Just reflecting on the back of yesterday's post, it must cause just a little bit of discomfit for politicians when they get it so wrong. No? I guess that if it did, they wouldn't be in the game.
November 2015
"New Zealand’s unemployment rate is now worse than Australia’s – an economy described as ‘fast becoming a basket case’, Labour Finance spokesperson Grant Robertson says.
“Last night Australia’s new figures put unemployment at 5.9 per cent. New Zealand’s is 6 per cent.
“Australia’s economy has been going through extremely difficult times of late. It has been a rapid downturn for a once-thriving economy.
“New Zealand has experienced a sustained period of economic growth that is now falling away. We should be doing much better than Australia. There is no way our unemployment rate should be higher than the across the Tasman.
“John Key and Bill English always blame overseas economic factors and turbulent times. But the GFC is over and other countries are doing much better. Britain, Australia and the US all have unemployment levels below 6 per cent and falling. New Zealand’s is forecast to top 7 per cent.share on twitter
“The stark truth is National hasn’t been able to turn growth into jobs. Now the economy is going downhill opportunities will be even harder to come by, even for those with jobs.
“This isn’t the Kiwi dream. It’s getting harder and harder to get into work or find a better job. Behind these figures are real people with families to support and ambitions to fulfil.
“National is failing them,” Grant Robertson said.
And just for good measure here he is talking to the Labour Party conference:
"151,000 New Zealanders are out of work, and the rate of unemployment is six per cent, with projections that it will head towards seven per cent next year. 151,000 people. Think about that. It is nearly twice the population of this city out of work. It is nearly 50,000 more than when National took office. In Gisborne one in every ten people is out of work. It is clear that John Key and Bill English see levels of unemployment like this as collateral damage in their blinkered economic vision."
Mum jailed for letting a 10 year old go for a walk
31 minutes ago
4 comments:
Hi Lindsay
It's hard to imagine anything a Labour politicians says or promises making any difference in the political climate at this time. National has occupied their constituency, and they are simply left with saying 'we do big Government better than National'.
We can expect more 'free stuff' from Andrew Little as the next election draws near, but I suspect even the average voter can smell the desperation in their ranks.
Labour is a political entity whose 'reason for being' has passed. 25% will eventually become 20% then 15% as their elderly voters die off. The question is, who will replace? The Greens appear to be aiming for respectability, saying they can work with National etc. Interesting times.
“New Zealand has experienced a sustained period of economic growth that is now falling away. We should be doing much better than Australia.
well he's right of course. IER & Treasury have repeatedly stressed that NZ's economy needs to be doing 10-15% better than Oz just to stand still. Remember the wage gap anyone?
It's hard to imagine anything a Labour politicians says or promises making any difference in the political climate at this time
and that's really where he fails. Remember both Douglas and Mad-Dog Prebble were his Labour predecessors?
Were he to then say "that's why we are outlawing unions, going for full at-will employment laws, halving the size of the civil service, and ending all unemployment benefits and all corporate taxes" then you bet people would listen!
The question is, who will replace?
we know the answer to that: National already have. The real question is: who will replace the old Ruth Richardson National?
“The stark truth is National hasn’t been able to turn growth into jobs."
Oh dear. It seems that Robertson believes that Government is the creator of most jobs, rather than the private sector - who trade for things that people want, at a profit.
It seems that it would be too much to ask that next year, election year, all parties drop this nonsense. It's just so tiresome hearing this childish drivel.
Peter
Oh dear. It seems that Robertson believes that Government is the creator of most jobs, rather than the private sector
perhaps or perhaps not. Certainly we would agree with him that the government sets the environment in which businesses must operate; and that there are many very important changes that the government could and should make today that would let businesses create many jobs - rather than create them directly*. The problem is that there are very few that Little and Robertson would argue for (even those that they and most of us here would agree with)
- stopping government propping up smelters
- and saudi "businessmen"
- and building unnecessary roads
- increasing "communism by stealth" *aka welfare for families" to increase the gap between benefits and work
- simplyfying the tax system
- simplyfying the benefit system
- increasing the sustainability of super
- freeing up land in auckland to build more "worker housing"
- paying unemployed to move to places where there is work
- increasing childcare support for solo mums especially to return to work .
Ten "Labour" policies that Lindsay might agree were better than Key's benefit rises!
On the other hand, imagine if any government was take "creating jobs" seriously, in the Richardson / Douglas / Thatcher style?
- corporate tax rate to 10% immediately, aiming for 0%. Naa stuff that, just cut it to zero
- full at will employment law on the employer side.
- employment courts, employment tribunals, and employment civil actions abolished
- ACC employer levy abolished, all employment-related claims abolished, but complete tort reform retained
- personal taxes capped at say $50,000 nett per family per annum
- fringe benefits taxes and most other commercial regulation abolished
- RMA abolished, principle of real private property entrenched in law
- all "jobseeker" welfare abolished; minimum wage and other employment laws abolished.
- all government funding for elections & political parties abolished; all funding limits removed
- unions banned as criminal conspiracies
do you really think those policies - or rather actions by the government - would not "create jobs"?
* this is separate to the question as of whether real deep reform would mean massive creative destruction with unemployment hitting 15% for 5 years.
Post a Comment