Changes of the tax system, making property speculations difficult and introduce fairer conditions for producers and exporters to encourage manufacturing and production "“ such actions are a great start for a better NZ and future for our younger generation.

As much as reforms are necessary for deeper and long lasting economic success, profound actions for culture changes need to be taken also.
Our nation is literally badly shaped, because we live in a daily environment dominated by consumption. A shift to a more balanced style of life is essential. The media should play a major rule to educate the public in developing a manufacturing culture, so we can learn again to create and make all sorts of products for us and for others (Export). As a nation, this is an important step to keep our living- standards.

A blogger ask:
"Do we really think that building widgets here in New Zealand at a higher price than we can import them is the solution?"

Yes "“ AS A NATION WE MUST "“ with clever planning form the private sector, other international companies and the government.

WE MUST ADD NEW SEGMENTS TO OUR ECONOMY

Here only 10 important advantage points:

1) It creates jobs.
2) It lifts the quality level/ selection of jobs/ education.
3) It allows us to keep skilled/ educated people in NZ.
4) It encourages/ supports academic Research & Tech. Developments.
5) It makes us more in depended from other countries/ companies.
6) It makes existence easier for other companies/ businesses.
7) Manufacturing becomes more competitive.
Of security reasons.
9) It creates wealth & prosperity.
10) It makes us proud.

Cheers Walter

Tired Farmer,

Many thanks. Have you made profits cumulatively over time and has that exceeded say a 5% return on equity and debt? If not, how did you justify the investment?

cheers
Bernard

National appear obsessed by the warm glow of their massive approval rating . Do we really think that JK is going to allow Wild Bill to give us the bitter medicine that we need ? I can think of a parallel with Malcolm Fraser , in Australia , 25 years ago . The people gave him the mandate to make reform to the Government and the wider economy . He had full control of both the lower house and the senate . And he sat , and sat , alike a bunny transfixed by the headlights of an oncoming vehicle . Luckily for Oz , they had Bob Hawke and Paul Keating in opposition . And when the electorate's patience with Fraser wore off , Hawkie and Big Paul gleefully took over , and set about the hard work that the Tories had neglected . But the parallel with NZ today , ends abruptly there . 'Cos our opposition are still stacked with the same tired old pollies , who in 9 years , led us into the financial wilderness . They needed more than just # 1 and # 2 to clear off . Goffy , King , Cosgrove , Carter , Parker , Mallard ... the whole kit and caboodle of them need to exit now ! Until they do , the Nats will ride high in the polls , understandedly . And we risk JK doing to us exactly that which Fraser did to Australia .......Bloody nothing !

20 Billion down the tubes in 6 months. There was a spending spree over the last 10 years of Labour - in fact ever since Ruth in '91 - not just the last two years. We don't have to make hard decisions in 10 years time - we have to make them now

The decisions are clear: we absolutely cannot increase taxes or broaden the base. We must cut out clothes to fit the cloth. We all know what need to be done:
* repeal Employment law, Union laws & minimum wage to get people working.
* greatly lower or ideally eliminate the pensions and benefits
* stop ACC
* privatise schools and hospitals.
* eliminate TVNZ & RadioNZ
* get rid of all the SOEs

Key's got at least two years. He's on 55%. He's got the support he needs NOW to put the next election off say til 2015 - more than enough time to do the work that is required.

But you're right on one count, though - I retired and went right into hospital
http://youmustbefromaway.blogspot.com/2008/04/before-and-after.html

Someone Please suggest stopping subsidies on borrowing. Please!

Brodie,

I give Tired Farmer some credit for being financially astute. I'm sure he was a good farmer, but I suspect, like many farmers, the end game is to build up the asset into something valuable to either sell (tax free) or pass on to the next generation (tax free).
This distorts investment decisions and collectively reduces the performance of the country.

cheers
Bernard

Hi Bernard,

Concurrent to Brodie Davis' remarks (concerning "Tired Farmer"), I would suggest that your view with respect to "investment decisions" is somewhat wide of the mark.

It seems to me that your perspective on the criteria as to what constitutes an incentive to make an investment decision may be too narrow. I am the 5th generation in my family to be involved in farming, and the third generation to be involved in farming our "current" family farm. My primary income is not from the farm (I work full-time off the farm), and at present I lease out our pasture / cropland to a neighbour. Since I currently work off the farm, I have used my off-farm income to buy the farm next door to ensure that our current operation remains viable over the next 30 or so years. The reason for the purchase of additional land is this: I have three boys that I want to have the OPPORTUNITY to farm if that is indeed what they decide they want to do.

