What is the Real Economy?
The ‘Real Economy’ is made up of the farmers, manufacturers, tourist operators and service providers that sell to the world and generate New Zealand’s external income. As Angus Tait once said, “There are three ways to generate wealth; you farm things, you make things or you dig things up.” That is the essence of the real economy.
[ read more ]



mist Posted:
Perhaps IMF formulas are not accurate for this area.
(view article + comment)
mist Posted:
" tax increases in one area supports decreases in another is correct" it can only be correct if it is true. Observation and repeated sampling has proven that the hypothesis is faulty. Tax increases in one area are not causally linked to decreases elsewhere - not "possibly", not "it adds up". "Philosophically" it _might_ but testing proves it does not. One could even say "it should" but we both know an equivalent term for "it should" is "doesn't" What drives taxes down is political advantage. If a political party has an agenda they don't want the public to look at too closely, then sweeters (aka "bait") is put forwards. Tax decreases is a classic. This can be achieved because the tax increases and tax decreases are not linked. They're not zero sum nor do they have causal or proportional connection. This is because the "buffer solution" in the middle is that endless hole. tax increase means more spending. tax decrease means more government borrowing. The in/out relationship is decoupled, through size and power in the marketplace (financial economy). The abysmal productivity is because of the massive overheads from doing business in NZ. personal taxes double the rates of the US, huge taxes on goods and services, massive levies on critical imports, price gouging in the energy and communications markets, interest rates 300 to 500 times that of the US!, and not nearly the number of cost writeoffs either (subscriptions, training, vehicle rebates). Nor would get the 401k option either, of rebuying into the same market and not having to pay CGT. Oh and horrendous ever inflating local rates, again much much higher, for less, than our foreign counterparts (excepting Scandinavian countries). Our "abysmal production" is a result of this overtaxation being sand in the gears of the economy, wearing it down and rubbing out real growth. Putting CGT makes that problem worse!! And to sum up... your last comment.... O.M.G. You think that improving our situation, of people not wanting to save or invest in government buggered industry is to bugger up the ability to accumulate equity in useful assets??????? Where do you think people are going to get savings or capital to do anything??? (including retiring when their earning ability is severely reduced!) Put it in finance companies???????????? Buy the oh-so-excellently-performing NZX? In the few companies squeaking by?
(view article + comment)
John Walley Posted:
I think we agree on the lending without security issue. It might well be that the intent to change the source of tax and not increase government spending is fictitious, however given the provision that government spending does not change the statement that tax increases in one area supports decreases in another is correct. The broader point is demonstrated by the Romney situation where he pays tax at half the rate of his salaried staff - and in the USA capital gains carry a 15% tax rate - it will be interesting to see how that one pans out. For New Zealand the economic distortions supported by the complete absence of capital gains tax are clear from our abysmal productivity record. Why save, why invest in production (taxed interest paid or via the income statement) when money can be made without tax from passive asset appreciation.
(view article + comment)
carl Posted:
"a Capital Gains Tax means less tax in other areas or lower borrowing for the same amount of government spending. " Only in your wildest dreams, mate. a drip or a bucketful does not change an infinite hole. The only reduction in tax you would see is short-term, and done to create a perception. Once the elephant was sold it'll be put back up, often with extra claw-back clauses to catch more cash. And Banks do lend for shares - but at lower rates of coverage. 50% for business assets is rule of thumb, 80% for first mortgages, 20-25% for basic unencumbered share parcels. with additional security and reasonable ability to cover debt servicing compliance. That's the ball. So why's the man (original poster) running with such blatantly obvious fouls????
(view article + comment)
DGS Posted:
SEE ABOVE
(view article + comment)


Recent News

BusinessDesk: "US economy remains vulnerable to shocks from Europe" - Interest, 3 Feb 2012 Tweet It's been a great start to the year and investors found little reason to change much today, ahead of January's US jobs report due tomorrow. While Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke told lawmakers there were signs of improvement in the...

