This big-spending government got a wake-up call this weekend, courtesy of the gimlet eye of the ratings agencies who are now scouring the world to find the next Ireland on the horizon—and with this government borrowing a quarter of a billion a week just to tread big-spending water, the New Zealand Government is now in their sights. The Wall Street Journal quotes
ANZ senior economist Khoon Goh, who says, the outlook revision suggests "Standard & Poors are more concerned about the state of the government's finances than initially thought."
The net result is that the government will have to tighten its belt more than initially projected and try to return to surplus…
Sadly, it was apparent listening to Billy Bob English on Radio NZ this morning that it’s a wake-up call he’s too tied up in the status quo to take, and that his government is going to carry right on spending more than it has.
So much for responsible government.
8 comments:
Billy Bob English should read about Sarah Palin on govt spending.
Gov Sarah Palin In WSJ: 'Refudiation' of $600 Billion Printed Out of Thin Air
The only responsible policy for this government to take is to target the halving of the size of the State over the next five years.
Implement a policy of no new laws, regulations or tinkering with the tax system, to fix distortions from previous tinkerings. Everything decided in Parliament from now should only result in the rescinding of the laws, regulations and taxes that we have.
Anything other than such policies is a waste of time. Sadly this government doesn't even have the gumption to take turn one toe in this direction. And I can't think of a time when there were so many bureaucrats trying to muddy the reputations and shut down so many businessmen. It's obscene; some sort of national economic suicide:
I've made some blogs on it here:
http://www.solopassion.com/node/8141
And here:
http://www.solopassion.com/node/8135
(I've given up on Twitter, the java script seems to mess with my computer).
The NZ$ will of course drop as a result, and Labour will point out that it ran surpluses almost every year it was in power.
Labour-lite is failing and only Libz can even talk about what needs to be done. ACT is a lost cause
@ Scott
"Labour will point out that it ran surpluses almost every year it was in power."
And neglect to mention that it failed to take advantage of the opportunity to reduce taxation but chose instead to spend it all on bloating the public sector to it's present size.
Thus passing on to the Nats the electorally difficult task of cutting public sector jobs.
A task Labour are better suited to do themselves (as they proved in 1984) since anything they do the unions happily go along with - a luxury the Nats do not have.
Be that as it may, the Blue Team still have the responsibility of getting this bull by the horns. If they don't fancy the task then maybe they should have thought twice before running for office? There is more to seat in parliament than sitting on your expense account.
Sarah Queen of the TARPies.
In 2000 household debt was 60% of GDP now it is 100%.
Currently Govt borrowing is 30% of GDP.
Someone has to party on. Party on Bill.
@simon: and who gets to treat the patient for their hangover from all this partying? Or do you advocate hair of the dog for the already heady? The govt needs to come clean, and live within its income. The need to leave as much money in the wealth creators hands as possible so new micro-economies can grow and thus improve the macro picture. Pissing away the resources of the wealth creators will not turn the boat around.
There needs to be a push to reduce the public service by 10% per annum for at least 3-4 years. Natural attritiuon would probably meet most of the goals, but under such a regime the deadwood would bury itself in and hide in the relative security of a public servant, but carry on inhibiting the wealth creators' activities. So there would have to be some element of enforced retirement of non-productive/obstructionistic jobs
Mort
Sean, yes and Labour will claim that National's tax cuts are to blame of course. Labour wont engage in austerity, 1984-1990 was an era that will not return for some time, as that was a Labour Party divided between neo-Maoist like leftists (in technique and tolerance of dissent) and pragmatists (Douglas is one of those).
Labour is now a club for the patronising "I can make everyone else's lives better" tossers, who need little more than a slap in the face and to be told to mind their own frigging business.
Nats are back to Muldoon - stay in power at all costs, with nary a belief in anything else.
NZ senior economist Khoon Goh, who says, the outlook revision suggests "Standard & Poors are more concerned about the state of the government's finances than initially thought."
The net result is that the government will have to tighten its belt more than initially projected and try to return to surplus…
Post a Comment