Even if I may not at present be a "primary income" farmer, I recognize that the opportunity to purchase land next door that can be efficiently farmed by us (either now or in the future) does not happen often. Consequently you do it when you can. In terms of "efficiently" farming of what we have, I am very happy with our leasee and the sustainable, efficient production that he has been able to generate and profit from.

Lastly, I would suggest that "the end game" in making a sound investment decisions relating to farming involves more than dollars and cents. For some of what I would call forward-looking operations, it's a recognition that to be "efficient" sometimes goes beyond what you may hope to achieve in one, single generation. Additionally, it involves decisions relating to cultural and social values that come from living and making your living off the land. I am not saying values derived from raising a family or growing in this environment are any better than any other experience, but I want to re-emphasize that economic decisions are about more than simple dollars and cents, and deciding what to do and how to conduct your life is, in fact, an economic decision! So to conclude, I would argue multi-generational decisions relating to family farms, on a macro scale, will in the long term INCREASE the collective performance of the country, as the investment decisions being made are still looking towards efficiency, productivity and sustainability, but also recognizing that increased efficiency and productivity may take more than one generation to achieve.

I greatly appreciate your website and the opportunity to comment on an interesting subject.

..and why is so important to extend the manufactring sector adding new segments to the economy. I think there are questions to answer from professionals in that field - most bankers, economists, politicians and the public have not a clue of.
Cheers Walter

Bernard

Your comments to Tired Farmer:

"Many thanks. Have you made profits cumulatively over time and has that exceeded say a 5% return on equity and debt? If not, how did you justify the investment?"

show that you just don't understand the difference between land asset based businesses and other forms of business.

The return on the current market value of the assets (debt plus equity) is just not a relevant consideration.

Market values fluctuate and there can also be potential to grow incomes within the existing assets. Asset disposal costs mean that market value will not likely be achieved anyway.

Land assets produce income streams that can generally repay debt in a relatively short time frame - for me I look at an under 10 year horizon. Some passive property investors may negatively gear themselves for too long but these investors generally have a much longer horizon maybe 20 or 25 years. But under either strategy the end goal is a debt free income stream.

Here's an example:
A house I bought 7 years ago for $70k in north central ChCh, is rented at $240pw, but now worth $375k+. In your view it's a terrible investment because it returns 3.3% on current market value, however it returns me 18% on the original purchase price which I'm happy with. Moreover the house (large villa) if renovated would rent at $450pw plus there is room to build up to 4 apartments in the back yard - producing a potential $1800pw once the extra money is spent.

So I see owning that property as a good thing even though on paper the return might be rubbish. (BTW It also allows me to save an historic villa from demolition which something I like to do).

Compare this to a manufacturer who uses debt to buy machinery. In 10 years when the debt is repaid the machinery is outdated and worthless and gets hocked off at auction for nearly nothing. A land owner has an asset paid off which (if he or she has chosen wisely) is in a location that has improved in value and can produce a debt free income stream indefinitely.

There's just no comparison between the returns that the two types of businesses should expect. It's this way, that land businesses can justify what seem like unrealistically low returns.

PS I've bought properties as little recent as 2006 on returns around 7.5% which with minor improvements and reletting already achieve 13.5%PA - with my 5 year fixed at 6%, I've already put those properties in the "job done" category.

Chris_j,

And as for your investments. Good on you if you can find 7.5% yields and properties that quintruple in 7 years. If you have found a 7.5% yielding property then I agree with you, that particular house is not overpriced assuming the yield is realistic long term. But remember, these must surely be exceptions to the general rule???? I can only take your word for it but we all know from your "analysis" of housing stats in a previous blog that perhaps you bend the truth a little. If you are telling the truth then whats your number - I need a good buyer's agent.

Chris J
Many thanks. Interesting comments.
Particularly this one:

"So I see owning that property as a good thing even though on paper the return might be rubbish."

Would your financial justification be the same if there was a land tax or/and a capital gains tax?

cheers
Bernard
PS BTW Well done on the 7.5% yield. That's pretty good for any investor.

Where do I start...ChrisJ.

May I just point out that ANYONE who did this 7 years ago will be able to SKITE, some more than others.

However, the next 7 years for most people will be more TELLING.

Especially those jumping into highly leveraged debt borrowings today to do the SAME.

The debt explosion has not gone away folks.

