Did we go backwards again?
Yes, probably.
We'll find out for sure whether the New Zealand economy recorded its fifth quarterly contraction out of the last eight when September quarter gross domestic product (GDP) figures are released on Thursday, December 19.
The Reserve Bank (RBNZ) has forecast a 0.2% drop.
It had seemed there was broad agreement among bank economists that 0.2% was about right. But minds have been changing as some of the 'partial' economic indicators for the third quarter have been released. Manufacturing figures appear to have turned out far softer than expected.
At the time I started writing this, I had just two of the big bank economists' previews in front of me. ANZ and Westpac are both picking a 0.4% fall.
As is frequently mentioned, there's a fair bit of a lag on our GDP data, given that we'll see what happened in the September quarter just 12 days before the December quarter ends.
So, it's all a bit historic. But, as ever, we'll be looking for clues as to how the economy might have been faring subsequently.
And there are signs the worst is over. The RBNZ thinks so, and reckons the December quarter will see us record 0.3% growth.
However, assuming a drop in GDP for the September quarter is confirmed, it will mean we've had two consecutive quarters of shrinkage. There was a 0.2% drop in the June quarter.
This means by 'technical' definition another recession.
Really, however, we've been in a kind of rolling recession since the December quarter of 2022 as the below table shows.
These figures have been the product of the RBNZ's wave of Official Cash Rate (OCR) hikes between 2021 and 2023 that saw the OCR pumped up all the way from just 0.25% to 5.50%.
The RBNZ began cutting in August, 2024 and now the rate is down to 4.25%.
On a per capita basis the GDP story has been even worse, remembering that we had a massive inbound migration boom following the pandemic.
Many more hands actually produced less. In the seven quarters to June, per capita GDP fell 4.6%, which is a bigger per capita decline than we had after the Global Financial Crisis.
Revisions will cloud the picture
However, we do need to mention the forthcoming September quarter GDP release will include extensive revisions to prior data.
We'll have to fully unpack all that after we've seen the detail and had it explained, but Statistics NZ is indicating annual GDP growth for the year to March 2023 will be revised up from 2.7% to 3.5%, while the figures for the year to March 2024 will go up from 0.3% to 1.4%.
Presumably the recent past economic performance may therefore not look quite as dire as has appeared. But we will have to wait and see for the detail.
So, that's the previous data. What are we expecting for the September quarter figures?
Well, as mentioned further up there has been a drip feed of 'partial' GDP indicators.
Retail sales volumes fell on a seasonally adjusted basis by 0.1% in the September quarter. That's better than the 1.2% drop in the June quarter, but trading conditions are undoubtedly still very difficult. Actual sales volumes in the September quarter were 2.5% lower than for September quarter 2023.
The volume of building work put in place fell by 3.2%, which was a bigger fall than expected. Residential building work fell by 3.5% to its lowest level in four years.
The volume of total manufacturing sales fell by a seasonally adjusted 1.2% after a surprising 0.3% rise (and that's now been revised down from the originally stated 0.6%) in the June quarter. Wholesale trade sales fell on a seasonally adjusted basis by 1.2% in the September quarter after an downwardly revised 1.3% in the June quarter.
So, what does it all mean?
Well, it certainly suggests GDP declined in the September quarter. At this point, I will leave you with the economists and their views.
ANZ economist Henry Russell and senior economist Miles Workman say in their preview that despite their forecast for GDP (-0.4%) being marginally weaker than the RBNZ’s November Monetary Policy Statement forecast (-0.2%), they don’t anticipate the third-quarter figures will alter the near-term path for monetary policy.
They say RBNZ senior policymakers have already provided guidance that a 50 basis point cut to the OCR is likely at the next review in February, and the bar for a 75bp cut "is likely to be very high".
"The Q3 GDP data (already three months old) is very much a look in the rear-view mirror, and the focus has now turned to gauging the economy’s responsiveness to monetary easing."
"On that front, high-frequency indicators signal the economy is turning a corner, but that will take time to be reflected in hard economic outcomes."
