Dear Sir
The election date has been set and even the Bookies can’t pick the final outcome. We the punters are going to have to decide. (DominionPost July 26). This is absolutely how it should be but what criteria can we use to make this decision?
I want to see evidence of plans to stimulate the ongoing growth of the New Zealand economy, as I think this is one of the most important criteria. For instance, there has been much talk of lowering the company tax rate but I want tax concessions to be given to existing businesses, which achieve productivity gains, or to new ventures, which make fresh contributions to the economy and increase employment opportunities. This targeting of the offer of reduced company taxes will be sending the right messages and actively encouraging further economic activity.
I challenge all aspiring political candidates to tell us, the punters, how they plan to grow the economic pie. We must not just be satisfied with Labour’s policy of redistribution of New Zealand’s current economic wealth. A stronger economy brings even more benefits to everyone in New Zealand.
Yours sincerely
Jan Hains
Economic Growth
I was concerned at your recent editorial in which you labelled Don Brash as an economic ‘rationalist’ without defining what you meant by this term.
I have seen this term used frequently over the last few years, inevitably without an explanation of what the user actually means by it. It in fact appears to be merely a pejorative term used as a label by those opposed to the economic reforms of the last 20 years.
If by ‘rationalist’ you mean increased economic efficiency (meaning better outcomes for given inputs), especially in the area of government spending, then I personally am all for it. An implication of such a ‘rationalist’ approach would mean better targeted welfare: in other words less welfare for those who don’t need it.
The key to increased living standards and hence individual welfare is economic growth. This will be achieved in no small part by improved efficiency. There is still large potential for improved efficiency in the areas of government spending and regulation. For example, poor quality spending on ‘hip hop’ tours and the like as well as poor quality regulation such as the RMA ultimately make us all poorer.
P V Gallagher
© Copyright; Foundation for Economic Growth and various authors. Individual authors retain their own copyright.
Top of Page
|
