top of page
Search

I can't make sense of the Finance Minister's statements today regards the "Pre-Election Economic and Fiscal Update" by the NZ Treasury. He claims the country is in better shape than expected and that the "forecasts showed New Zealand would avoid recession, with wages keeping ahead of inflation".


So here's my question - GDP growth up to June 2024 is forecast to be just over 1% (the forecast has been raised slightly from 1.0 to 1.3%). On the other hand, it is also stated immigration is now running at 100,000 a year, corresponding to an increase in 2% of our entire population. But if total GDP is only growing at a bit over 1% and the population is growing at 2%, then GDP per capita must be declining (since GDP per capita equals total GDP over population size).


In other words, from an individual perspective, we are entering a deep recession. But the Finance Minister says Kiwis are getting better off since our inflation-adjusted incomes are rising. Can a journalist please ask Robertson how GDP per capita, which measures the average income of a Kiwi, is falling based on his own Pre-Election Economic Update whilst at the same time tells 5 million Kiwis that we're getting better off?


If you don't believe me, then take a look at the graph of GDP per capita on page 7 of the Treasury's Pre-election report (see link below). What really blows my mind is the following figure - in particular the black line that shows the amount Kiwis are consuming on a per capita basis, after adjusting for cost-of-living changes:



It's set to plummet at a rate not far off from what occurred during the first lock-down in 2020. And consumption is a good measure of living standards. According to former Chair of the Reserve Bank Board, Arthur Grimes, consumption is the best predictor of well-being and we are meant to have a "well-being" government. Kiwis are going backwards.


Sources:





PM Hipkins released his Five Economic Priorities yesterday. The language is comical, using every buzz word known to motivational speakers. NZ should develop "a strong global reputation", be a "Centre of Excellence", go for "sustainable agri-tech", be a "global leader" in renewables, "digitally creative" and focus on "premium tourism" (meaning rich people flying Business & Private, one supposes, not unwashed backpackers driving vans).


In other words, it reads like something a billionaire who stays in eco-friendly lodges, owns a tech business where everyone earns a million a year, attends global leadership conferences in places like Davos in Switzerland, has a superyacht powered by bio-fuel and invests his or her spare cash in sustainable energy start-ups, would come up with. As such, my reading of Chippy's "five economic priorities" is that they will put up the cost-of-living.


The odd thing is that there's nothing in his priorities for ordinary men or women. The PM may like to pretend he's on the side of bread-and-butter working-class folk concerned about things being affordable, however, at least in the US, such folks would read his five economic priorities as something concocted by Hollywood producers, Silicon valley weirdos & Prince Harry types, with help from Hilary Clinton. And run for the hills.


Oddly enough, we've just been visited at Auckland University by Professor Massimo Morelli from Bocconi in Italy who gave a Distinguished Lecture about populism. He said populist leaders often go for five commitments to wrangle votes. Apparently psychologists have identified "five" as a magic number. He said Italy's former PM, Silvio Berlusconi, had a Five Point Personal Contract, and there was a populist party in that country called the "Five Star Movement. Former Republican Speaker of the House in the US, Newt Gingrich, has advocated a "five point plan" for America. At least Chippy's in good company.


Sources:






Home: Blog2

SUBSCRIBE

Thanks for submitting!

CONTACT

Robert MacCulloch

bottom of page