"The stark divergence between where the economy has been, and where forward indicators signal that it is heading, is likely to temper the attention the RBNZ pays to a weaker-than- expected Q3 GDP outcome," Russell and Workman say.
Paving the way for recovery
They say lower interest rates and easing credit conditions are paving the way for an economic recovery. And high-frequency indicators are already signalling the economy is responding, with confidence lifting, the housing market showing signs of life, and activity indicators having bounced off their June lows.
"This recession was caused by high interest rates, so lower rates are likely to be an effective cure, but not an instant one, and there remains considerable uncertainty surrounding the pace of the recovery," the ANZ economists say.
"Our assessment of near-term growth prospects will be informed by how extensive the slowdown in the economy has become outside of the most interest rate-sensitive industries."
"If weakness in [the] GDP release is concentrated in the most interest-rate sensitive sectors, namely construction, manufacturing and retail trade, a stronger rebound in activity could be on the cards, as these industries tend to be the first to respond to falling interest rates."
"If, however, underlying momentum in services industries has weakened more than expected, that could have larger implications for the near-term path for growth, given services industries tend to be a slower ship to turn," Russell and Workman say.
In his latest Eco Pulse publication, BNZ chief economist Mike Jones has posed the question of whether the economy is responding to interest rate reductions.
"...It’s clear that the economic response to rate cuts to date has been small and reasonably tentative," he says.
"That’s not hugely surprising given the OCR is still at restrictive levels overall and it takes a while for cuts to work their way into the interest rates that people pay and receive."
But he says it’s important to note that lower interest payments are not the only way less restrictive monetary policy works. Cutting the cash rate and saying there’s more to come can also lower the exchange rate, boost asset prices, and lift confidence.
Providing an extra leg-up
"These impacts tend to be more immediate and we’re seeing elements of all of them in play. Most of the NZ dollar’s recent decline is linked to the strength of the US dollar post the return of Donald Trump. But the NZD has still underperformed all G10 currencies over the five months since the RBNZ first flagged cash rate cuts were on the cards in July. If the lower NZD/USD is sustained, and our forecasts suggest it will be, it will provide an extra leg-up for export returns that are already starting to look healthy in some sectors (e.g. dairy and horticulture)."
Jones says evidence of a boost for asset prices, and any associated ‘wealth effect’, is mixed.
"The NZ share market is rising but there is a strong offshore updraft to this. Local house prices are not rising but our view is that lower interest rates: a) likely prevented a deeper correction this year, and b) will help drive an upturn in house prices next year."
He says confidence "has most definitely perked up". An expectation of lower interest rates has "supercharged" particularly business confidence recently. Firms’ expectations of their own output are at the highest level since 2014. Historically there’s a strong directional (but far from perfect) link between firms’ expectations of their own business activity and what gets delivered.
"So, while a more confident populace does not mean the recovery is assured, it does provide a rung of support to our forecasts for economic growth to pick-up to around 3% next year."
*This article was first published in our email for paying subscribers first thing Friday morning. See here for more details and how to subscribe.
93 Comments
"We'll have to fully unpack all that after we've seen the detail and had it explained, but Statistics NZ is indicating annual GDP growth for the year to March 2023 will be revised up from 2.7% to 3.5%, while the figures for the year to March 2024 will go up from 0.3% to 1.4%."
Where are all the benefits we should have seen if trailing economic growth has been revised upwards by these amounts?
Makes me wonder if they cauldrons at Stats NZ.
"This recession was caused by high interest rates, so lower rates are likely to be an effective cure"
Was it really? I thought it was caused by our general in ability to actually produce anything. Hence the "product" in GDP being lower and excessively lower per Capita.
Oh well just lower interest rates then.
What were the emergency low rates prior curing?
The patient is dead, inject more debt with a side dose of low interest rates.
Bank economists are so caught up in their own doublespeak they don't know what they're saying. Beware the false prophets speaking in forked tongues.
We've produced a wealth of property wealth, white gold, and logs...
Those revisions are interesting, but if overall GDP has been revised up in 2023 and early 2024, are we being setup for a big drop?