It is only being MICRO-MANAGED....and piling up FAST....just ask BILL....as he has to PAY the BILLS...and the PIPER who may want their money back, but not DEVALUED.

You do not want to PISS orf the CHINESE particularly...they got GUNS...BIG-uns. and I do not mean the packet ones.

Seems RODNEY is objecting to some HIKES in taxes...

In fact he mentioned that SOME are PISSED off at the prospect of PAYING.

(RUDE RODNEY...but CORRECT.....if you can use that word..so can I)

Your commitment to paying SOMEONE else's debt is an on-going SAGA

You and your RENTERS do it Daily...long may they have jobs and income and TAXES.

It unwinds pretty fast, when it starts unravelling..just ask the YANK and the BRITS.

I hope the tax-man comes calling too...soon, very very soon.

John & Bill are you LISTENING....cos it..... is Long, Long Overdue.

There is a TIDY SUM to fill the COFFERS if you do it right.

(But I suppose you are not listening but GALLIVANTING...looking for more CHINESE DOUGH instead)

By the way. ...The yield is immaterial and miniscule, when weighed against what you could have achieved elsewhere and realised

And that not aided by more IDIOTS piling in behind and BOLLARDS managing your OUTLAY interest downwards.......till now........... aided and abetted by the previous Governments.

That is what we in the know actually call a BUBBLE...and WRAPPED is not what NZ as a HOLE...should be.

Nor all the other HOLES around the WORLD.

Personally I applaud your ilks efforts on my behalf.

Not all investors look to the SHORT-TERM, nor are we all motivated by BLIND greed.

You have had a good run.

Now I and a lot of New Zealanders want the IRD to come to the PARTY.

BOLLARDS and KEY please NOTE...read my lips.

ENUFF ALREADY.

Then can we start on the other TAKERS and things that really need fixing.

I will start the list...Maybe you readers can ADD to it.

Maybe we could start a PETITION .......BERNARD.

GANGS,
LACs,
DPB,
WFF,
Govt Pensions,
Number of MPs.
Number of Civil SERPENTS.
PRISONS,
ACC
INFRASTRUCTURE miss-management. (Toll roads..yeah right).

Have to Go......Her...in ...DOORS wants to go SHOPPING.

Roger, I'm sure John may consider your proposals - smiling.

Bill should sack John over the weekend.

Walter : Biff 'em both out . Am 100 % sure that Bernard and Mark Hubbard could take over . Do a far better job . And be cheaper into the bargain ( old one latte a week Hickey ain't gonna waste tax-payers dosh ! )

Bernard---many thanks for providing a forum on which to read your thoughts and share ideas amongst the wider community.

Brodie Davis, Farmer Bob and Chris J----they have expanded my thoughts cohesivly and to them I am grateful.

Back in the early 1980's we were advised to broaden our investment base off farm.

Let us just say the timing was wrong. In later years when many of my farming friends were either cashing up voluntarily or other wise ,I felt we were the lucky ones able to survive and carry on farming( due, as in many cases i am sure) to the repertoire of skills my wife was able to inject into the partnership .

A farming friend who has developed a much larger property than ours sums up the situation saying a farm is like a sponge, the more you pour in the more it soaks up, slurp,slurp, slurp .

http://blogs.nzherald.co.nz/blog/show-me-money/2009/10/16/welcome-our-sa...

The beginning of serfdom Bernard?

Better to embrace this inevitable economic linkage with China , than to act with xenophobic hysteria , as Australia has done . And if we can feed them up on our diet of fish / chips / pies / and cheese , we may slow them down enough such that we can successfully compete in some industrys .

Bernard,

i read your piece - "To that end, New Zealand should open up the immigration taps from China and encourage Chinese investors to come here. "

I thought you wanted to dampen down the housing market. The less asset inflating foreigners the better.

The water is still too cold down here , for serfdom , unless you have a wet-suit .

What's rude about it , Walter ? Is this the price for raw oil , or naked crude ?

No point in Wild Bill trying to usurp the Marshal of Tumble-debt Gulch . He's as bigga fool as JK is , so no gain there . Where's a " Paul Keating " when ya need him !

Oil won't hold these levels . Demand side of equation will bring it down . And OPEC have 5 million barrels / day of excess capacity .

neil c - indeed, have a listen from 18th minute, back on this thread at October 16th, 2009 at 6:54 am. Cheers, Les.

The way forward is becoming more and more evident. We just need to have the goolies to go ahead and do it.

