The reaction from the left to Luxon’s state of the nation speech was a mix of irony and ignorance. Listening to Chris Hipkins’ response, it would appear he missed the complete point of what Luxon was on about. He said Luxon had missed the one thing Kiwis were most concerned about: the cost of living crisis. Chris, his entire speech was based around exactly that.
The whole point of what Luxon is trying to do is to grow the economy, which will result in a better standard of living for Kiwis: by increasing wages through growth, people have more spending power. Does Hipkins think we will all be left further behind because there was no mention of increased taxes?
This is reflective of the mindset of the left. Time and time again they raise the hoary old chestnut that is tax, tax and tax. Think back during the last election campaign and recall how many times Hipkins talked about increasing productivity: the answer is zilch. They never do and don’t seem to ever grasp that growing the economy is all about increasing productivity, which in turn increases wealth.
Growth doesn’t come from taxing people out of house and home: it comes from producing more and exporting more. Raising taxes provides more revenue for health and education, but that shouldn’t all have to come from the pockets of those who could better spend it themselves. It should come courtesy of the productive sector.
I listened to a 20-minute interview Hipkins did with Jack Tame four months ago. Virtually the whole time was spent talking about tax. Growing the economy was mentioned a couple of times, but purely from a domestic viewpoint: e.g., people should invest in productive businesses rather than housing, and this was in the context of providing for a retirement nest egg. That was the extent of the vision.
In Hipkins’ view, to provide the revenue we need to build such things as hospitals and more roads we have to increase debt. No mention of public-private partnerships or attracting overseas investment: just increase tax and debt. He is unable to see the bigger picture.
Bernard Hickey is another who doesn’t think going for growth will work, because mathematically it doesn’t add up. Evidently you can’t go for per capita growth of GDP while downsizing the size of government at the same time. As for attracting overseas investment, Bernard reflects on NZ First pulling the plug at the last minute re using sovereign wealth funds for light rail to Auckland Airport.
Maybe things have changed and Bernard hasn’t quite caught up. He needs to listen to Shane Jones talking to Ryan Bridge on ZB last week. He has met with about eight international analysts coming out of London and Toronto and they told him the fast-track legislation, if passed in its current form, will result in an avalanche of North American capital. There is no other regime that they know of in either Australia or the United States that will have the capacity to allocate with this efficiency.
The Council of Trade Unions president, Richard Wagstaff, described the idea as tired and “ridiculous”. He said it was shallow and full of “smoke and mirrors”. According to Wagstaff, Denmark and Singapore, which Luxon cited as examples, are taking the opposite approach to economic growth: “They have what we need here which is industry planning and serious investment in infrastructure, things this government has abandoned.” He wants the government to have a serious dialogue with businesses and unions to solve the problems…
It would appear those on the left have little to no idea of what Luxon was on about. They fail to grasp what he is trying to achieve long term. These are people who support big government, high taxes and a mentality that all growth can come from domestic sources – this proves that they have little understanding of economics.
What this country needs is strategic economic planning for the long term rather than three years of this followed by three years of that. That is what this government is trying to put in place. More years of ‘borrow and hope’ is exactly what we don’t need.
JC is a right-wing crusader. Reached an age that embodies the dictum only the good die young. This article was first published HERE
The whole point of what Luxon is trying to do is to grow the economy, which will result in a better standard of living for Kiwis: by increasing wages through growth, people have more spending power. Does Hipkins think we will all be left further behind because there was no mention of increased taxes?
This is reflective of the mindset of the left. Time and time again they raise the hoary old chestnut that is tax, tax and tax. Think back during the last election campaign and recall how many times Hipkins talked about increasing productivity: the answer is zilch. They never do and don’t seem to ever grasp that growing the economy is all about increasing productivity, which in turn increases wealth.
Growth doesn’t come from taxing people out of house and home: it comes from producing more and exporting more. Raising taxes provides more revenue for health and education, but that shouldn’t all have to come from the pockets of those who could better spend it themselves. It should come courtesy of the productive sector.
I listened to a 20-minute interview Hipkins did with Jack Tame four months ago. Virtually the whole time was spent talking about tax. Growing the economy was mentioned a couple of times, but purely from a domestic viewpoint: e.g., people should invest in productive businesses rather than housing, and this was in the context of providing for a retirement nest egg. That was the extent of the vision.
In Hipkins’ view, to provide the revenue we need to build such things as hospitals and more roads we have to increase debt. No mention of public-private partnerships or attracting overseas investment: just increase tax and debt. He is unable to see the bigger picture.
Bernard Hickey is another who doesn’t think going for growth will work, because mathematically it doesn’t add up. Evidently you can’t go for per capita growth of GDP while downsizing the size of government at the same time. As for attracting overseas investment, Bernard reflects on NZ First pulling the plug at the last minute re using sovereign wealth funds for light rail to Auckland Airport.
Maybe things have changed and Bernard hasn’t quite caught up. He needs to listen to Shane Jones talking to Ryan Bridge on ZB last week. He has met with about eight international analysts coming out of London and Toronto and they told him the fast-track legislation, if passed in its current form, will result in an avalanche of North American capital. There is no other regime that they know of in either Australia or the United States that will have the capacity to allocate with this efficiency.
The Council of Trade Unions president, Richard Wagstaff, described the idea as tired and “ridiculous”. He said it was shallow and full of “smoke and mirrors”. According to Wagstaff, Denmark and Singapore, which Luxon cited as examples, are taking the opposite approach to economic growth: “They have what we need here which is industry planning and serious investment in infrastructure, things this government has abandoned.” He wants the government to have a serious dialogue with businesses and unions to solve the problems…
It would appear those on the left have little to no idea of what Luxon was on about. They fail to grasp what he is trying to achieve long term. These are people who support big government, high taxes and a mentality that all growth can come from domestic sources – this proves that they have little understanding of economics.
What this country needs is strategic economic planning for the long term rather than three years of this followed by three years of that. That is what this government is trying to put in place. More years of ‘borrow and hope’ is exactly what we don’t need.
JC is a right-wing crusader. Reached an age that embodies the dictum only the good die young. This article was first published HERE
1 comment:
PM Luxon knows didly squat about hard work which is what production requires . The Corporate world is the antithesis of production and the last thing we need is a corporate leader who cannot get his head around NO spending and foolish Zero Carbon. He couldnt even tell Margaret Pugh which book to read when he abused her for asking a very valid question . His answer to MP Pugh was smart arse , non answer and totally stupid . We all would love to read the "book " that answers all his fetish about Climate change and Zero Carbon for NZ. WHAT is the book PM?
Post a Comment