Important to remember of course that GDP(p) is basically a measure of the surplus that businesses and organisations make (wages + profits). The surplus that can be made by all organisations collectively is a function of net money creation (by banks and govt) and the far less relevant spending down of savings.
Some of the new money created flows into offshore ownership thanks to our huge current account deficit. This is deducted from GDP(p). So, as a basic rule of thumb, net govt and bank money creation have to comfortably offset the current account deficit for us to increase GDP.
So, with a current account deficit at 6%+ GDP, we need govt deficit spending + net bank money creation to be at least 8% of GDP before we will see anything like expansion (jobs, profits etc). Govt are currently planning to run an annual deficit of 2% GDP, so we will need private debt expansion to hit 6%+ of GDP this year at least. We are running at around half that amount.
Now, I'm sure people will get upset and think I'm advocating for a private debt boom, house price explosion etc. I'm not at all. I am merely saying that GDP growth (and household savings actually) are totally reliant on private or public balance sheet expansion (debt increase). It is that expansion, and the extra consumption and activity it enables, that we measure as 'growth'.
So, you see, if you are serious about stopping the housing ponzi, debt fueled growth model, then you should be pushing to abandon GDP as a measure of success.
then you should be pushing to abandon GDP as a measure of success.
The basic assumption is that more money = more abundance, and better lives. Obviously flawed, especially as an economy maturates.
Replacing it though, is quite challenging. Other methods become even more arbitrary in what they're trying to represent.
Ideally we'd want something that enshrines an economy providing a minimum set of standards for the population. Physical and mental health, shelter, nutrition, etc.
I think the main problem with the metric is that it ignores the debt - which is a creation of future liabilities.
Ignoring government debt, which will hopefully be taxed back through improved tax from improved GDP is one thing - but why ignore private debt?
Private debt just siphons off money from those who take it on to those who provide it. But in the current economic environment, the majority need it (assuming renters are aiming at a mortgage plus those who already have 1, or 2, or ...) while only a select few may provide it.
So where does the money to pay the interest on the private debt ultimately come from? Exports, government, or ... more private debt? Meanwhile, who pays back the government debt? Not those siphoning it off via private interest but by those who pay taxes. So, in the absence of positive export income, the system just transfers money from government spending to private banks - as long as the majority of the public play their game.
We brought this upon ourselves when we allowed the banks to issue their own credit. Maybe we can't immediately undo that, but there is a good first step we could take: bring back state-supported mortgages for FHB.
It's said that there can never be enough money created to pay the interest on debt.
It would appear that all the money from wherever is to pay the interest (it's a tax minimisation strategy for many), and we boost asset prices and borrow more to repay the capital.
Monetary thinking, financial return on imaginary "capital", money changing, GDP, a control system based on spreadsheets, is not a wise use of our intelligence.
We're literally doing everything we've been warned against over and over again for the last 2 millenia.
Why is that?
I see it as path of least resistance. Everyone wants more for less, so we all want to make the most money for the least effort and when people see that debt is able to be fiddled with using tings like leveraging equity, they realise that they can use (insert number here) times the wealth they currently have to access other resources and investments for return. The resource based community minded mentality of post WWII is dead and gone on a population scale.
I think many simply want more from a fear of not having enough. It's an inherited scarcity consciousness and our systems have taken advantage of this, have in fact created this. It's snowballed to an extreme.
Modern western economics demands that we get more and not manage responsibly what we already have. Many are in a position of needing more just to keep their heads above water, even if they don't want more.
It has a lot to do with not appreciating what we already have.
At what point are we able to give, unconditionally, and not keep taking.
There's an interesting terminology called Wetiko that makes a lot of sense.
You mention in another comment the lack of empathy. I suggest this is a narcisstic trait that has existed in our ruling constructs throughout history. We're not born that way, but we're increasingly becoming that way as a result of our environment, and faulty nurturing.