"The private banking system is in systemic failure, and the public is waking up to the fact. We have been fleeced by Wall Street, the banks are not providing loans, and our savings are no longer secure. The publicly-owned Bank of North Dakota has provided an alternative model that has worked remarkably well for nearly a century."

http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article14253.html

A little farming Humour.

A Farmer won 4 million on LOTTO. Spent 2 million on the kids, bought em both new houses, cars etc and a holiday.

His townie cousin asked him what he was going to do with the other2 MILLION.

His reply......keep on farming till it is all gone.

Bernard,
The control and timbre of your delivery was professional and spoken by someone who understands the watershed importance of taking control of the situation now - or spend the next generation (.... at least) sticking fingers in an eroding dam, as the water rises above our heads.
We were the Cinderella, made over like a princess, and delivered in a gilded carriage, to parties held in financial ballrooms all around the world. But the clock is fast approaching Midnight and our carriage is about to turn back into a pumpkin. The greater fantasy has been that somehow our nation could achieve sustainable prosperity through the synergy of real estate transactions, consumerism, and debt.
In truth, the wealth of this country has simply been shifted from the foundations of working people, to power elites whose primary interest is themselves. When the Titanic was sinking; those on the upper decks had first crack at the limited number of lifeboats. The majority of those who drowned occupied the lower berths.
Certainly there are other nations at greater risk than New Zealand. Japan, the United States and UK have become "Too Big To Fail" much the same as AIG, Citigroup, and Bank of America. TBTF has become the cowardly mantra of those without the courage to draw back the curtain to reveal truth.
So good on you Bernard for the courage to stand and be counted among those of us who despair of the world our grandchildren will inherit.

Bernard - re. your invitation to folk who are leaving to write John Key a note with the line, "I left because you did nothing." Good line and many exporters giving up, or who have given up have said the same, to him and Clark before him. But still no change. What is it going to take?

To the lady (I've forgot your name sorry) who shared this link last week sometime:

http://www.chrismartenson.com/crashcourse

Thanks, very useful.

Tip - if you are going to watch this 'Crash Course' on the same days as listening to Bernard's interview lnked above - remove all razor blades from the house first.

jimmy

Did I read you correctly at 12.05pm:

"I need a good buyer's agent."

Your not thinking of buying property are you? Surely I must be mistaken!

On your comment about Shorty's brother's property I think that you missed the point that there were 3 rental incomes earning the $800pw not just one house.

I'm not sure why Bernard, jimmy etc are impressed by a 7.5% yield. I only buy a straight investment at that level if the rents are below market. 1998-2003, 15% yield was my minimum standard and in some markets (Dunedin etc) 25 or even 40% yields were possible. I declined a block of flats in a top Mt Eden street at 11% in 2002 on low rents (that was a mistake!). Yes yields are lower now, but 6-12 months ago some very good freehold residential properties sold in Chch and Dunedin at 10-12% yields (I bought some of them) others with angles to them have been able to return even more to an active investor (closer to 20%, I picked up a couple of these too), even this week a small currently vacant freehold Chch CBD commercial property sold at what could be 12% on fair rents (less than half of GV).

I think many of you that don't like property tend to use the low yields on desirable family homes as an excuse for property being a bad investment. The 3% yield on current market value (that I mentioned at the top of this page) for a property I've owned a long time, is only 3% because it's let below market and is on a large subdivisible section. A similar house in good order on a smaller site (suitable for straight investment) would be at the 7-8% level.

Bernard should remember though that yield isn't the be all and end all of property valuation otherwise all vacant land would have to be worthless wouldn't it! (And even then it'd still produce a negative net yield!!) Other factors do determine market value!

I had a post put in moderation about lunch time on this thread
http://www.interest.co.nz/ratesblog/index.php/2009/10/16/top-10-at-10-rb...

just testing to if I can participate in any other thread?

Kate - I and others I think, empathise with your frustration about the TWG project if it is simply about deriving more revenue by casting the net further, rather than doing the latter but to sensibly reduce income and corp. tax. Reducing these would help grow the economy, among other things, that we have discussed in the past, and things that gov. are quite aware of, eg. reinstate the R&D tax credit, plus initiate other pluralistic 'winning behaviour' incentives. However, on the 'grow economy' score, perhaps it's time Bernard asked for a progress update from the PWG, please? Also Bernard, do you know what has, or is to become of Labour's banking inquiry please?