Oi! You’ve missed a bit... - Economist - Babbage, 3 Feb 2012 HOW much easier it would be to locate and repair damage to bridges, wind turbines and other dumb objects if those objects could tell you what the problem was. Researchers at the University of Strathclyde, in Britain, led by Mohamed Saafi, are therefore trying to give them a voice, by devising a...

Survey of Banks Shows a Sharp Cut in Lending in Europe - New York Times, 3 Feb 2012 The figures raise concern that Europe is on the verge of a credit crunch that would cause a deeper recession than had been expected.

TYSON: America’s Three Deficits - Project Syndicate, 3 Feb 2012 TYSON: America’s Three Deficits The US faces painful choices about how to close its long-run fiscal gap, and a credible plan should be decided now and implemented promptly – but only after the economy has recovered. For the next few years, the priorities of fiscal policy should be jobs,...

Dollar hampers 'knowledge intensive' exports - Stuff, 2 Feb 2012 The strong kiwi has stymied growth of high value exports in "knowledge intensive manufacturing", according to briefing papers from MED.


MED report highlights problems for high value exporters http://t.co/VoLBDWMv
3/02/2012 12:37 p.m.
Sales bounce at year end http://t.co/VtI5uuSq
3/02/2012 9:56 a.m.
Monetary policy matters http://t.co/45wTSnWd
2/02/2012 1:25 p.m.
New RBNZ Governor and prospects for policy change http://t.co/TiVh9HQY
31/01/2012 2:25 p.m.







08/07

Survey - Pride or Prudence?


Print-friendly 0 comment(s) Posted in: In the media

The latest New Zealand Manufacturers and Exporters Association (NZMEA) Survey of Business Conditions completed during June 2010, shows total sales in May 2010 increased 9.8% (export sales increased by 9% and domestic sales increasing 10%) on May 2009.
 
The NZMEA survey sample this month covered NZ$347m in annualised sales, with an export content of 41%.

Net confidence rose to 50, up from the 46 result reported last month but locked in the ‘no change’ and ‘modest rise’ categories.

The current performance index (a combination of profitability and cash flow) is at 104.5 up from 102.5 in April, the change index (capacity utilisation, staff levels, orders and inventories) went up to 105 from 102 in the last survey, and the forecast index (investment, sales, profitability and staff) is at 105, down on April’s result of 108.25.  Anything less than 100 suggests a contraction.

Constraints reported were 70% markets and 10% each on capacity, capital and staff.

Staff numbers for May increased 3%.  It is the first time the survey has reported an increase in employment since November 2008!

“This is probably the most positive survey we have seen since the onset of the global financial crisis,” says NZMEA Chief Executive John Walley, “that said, the recovery is fragile, patchy and far from bedded in.”

“The broadening of the constraints is a further indication that, right now at least, demand is stronger. Our forward looking index has softened in line with reports of softening export markets, but for the present sales have improved on last year and job growth is reported for the first time.”

“When I look back at the net confidence numbers our survey was in deep negative territory from early 2005, which turned on trend earlier this year.  That growth will have to continue for a while yet before we start to see any real investment kick in.”
  
“We have long been of the view that, frothy confidence numbers aside, jobs and sales are better measures of where the world is at.   On those measures June was too early for the Reserve Bank to increase interest rates; we remain of the view that September this year is the earliest practical date to even consider a shift in monetary policy.”

“Pessimistic reports from other commentators in New Zealand; continued concerns in our financial sector; lower for longer messages from the Federal Reserve; a no change out of the Reserve Bank of Australia, and an Australian election in prospect; significant budget cuts in the UK; on-going European worries; and more appreciation of the RMB and other economic worries out of China - all encourage a wait and see position.”

“Pride should not win out over prudence.  The RBNZ should signal lower for longer on interest rates and indicate the favoured route will be to use macroprudential efforts to press back against any inflation concerns for the foreseeable future.”
 

From: To:

 

From: To:

 

From: To:

 

From: To:

 

From: To:

 

From: To:

 

 

From: To:

 

  



tags: survey, sales, global, confidence

comments

0 Comment(s)



No comments have been posted yet

Name:
Email:
Website URL:
Comment:
Remember Me:
Email Replies:
Please play the ball not the man.