It's a result of, dare I say it, patriarchal rule, and unhealthy, shadow masculine traits. Empathy and nurturing are feminine traits required for the care of children, to understand the emotional needs of a child before they are capable of expressing themselves effectively. They're also required to enable us to better relate to each other as adults. They are not gender specific traits either. It's all been taught in ancient wisdom teachings.
Capitalism, economics, politics is purely a reflection of unbalanced, unhealthy versions of masculine energies.
"We brought this upon ourselves when we allowed the banks to issue their own credit. Maybe we can't immediately undo that, but there is a good first step we could take: bring back state-supported mortgages for FHB"
Perhaps , but I would suggest we supercharged it when we allowed the vested interests to remove the capacity to limit that credit use/accumulation to the point where governments are incapable/afraid to reverse it.
Tax is not to pay for public services....it is a tool to ensure that corporations/individuals do not accumulate so much power that we find ourselves in the position we are today....a state with no capability to ensure that its own resources benefit itself.
The collective 'we'....politicians do what the (majority of the) electorate demand or are rejected....at least in a functioning democracy. Individually many can and do say 'this is not what I voted for'....but enough did (or were ambivalent) over a period of decades.
Let's not forget that money travelling faster throughout the economy can also result in higher GDP with no increase in the money supply.
But ... [checks notes] ... that's unlikely to be happening now either. In fact, it is more likely to be slowing.
edit: too tired to explain the root cause of the slower velocity of money but a) as the wealthy accumulate more, and b) as government tax the wealthy less while slowly building taxes on the other 90%, the velocity slows down. And this has been going for years which, is why Jfoe's math makeso much sense.
So, you see, if you are serious about stopping the housing ponzi, debt fueled growth model, then you should be pushing to abandon GDP as a measure of success.
Couldn't agree more, however the strength of our dollar is, in part, what allows our standard of living. If the NZD was not traded so much as a favourable country, and NZ not as popular of a place for talent to come, we would not have the ability to import so much and maintain what we have. It would still be ok longer term, as we could make better use of our own resources and innovate, but then again we are reliant on imported fuel for energy that powers so much of our economy, and should our dollar tank, fuel pries would rise and we would again see prices increase.
And there are signs the worst is over.
What are these signs please? Sure the dropping OCR will help, but it will take time, and the dropping OCR could be a cause of improvement, but not a sign.
So, I would like to ask again, what are the signs that our economy is improving?
When repeatedly grilled about New Zealand's slow economic growth, Luxon said: "It's somewhat naive, to be honest with you, to say, we've had six years of economic mismanagement, and in 12 months we're supposed to fix that all?"
The numbers tell the story...
GDP
2018 3.4%
2019 3.5%
2020 2.4%
2021 -0.4%
2022 4.55%
2023 2.8%
2024 ....?
But you listed the numbers.
Actual substantive reform takes 5-10 years, or generations to be felt. The fact we flim-flam between spectrums under that timeframe makes evidencing any benefits or negatives of such changes very hard.
We have Argentina conducting some rather radical changes, that'll be interesting to observe over time. Their inflation is dramatically reducing, but so too is their GDP, as they cut 30% of their public spending, which equates to about 15% of their overall GDP. But the state is also now not running rolling deficits. They're making extensive cuts also to regulations, the effects of those will take years to be truly felt.
Assuming Milei manages more than one term.
Falling interest rates are not helping because everything else is still going up at a great rate of knots. Rates, insurance, electricity, Govt taxes, etc. The onging yearly cost of owning a home is becoming prohibitive even for those who don't have a mortgage.
The economy responds to bank interest rates (they are who businesses and consumers pay) not the OCR - and the banks have been front running the OCR all year. Interest rates peaked in January 2024 (at 7.35% for the 1 year rate) and have been falling ever since (down to 5.75%) so that's a substantial 1.6% cut in rates over the last 12 months.
https://www.interest.co.nz/charts/interest-rates/fixed-mortgage-rates
So there has been plenty of time for interest rate cuts to have made a difference. Newsflash - if it hasnt, then another 50 bp (which wont be passed on in full by the banks as they are now clawing back their NIM) wont make a difference either.
