …

               19 June 2013 at 3:18 pm

               We are discussing the overall market not individual inventions or innovations that form part of the market.
               • KJT …

                 19 June 2013 at 3:27 pm

                 Yeah right.
               • bad12 …

                 19 June 2013 at 3:42 pm

                 You are not discussing anything, your ‘market mechanisms’ etc are simply empty mouthing’s from an equally empty head, i still await your description of the ‘market mechanism’ you claim will bring down the retail price of electricity…
               • Colonial Viper …

                 19 June 2013 at 3:49 pm

                 Hey Gossie who invented the transistor, the basis for electronic technology from the 1960’s onwards?

                 And who funded the development of the first jet aircraft?
             • Rob …

               19 June 2013 at 4:37 pm

               KJT who invented the plane .

               Clue

               It wasn’t the Govt.
               • vto …

                 19 June 2013 at 4:49 pm

                 Rob, who invented the cooked meal.

                 Clue

                 It wasn’t a market mechanism.
                 • Rob …

                   19 June 2013 at 5:00 pm

                   Nor was it a Govt.

                   It was probably an individual, exactly the same as the bloke who conceived the internet.
                   • Colonial Viper …

                     19 June 2013 at 5:16 pm

                     If this is the level of reasoning and invention you are referring to, there’s not much hope left.
                   • vto …

                     19 June 2013 at 5:17 pm

                     whooosh….

                     you see this crazy line of reasoning exposes the craziness in right wing thinking in these modern times.

                     It would not have been an individual at all it would have been a group I would suggest. Early humans or neanderthals or cro-magnons or our great-granddad-apes never ever acted or lived as individuals. The cooked meal would have been attended to as a group, or community, acting together in its best interests AS A COMMUNITY.

                     This whole concentration on the individual is at the forefront of right wing madness. You guys are out of sync with manwomankind and history. You are an anomoly. You need to wake up and see the big picture and how we humans have got to where we are. It has got us this far – it should, fingers crossed, get us to where we will get in the future.

                     It is all about community, not individuals.
                   • karol …

                     19 June 2013 at 5:31 pm

                     The bloke who conceived of the Internet.
                   • McFlock …

                     19 June 2013 at 5:43 pm

                     Maybe Rob’s thinking of Tim Berners-Lee, who developed the integration of hypertext and the internet.

                     While working for CERN.

                     Oh, and he gave it to the world, rather than stifling creativity and expansion via corporate IP monopolies.
               • Colonial Viper …

                 19 June 2013 at 5:03 pm

                 KJT who invented the plane .

                 Clue

                 It wasn’t the Govt.

                 LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL what a dumb line of reasoning.
                 • Rob …

                   19 June 2013 at 7:45 pm

                   Yep I was thinking of Lee , obviously I missed learning about the community meeting that devised the hot meal cooking roster .
                   • McFlock …

                     19 June 2013 at 9:21 pm

                     pity for you he didn’t work for ma bell
           • Draco T Bastard 4.1.2.1.2.3

             19 June 2013 at 9:57 pm

             Industries that wouldn’t have got off the ground without government funding.
     • Draco T Bastard 4.1.3

       19 June 2013 at 9:11 pm

       Because they’re stupid and tied to the neo-liberal lie that the government can’t do it?
5. KJT 5

   19 June 2013 at 3:04 pm

   The difference is the banks charge us for “printing money”.

   It still represents work done, either now or in the future who ever “prints” it.

   It seems to have been rather buried inn history that, printing money for public works and employment schemes, work done, now! was how New Zealand got itself out of the 30′s depression. Before the countries that did not, by the way! They required a war.

   Much of the infrastructure the idiots are selling off now, was built with “printed money”.

   The USA did the same. It laid the infrastructure foundations for their continued prosperity after WW2.

   It was also “printed” US dollars backing the Deutschmark, also “printed” which enabled Germany to become the economic powerhouse it is now.

   The problem with “printing money” is that, in New Zealand at present, it is unlikely to cause enough inflation to restore the balance of trade and the overvalued dollar. We have too many underutilized resources, especially workers.

   It puzzles me that some people are so opposed to the State “printing money” but are happy to live with the effects of banks unbalanced “printing money” into house and land price inflation, and our dollar inflation against trade competitors currencies..
   Well, I suppose it is not a puzzle really. they are happy to take wealth off the rest of us, in interest.

