On the previous page we saw graphical evidence of our increasing relative poverty. What are the consequences of this fall? Let’s make a couple of comparisons.
Hagar the Horrible can retire in comfort
Most Scandinavians pay taxes that would make Kiwis’ eyes water. Here, it would invite bloody revolution. I watched a TV program some time in 2010 in which the sorely taxed Danes were asked about this sorry situation.
There wasn’t a complaint to be heard.
Why is that, I hear you cry?
Denmark isn’t in the top ranks of wealthy nations, nevertheless their per capita GDP is 50% higher than ours. Which is another way of saying that the average Dane in employment produces 50% more wealth than we in New Zealand do. (Norway’s is more than double ours, Liechtenstein cleans us out by 450%)
So the people they’re employed by make higher profits, those employers can therefore pay higher wages, and even though the Danish workers pay those very high taxes, come payday they still have more money in their hot little hands than we do.
On top of that, with the higher tax income received by the Danish treasury, the government has more to spend on health, welfare, pensions, R&D, defence, policing and all the other goodies that we’re struggling to provide. The Danes therefore have no complaints about public services and long term security and they’re very happy with their lot.
Could we in New Zealand cope with a 50% pay rise? A minimum wage of $25 an hour? That’s what it would mean if we caught up with the Danes.
I’ve worked with many Norwegians and Swedes at sea, they tell me that other Scandinavians say of Denmark:
If you stand on a box you can see the whole damn country.
That’s not far from the truth. It’s a tiny country with few resources other than North Sea winds and oil. Nevertheless, they’re showing resource-rich New Zealand the way to prosperity. We export much less oil than they do, but we’re not far behind in natural gas, we have mountains of coal (OK, no future there) and enviable hydro, wind, geo-thermal and tidal resources. We have 6 times as much land, a vast and rich oceanic economic zone and we have a smaller population. Two of the keys to their prosperity are the low company tax of 25% and the ease of doing business. It’s easy to hire and fire, so firms are very willing to take people on. Because of that, despite what union activists here will tell you, it’s also easy to get a job.
It gets better
Or worse. Depends which way you look at it.
The people of Liechtenstein produce more than four times as much as we do per person. They’re doing quite nicely. Liechtenstein is a quarter the size of Lake Taupo and has 35,000 people—a smaller population than Whanganui. How can they earn so much with negligible natural resources? It’s easy; on average, they’re well educated and they’re employed in enterprises which require high skills and which generate high-income jobs.
We are not. Our major sources of national income are in agriculture and tourism. Both of which generate lots of low-income jobs.
Very low taxes on businesses in Liechtenstein have spurred outstanding economic growth. High value jobs in high-tech manufacturing, in banking and in financial services. O.K., it must be said that half the work force commute to neighbouring countries every day and that their infrastructure costs are low in such a small country. But their natural resources are almost zero. No renewable energy to speak of, no oil, no gas, no gold mines, no hydro or geothermal. No ocean, no beaches.
Just people and productivity. And a government which encourages the exploitation of those resources.
Nevertheless, they’re doing very nicely and I suspect that they’d outstrip New Zealand even if their borders were closed to the commuter exodus.
They also have zero debt. No bleeding their life-blood to pay interest to China.
What makes this matter even less palatable is that, until the recession killed overtime, New Zealanders worked longer hours than almost anyone else in the OECD, yet we were, and still are, producing less than they are. In comparison with most, much less.
New Zealand as a financial hub?
One of John Key’s government’s few ideas for priming the pump is to set New Zealand up as a financial services centre. He’s received a lot of flack from folk who say it will generate lots of low income call-centre type jobs.
Tell that to Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Switzerland and The Cayman Islands. The Cayman Islands! Their per capita GDP is far higher than ours.
What to do?
It’s a worry.
We’ll look at it in detail soon but, in a nutshell, we have too many people who could contribute but don’t and too many of those who do are working in jobs which generate low wages. Farming and tourism are our economic backbone but as I mentioned above, they’re low-wage industries and as long as they dominate our economy we’re destined to remain relatively poor.
We need agriculture and tourism. But to generate the prosperity we once took for granted we also need a Samsung, a Nokia, a Sony, an Apple, and a Google or two. We need dozens more like Weta Workshops, Fisher & Paykel Healthcare, Tait Electronics, Rakon and Proata.
We have too much money—borrowed money—going into unaffordable vote-catching bribery and too many people for whom paying income tax is a voluntary pastime. Scrapping interest on student loans; absence of a capital gains tax; ridiculous legal depreciation rorts on property; Working for Families; refusal to acknowledge the necessity to change the age and entitlement rules for New Zealand Superannuation.
It goes on and on and we can’t afford it.
How do we do turn things around?
Next installment: the connection between innovation and prosperity.