Everyone is feeling the cost of living. Non-tradeable inflation (the stuff you are forced to pay for every week) is what matters to households - and that is still running at close to 5%. Nobody cares that the price of overseas hotels have fallen or the new iPhone is superior to the old one (the "deflation" that is pulling down the CPI figure). 2025 is going to see more double digit increases to council rates, insurance premiums, ACC levies, car rego/RUC, electriciy prices ..... when will it end???
I disagree KW, people underestimate the lag for the OCR to have effect. Just like it took 2 years from the first OCR rise to have an impact on spending and on inflation, it will equally take about 2 years from the first OCR drop (August 2024 like predicted by a very few 😉) to have an lifting effect on the NZ economy.
Not quite true. A large part of the lag is due to the terms most people have fixed their mortgages for. When the tightening first started, the majority were on 2 year fixes, so it took that long to filter through. Since then people have been taking shorter and shorter terms jn the hope they can weather the higher rates until they drop again - I believe the 1 year term was very popular a year ago, and now the 6 month. This means there will be some lag going forward, but it won't be as prolonged.
This does of course assume the fortunes of the country are tied to the OCR...
So you assume the people who come off their 1 year fixed rate for a lower rate are better off straight away and willing to spend the next month...? It takes time to rebuild cashflow or repay debt.
We will feel an uptick in NZ economic activity after August 2026. By then you will have forgotten this post.
Your argument equally applies regardless of the term, and is thus nonsense.
What if everyone coming off their fixed term drops interest rates, but keeps payments the same as they now know they can service the higher payment and thus reduce overall interest paid through shortening the term? Then the lower interest rates will have no effect for years to come? Note this wasn't an option for those who over-leveraged on low rates previously.
My point is the historical basis for a 2 year delay was the predominant term, and the predominant term has shortened.
You responded with a statement of how people might be slow to react.
My following point was people might be slow to react whatever the term, as the example I gave showed.
Which is to reinforce my first point, that people are able to react faster now due to shorter terms and can choose to. Which was not an option before.
Though I knew as I posted it the exact twist you would then respond with
Only history will show which of us is right, and I must confess, at that point I will likely long have forgotten this conversation.
Though again, this is all assuming the OCR has some meaningful effect and NZ isn't a small cork bobbing about in a global sea...
So you assume the people who come off their 1 year fixed rate for a lower rate are better off straight away and willing to spend the next month...? It takes time to rebuild cashflow or repay debt.
People will likely choose to pay down their principal when they have more spare cash, as they have adapted to living a more frugal lifestyle and won't want to have the same financial stress again in future if they can help it. Well.... the financially sensible one's at least.
The per capita figures are alarming - "In the seven quarters to June, per capita GDP fell 4.6%, which is a bigger per capita decline than we had after the Global Financial Crisis."
We need to learn how to make things to add value again, as selling overpriced houses to each other just doesn't seem to be cutting it as a major economic activity.
I think we've developed a too narrow perspective of value and benefit. It's become about selling rather than providing.
There's many persuasive selling tactics and language, that makes the customer perceive value they didn't need and doesn't benefit them.
Nature provides immense value and benefit, but how do we value it? We don't.
There's a difference between Adam Smith's belief in self interest being good for all, and the idea of valuing others needs as equally important as our own. True voluntary agreement for win/win outcomes, free from manipulation and power dynamics, free from servitude and conditional exchange, that creates more than financial benefits.
Money has consumed us, consumed our humanness and essence, our inherent value. Is this the true understanding of Mammon?
Nature provides immense value and benefit, but how do we value it? We don't.
For a produced good, defining a financial value is a lot simpler. Sum of parts plus a desired surplus.
In essence, "nature", a construct that's been shaped by billions of years, and an energy and intrinsic force that is still well beyond our ability, is something beyond our ability to value. But the damage we are doing to it is beyond most people's ability to perceive.
True voluntary agreement for win/win outcomes, free from manipulation and power dynamics, free from servitude and conditional exchange, that creates more than financial benefits.