   Objections to “printing money” show either a fundamental misunderstanding of the economic role of money, or a cynical desire to foster public ignorance to keep the banks gravy train in operation.
   • Gosman 5.1

     19 June 2013 at 3:29 pm

     That would seemingly include the NZ Labour party then.
     • KJT 5.1.1

       19 June 2013 at 3:35 pm

       Nothing would surprise me, about the current Labour party, non-leadership.

       Though some of their younger people seem to be shaping up well.
     • xtasy 5.1.2

       21 June 2013 at 1:35 am

       Stop making claims that are not true, even though I am critical of Labour myself, for other reasons.
   • bad12 5.2

     19 June 2013 at 3:38 pm

     Well said, and i agree with all your points made…
   • Draco T Bastard 5.3

     19 June 2013 at 10:01 pm

     Objections to “printing money” show either a fundamental misunderstanding of the economic role of money, or a cynical desire to foster public ignorance to keep the banks gravy train in operation.

     QFT and +1 on all the rest as well.
6. Ad 6

   19 June 2013 at 3:37 pm

   Great questions.

   My concern is tactical: if the Christchurch requild bring unemployment down below 6% it will be hard to have a sensible conversation about economic development. And hard to ge the left elected
   at all.

   I have been recently re-reading Brian Easton’s The Nationbuilders. It’s a pantheon of many who pushed the development of New Zealand as if New Zealand were an idea to strive for and make. I urge you to read it.

   I liked the Helen Clark government overall. But the next one has to be better than that. I want to see nationbuilders emerge again.
   • Rogue Trooper 6.1

     19 June 2013 at 3:39 pm

     High Ad.
     • Ad 6.1.1

       19 June 2013 at 3:49 pm

       Yes I was declaiming from the mountaintop to the soundtrack of Where The Streets Have No Name and calling down all Vogellian gods as I wrote it. Every mild attempt at policy coherence generates these little fantasies; sorry 😉
       • Rogue Trooper 6.1.1.1

         19 June 2013 at 3:59 pm

         “I don’t know what to say, you don’t care anyway
         
         Here comes love, it’s like honey, you can’t buy it with money…you shock me to the core” 😉
         -Ancient Grains
7. Rogue Trooper 7

   19 June 2013 at 3:37 pm

   well, the NZ dollar is going to go higher against the Aussie on the back of their rates cut, and we are all waiting for Bernanke’s announcement in the morning, with the inevitable flow-on effect to the NZ economy…
   the deficit is going to increase through the imports for the Christchurch rebuild and foreign profit-taking from the “growing economy”.Just swell.
8. xtasy 8

   19 June 2013 at 10:30 pm

   John Key would not care a damned shit about the report brought out by the Auckland University professor, who was the author of the manufacturing crisis report.

   The crisis is a multi faceted and complex one, and it is deep. It is not easy to see for those focused on total manufacturing output, which hides the fact, that only a fraction is value added “production” that happens in NZ.

   Low value added or non value added manufacturing dominates, and that is what goes out in raw dairy, meat, logs and fish.

   Key though is not interested in details, he is only interested in quick fixes, as he grew up with “quick fix” deals and solutions. The very environment and conditions of currency or commodity trading is one, where you do not care about details of who does what, who manufactures, who invests, who researches, it is the charts, the present, immediate market ratings, the day to day deal options, that dictates your thinking.

   That is the environment of one John Key, and that is what made him get rich. He is more of a radical short term opportunist and “gambler” and risk taker, than a strategist and planner. The latter is what smart and successful economies are built on, like Germany, Japan and now also China.

   Key is not interested in that, he is only thinking term focused. It is the last term, definitely at least the second last, that he will bother with running politics. So he is focused on quick fixes, and a rush in exports of low value added, resource depleting and environmentally damaging commodities and products, that serves him well. Once – or before, the economy is stuffed and drained, no more to be made, he will move on, and that will be to some other role in business or consulting, or into retirement, which he has already booked himself into, on a nice tropical island on Hawaii.

   No risks for him, and fuck the rest, that is ‘Keysianism”, the most modern version of Fieldman type economics.

   Manufacturing of higher valued products and all the efforts, finance and support that may require is too long term stuff for the man. Not worth his time. So suck deep, NZers, he does not give a shit damned arse for the future of your country. Yet so many love a smiling assasin face to trust, and they all speculate on their properties, to sell for a great gain to an Australian, a Chinese or Pom.

   NZ Economics in short!

Links to post

1. The Daily Blog Watch Wednesday 19 June « The Daily Blog: posted on 20 June 2013 at 6:39 am

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS