tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post836128105787966219..comments2024-03-29T17:12:19.648+13:00Comments on Bowalley Road: Trading FreedomChris Trotterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09081613281183460899noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-42310282450487001412009-11-09T16:38:07.956+13:002009-11-09T16:38:07.956+13:00I'm sorry but comparisons with the days when B...I'm sorry but comparisons with the days when Britain was able and willing to buy everything New Zealand produced are neither here nor there.<br /><br />Prior to Britain joining the EEC, Commonwealth countries had a Common External Tarrif, which was used to raise the cost of imports from non-Commonwealth countries. <br /><br />In consequence, 'Anchor' was a much cheaper butter brand for UK consumers than 'Wheelbarrow' (from the Netherlands), Lurpac (from Denmark) or Kerry Gold (from guess where?). <br /><br />This, rather than product quality, entrepreneurial flair or skilled marketing , was the basis of New Zealand's prosperity.<br /><br />There's no way back to that happy land of subsidised incompetence. "The past is another country".<br /><br />Victor<br /><br />VictorAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-70892504546740224682009-11-08T23:30:43.845+13:002009-11-08T23:30:43.845+13:00LibertyScott, I'd be rather wary of using Taiw...LibertyScott, I'd be rather wary of using Taiwan as an example of the success of "free trade" if I were you. I would say that receiving some 15% of its GDP in US aid alone (NOT including military aid) from 1950 to 1965, may have something to do with the country's economic growth. Not to mention the fact that the KMT, which ruled the country from 1949 to 2000 and now from 2008 on, is probably the richest political party in the world, and owns a good chunk of the Taiwanese economy...and it is much more Socialist in its outlook (and Marxist-Leninist in organization) than it is a free trade party. Furthermore, Taiwan only acceded to the WTO in late 2008, and had a pretty high wall of tariffs and informal 'trade barriers' prior to that.<br /><br />In larger context, I would agree with 'anonymous' above; I think it is VERY important to note that in 1984 NZ had a population of 3.26 million, now it is 4.32 million. One of the most interesting conclusions I took from Michael King's History of New Zealand, is that NZ is not in fact a particularly resource rich country (arable land of only 5% for example), and sooner or later (in fact looking at the state of our waterways thanks to the dairy industry, I'd say possibly right now) we have to face the fact that all the free trade in the world will not save us from hitting the wall in terms of exploitable resources with which to buy the imports we desire.johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11412160256764555691noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-86793783562862895732009-11-05T21:38:12.056+13:002009-11-05T21:38:12.056+13:00"The brutal historical fact of the matter is,..."The brutal historical fact of the matter is, that New Zealand has never been wealthier than she was when her trade was anything but free."<br /><br />I'm not making this comment about the merits of free vs unfree trade, but New Zealand had 2 million fewer people back then and much the same export base.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-32715669481786249902009-11-04T11:56:45.195+13:002009-11-04T11:56:45.195+13:00This is an excellent discussion.
Personally, I ca...This is an excellent discussion.<br /><br />Personally, I can't see that there is any alternative to free trade for New Zealand. We simply can't substitute for most of our imports and we need to export to pay for them.<br /><br />May I add that I first arrived in NZ shortly before the dismantling of most of our tariff barriers in the 1980s and was deeply unimpressed by the quality of most locally-made products. <br /><br />It is shameful to make everyone dependent on shoes that cut their feet to ribbons, clothes that dispolay wear and tear after they've been worn a few times or furniture that's beyond the pockets of most families. <br /><br />I also think that Phil Sage is correct to point to the role of free trade in lifting millions out of poverty in Asia, although I would add that free trade also tends to deepen the poverty of the millions that it doesn't lift out. <br /><br />However, there is little point in signing FTAs if the government then adopts a hands-off policy to the economy.<br /><br />John Key is currently bathing in the reflected glory of Labour's efforts to negotiate FTAs with our major Asian markets. Yet one of his government's first acts was to abandon tax incentives for R&D, without which we'll never be anything other than a small-scale commodity producer.<br /><br />Another caveat I have is that we are moving away from a global free trade agenda to a regionally -focussed one, as part of a revived 'East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere', under Chinese leadership. <br /><br /> This has political dangers that are only partly obviated by the mooted inclusion of India in the mix.<br /><br /> Moreover, experience suggests that one of the few strengths of our economy is our ability to switch focus from one market to another when the necessity arises. We saw this during the 1997 Asian Meltdown, when Kiwi entrepreneurs suddenly started sprouting up across Europe and elsewhere. Moral: we shouldn't be putting all our eggs in one basket (however huge and currently promising)<br /><br />VictorAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-1118978466879326592009-11-03T19:35:19.225+13:002009-11-03T19:35:19.225+13:00I see you mentioned South Korea there in your ode ...I see you mentioned South Korea there in your ode to free trade liberty scott. You however fail to mention that had South Korea chosen to implement the policies you propose as opposed to protectionist led development, they would still be fulfilling their 'comparative advantage' in exporting raw fish and wigs. I would advise you to read some Ha-Joon Chang before you start using South Korea as an example when preaching the gospel of free trade in future.Jonathannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-23389415624627579322009-11-02T13:15:11.956+13:002009-11-02T13:15:11.956+13:00Yes well Britain wont buy 90% of NZ produce unproc...Yes well Britain wont buy 90% of NZ produce unprocessed anymore, so let's start dreaming.<br /><br />You cannot pick the one example of CER where there is not free trade (apples remains the sole major hitch) and say it's a failure, it demonstrably is not. <br /><br />The idea that it is rational to have trade barriers between countries is nonsensical, as it would be to have trade barriers between the two islands. <br /><br />The report to government on the cost of protectionism for the car industry, before it was abolished in 1999 stated that each job in NZ protected cost the economyover $135,000. You can be sure the workers were getting a fraction of that, and even applying multipliers to that spending, it didn't come close. After all if autarchy worked, North Korea would be wealthy.<br /><br />Protectionism is the most appalling xenophobic belief that poorer people in other countries aren't entitled to make and produce goods for you. What they are meant to do instead is ignored. Presumably be dependent on aid. Look at the great success stories of Hong Kong, Taiwan and South Korea, they spent a generation with low wage industries, now these are all gone to China, Vietnam and Indonesia, but the economies thrive with knowledge and service based industries. In due course they too will move on into new sectors.<br /><br />Economies evolve, and there are thousands of NZers now employed in creative and service industries, in smaller firms, or producing higher value goods like wines, beauty products and the like, without unionised labour, but with better incomes and far better work conditions that traditional industries.<br /><br />What is needed is for the other developed countries to give up protecting their markets and sunset industries (agriculture being the key one) to let others trade there, and for developing countries to abandon protecting their traditional industries, and restrictions on import competition.<br /><br />After all, if anything other than free trade worked, then shouldn't the South Island put tariffs on North Island goods and start making more of what it consumes?Libertyscotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12741049550997300680noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-55486383343467109102009-11-01T23:41:38.391+13:002009-11-01T23:41:38.391+13:00I agree with you Millsy, it's not trade as suc...I agree with you Millsy, it's not trade as such, but the raft of evil conditions that go with the ideology behind it, as the cartoon spells out so aptly. I don't think it evan qualifies as capitalism any more, just economic tyranny.Olwynnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-31685091221551502372009-11-01T14:32:35.685+13:002009-11-01T14:32:35.685+13:00Thousands of jobs in this country have been destor...Thousands of jobs in this country have been destoryed, whole industries wiped out, wages slashed, and a whole generation of New Zealanders have been thrown on the scrap heap, with a whole raft of career options (such as shipping) closed off to them.<br /><br />A large number of family owned retail firms have also been wiped out, along with decent wages, decent customer service and decent goods.<br /><br />As for developing nations, if free trade was so fantastic for them, why are they still finding it better to work minimum wage jobs in developed nations and send money home to their families, than work in the factories that have sprung up on their door step...<br /><br />Dont get me wrong, I am not advocating autarky, and I acknowledge that we are a country that relies on trade, I just think that sometimes free trade is seen as an end in itself, and I dont think that sacrifices borne by New Zealanders in the last 20 years, though the loss of jobs, wages and conditions, and the wiping out of industries and destruction of family firms have really been worth it.<br /><br />MillsyAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-59517302954047812852009-11-01T06:32:36.503+13:002009-11-01T06:32:36.503+13:00Chris- I agree with you statements of fact, just n...Chris- I agree with you statements of fact, just not your conclusions. Those products being produced offshore are also helping to raise the living standards and development of workers all over the world. China has moved from a mainly agrarian society to a developing economic powerhouse in a few decades. The peasant farmer fathered children who have moved to the city and work in factories fathering children who get a formal education and form the middle classes.<br /><br />As a progressive you should be glad that free trade is helping to grow the common good. India with protectionism and its growth now are a fine contrast of the difference between free trade and not. North Korea is a fine example of the problems with no trade.<br /><br />I do not disagree that the rich nations have turned "free" trade on its head. French farmers and US rice and cotton farmers being the most egregious.<br /><br />The answer is not less free trade but more. Free trade is the best way for those in genuine poverty to get out of it. Western consumer organisation holding Western brands to account for their sourcing methods is a fine example of harnessing the power of the consumer for mutual benefit.<br /><br />There is an interesting article about recent growth in Turkey in the Economist and its changed attitude towards its neighbours and Israel that the government has wrought.Phil Sagehttp://www.nominister.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-67870989515001874642009-10-31T10:21:19.411+13:002009-10-31T10:21:19.411+13:00With regard to free trade making us rich, I would ...With regard to free trade making us rich, I would question who is included in the word "us." So far, it seems to only involve those that pass for elites in this country, & their flunkies, whose job descriptions often amount to bewildering titles rather than recognisable activities. The rest seem to be required to peer out from their quiet desperation to applaud figures and percentages as if they were watching a rugby game. I do not see how any society can sustain this state of affairs indefinitely.Olwynnoreply@blogger.com