This is an issue I see beyond financial influence. There are people here to shine a light on others, and others who want to rob it. It's hard to see how much less of this went on with older forms of interaction, vs what is a natural variation within people. I get hints of variance between cultures, but it's hard to tell how much of that is down to unfamiliarity with other cultures norms.
I think we've developed a too narrow perspective of value and benefit.
Agreed, and this also ties in with my comment around path of least resistance. It seems also to liken to planed obsolescence. Why plan for 50 years when those in power can legislate to help get them into power for one more term so that they can then ride off into a corporate spinoff job after their time in the beehive?
Another interesting thought I've had recently is the impact of less and less people having children. Psychologically it could be argued that there may be impacts on the general thought process, thinking of the next generation, if there is more that don't know what the responsibility of having children is, and to make sacrifices for their futures. Not a bag on anyone who chooses not to have children, simply an interesting potential psychological consequence.
These figures are a product of the RBNZ's wave of emergency OCR cuts and QE during the pandemic, failure to address the issues of the GFC, QE by central banks and "money" printing by private banks, faulty inflation metrics and economic modelling, 20 years of selfish interest in residential property investment, 40 years of mismanagement by central government, market economics, capitalism...
FIFY
Have to agree with you. And that cheap ca$h went straight into (unproductive) property. Was it intentional is the question - using property as a vehicle to pump cash into the system. If it was, big fail, didn’t go anywhere else. Next time, helicopter money is a better option.
Technically none of us "make" money as individuals.
But we can exchange our efforts for money, which can be used for goods and services, or invested/saved.
Someone else made the rules (they're a confluence of rules made at varying times by various parties). We're not really given the option to change much of them in a meaningful way, even if we were to vote wiser.
I understand this.
I'm suggesting, and it's something we have to consider moving forward, is that the narrative/goal/purpose of doing "to make money", is why we've gotten so lopsided and unbalanced.
We've lost the meaning "to be of service". We've lost the true meaning of value and benefit. If we're not doing to create a better, healthier, supportive environment, we're a failed species.
We're going to find it hard to alter course when people ask "yeah but, how are we going to make money?" :)
I'm suggesting, and it's something we have to consider moving forward, is that the narrative/goal/purpose of doing "to make money", is why we've gotten so lopsided and unbalanced.
Mmmm, I'd agree that imperative corrupts some people's mode of operation. But the imbalance and lopsidedness is largely a consequence of capitalistic proliferation.
We do have a culture that's gravitating more towards what's in it for me, rather than how can I contribute or serve, but that's a problem that extends through most levels of modern society. Some of that's an unfortunate bi-product of favouring individual rights over the health of the group.
I can't see a substantive change without significant pain. Something like COVID should be a wake up call, but for most it's a distant memory.
It certainly has in terms of companies, work conditions have gone backwards for as long as I can remember. Although maybe that’s a result of employees preferring higher wages instead of perks.
As for government, taxpayers have put up with decades of bracket creep for the greater good, but it’s debatable whether that greater good has ever occurred. The more Nanny gives, the more reliant people become.
I am not sure about families. I wonder if mobility hasn’t helped, I know hardly any families that live near each others these days.
We're a phoenix species. We war and quarrel, burn each other to the ground then rebuild again with a more collective mentality. Thus has it always been and is the reason why now we have less empathy as we have become generationally detached from the last major global conflict affecting many in NZ and thus the mentality will continue to shift from the community to the individual end of the spectrum unless there is a substantial shock that makes people think differently.
I was also thinking that we change the rules in many games for a range of reasons - to make it safer for players, to teach different outcomes or behaviour. We also eliminate some games. You know Monopoly was originally an educational game with different rules?
The other idea is that if we created this game we must be able to create a new one. There is no me without we?
The basic assumption by many is anyone asking that question has moral deficiencies. To me it's no different to someone asking how better to hunt or farm a crop. Someone's nature is going to largely dictate how moral or amoral they'll go about their commerce.
Ironically, my greatest prosperity has come off the back of having lower expectations of a profit, and trying way less to play the game in the manner most people are accustomed to.
Agree Pa1nter, money isn’t everything. I went to moneyville today, everyone was driving to the beach in their new Remuera Tractors with their fancy clothes etc. The beach was nice, but I think I prefer my fairly basic life than their Hollywood lifestyles.
By the way, I’ve been out a few times the last few weeks (city, bars, restaurants, etc), everything seems pretty bloody busy.
There's many who provide a lot more value and benefit than others, who aren't valued.
There's many values and benefits that can't be valued in money.
There are ways and means of "making money" that while benefiting the individual, have larger detrimental effects on a wider range of the community, in both the present and future.
Market values and monetary values are false programming. Money has no value other than its ease of exchange. We know it's not a store of value and we try to store it in "assets", meanwhile screaming out for "value for money" in everyday necessities.
There is intrinsic value in a home, food, clothing, various tools and gadgets, creative endeavours, sports and games, travel, music, education, serving. Making it all about money, "wealth" and status - extrinsic value - and we slowly lose sight of the true or real value. We slowly erode accessibility without the need for debt. We increasingly create more waste and pollution, and degrade the quality of everything.
It's exactly why we are less able to maintain and provide necessary infrastructure, quality healthcare and education, and community services.
I'm sure you'll fail to grasp any of this. When we're only valuing interest rates and making money our human values are broken. Our human nature and operating system has been corrupted.
Like I said, you couldn't grasp it. It's beyond your reach.
It all depends if you play a game for its inherent values or if you're overly focused on winning or losing. I've played many games in my life, won and not won. Didn't worry me either way. It's an unbalanced conditioning that puts more value on winning, and unable to teach the value of losing.
Many if not most games are designed to educate, to bring people together. Children learn best through play and with appropriate guidance it's how they develop their inner character, cognitive and emotional intelligence, creativity and self expression, self guidance and direction, unselfish self interest. The more we pervert it towards serving the Market, training to be workers, the more we have unbalanced and dysfunctional adults. You can view the instructions of a game as parameters to play within, while still upholding values. Hyper competitiveness, a lack of emotional intelligence, a lack of wisdom, the lust to win at all costs, the fear of losing, will soon override basic values - the Golden rule. We see it all the time when punishments are introduced for unsportsmanlike behaviour, for breaking the spirit of the game. There's a difference between being able to self referee and needing to be refereed.
Capitalism, economics, politics is not a game. The values are made up and don't align with natural, organic values. It's a control system with arbitrary rules that are constantly changed to maintain and justify certain behaviours, to establish dominance and power. It's designed to exploit the many for the benefit of the few. There are many overt and covert techniques designed to exploit your psychological and emotional operating systems. To divide and conquer. To pit you against your fellow man and woman. It's not designed to serve you, to benefit humanity. Over time it has eroded humanitarian values. It has encouraged and fed only one half of human nature, and not the best side.
If you're happy playing this game, then by all means do so. I won't judge you.
I simply put it out there for those with eyes to see, and ears to hear. There may be some folk in a better position than me, better able to lead the change.
Maybe it has something to do with a lot of firms taking a month or two to properly reconcile their accounts after transactions have taken place.
I don't have to do as much figure reporting these days, but in days gone by it'd be a month or two before some business surveys are closed off for data.
So since Dec 2022 the economy has shrunk almost 1%... but we have increased our population by how much?
Man, no wonder half the people I know are moving overseas. Economic and fiscal mismanagement abound, by governments of all stripes and a RBNZ who is making decisions 12 months too late and then patting itself on the back.
Plus now we have a bunch of numpties in power that are shaping up to be worse than the last numpties by ignoring basic economics and throwing babies out with bathwater while pandering to special interest groups.
China deflation since Evergreen went down and 2021-24 is major cause of NZ doldrums. Look at exports. Plus people’s disposable income been swallowed by costs exceeding wages and it’s not just mortgages
On top of that increasing inequality makes money stagnate where rich hold it. Cutting fiscal spending in face of monetary cutting also asking for trouble
We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.
Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.