I will be away for a week with very little computer access, but I really wish to inform the participants of this site that we have a new financial sector insider amongst us in one Lew Burton. So I am going to attempt to post in two parts, halving the number of supporting links, the comment that was caught up in moderation at 12:58pm:

part 1
Lew Burton, you being a former Chicago hedge funds trader, now lives in New Zealand and is an investment adviser, now head of derivatives at Goldman Sachs JBWere in New Zealand, I give you some credit for at least using your own name and allowing an open stand up debate with such an insider, I look forward to it as debate with such a worthy opponent can lift the financial literacy of all listening in.
Lew, I may be a truck driver in the Real Sector of the economy but I am not a dimwitted fool. You trying to put forward a few cheap speech fee's to infer that Summers made no more than that from other personal party loans and friendly investments into companies he is associated with, is amateurish, John Key would be most disapointed. He will be hoping his latest recruit David Mayhew, to take up the role of commissioner for financial advisers (http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/2975276/The-return-of-the-regulator )

Lew, I can see why you would not like the reputable collection of journalist that contribute to http://www.globalresearch.ca/ especially http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=theme&themeId=2 as they give the common folk far to much institutional memory than you would be comfortable with.

The financial sector, International Financial Institutions, have gotten all to greedy and cooked their goose a little at present, the Real Sector have become all to aware of their unscrupulous hideouts in the Caymen Islands etc, thus creating their next dirty money laundering hideout in a nation that is seen as one of the most transparent and least corrupt democracies in the world would be very beneficial, hence the wave of heavy hitting corporate raiders upon our shores.

Those that want to know just who Lew Burton is, and what he is about:

"In New York, where I grew up, it is common to give companies tax breaks for remaining in the city. In other places the local government will give away land or natural resources. New Zealand is a great place to live. It should take a small economic nudge to get companies interested in moving headquarters here. Tax breaks work, and it costs nothing if the companies demand little in the way of unique infrastructure"¦"¦New Zealand is small and resourceful; we can use tactics and smarts to outmanoeuvre the world. In the future we won't need to measure our success by GDP or employment statistics but by the length of the line to get New Zealand residency."
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=105...

"Lew Burton, executive director of equity derivatives at Goldman Sachs JBWere, sees this as the real problem. "Their leverage is huge. They're so leveraged that a pretty standard amount of defaults would bankrupt them."
http://www.stuff.co.nz/sunday-star-times/business/238063/Why-the-sharema...

Enjoy next weeks announcement of partial privitisation of the more attractive ACC accounts by corporate raiders, after the ACT - National good cop bad cop routine.

Les, with all due respect to a fellow decent battler, it doesn't matter which system tried in any country over the last 4000 odd years, especially the last 300 years, equal opportunity to wealth has been undermined by the monopolisers of the credit money supply and its userous compounding interest. History shows that when the debt based monetary system has been overcome taking into account the boudaries of finite resources, the society that overcame it was the better for it, thus until it is once again changed all the talk of change round the fringes is fruitless bunkum.

Jimy
There must be some alternate property universe happening in christchurch for Chris J!!!!!
As I've said here before you are very lucky if you can get rental yields over 5% in Akld.
There is the occasional crappy shoebox in the city that may return 7-8%, but those places are likely to attract bugger all capital gain

Have a good week Iain.

Les,

Thats probabaly why we are stuffed, we have had successive governments that are more interested in being popular (and the opposition who religiously go against whatever the current government is pushing) than doing whats needed.

What we really need is proper bi-partisan (supported by both National & Labour) policies that will go forward to reform the country, and not get reversed or cancelled after the next election. We also need those policies now and not as election bait as well. As the economy is heading towards a cliff, and they don't even seem to be lining up a ambo at the bottom.

I would love to see some form of study that shows if there has been any financial harm to our economy due to the majority of peoples incomes going to servicing debt, and how that has most companies competing for a smaller and smaller pool of money. It's pretty much the race to the bottom.

I can't see how selling assets, or opening up the National parks for mining is anything but stealing from our descendants.

Again and again !
Most articles this morning are about calculators and numbers in stead of what to do shovels and brains - the real economy.
How much longer can this country afford to have a situation where the government and the private sectors banging their heads together - crazy !
Obviously the severity and consequences of this recession is still not understood.

Why not use some overseas successful economic models.
It seems the introduction of strong "Green industry" "“ segments has enormous potential and long term saves Billions for national economy (among less imports)/ health and environment - exactly what we need to do in NZ.

Rogie: You are right - yes Les.

This is my last article for a longer time. I need a break from that side. Have good time juggling figures and numbers and how you can make another deal - against "your" children.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NH4SOpzbTMY

New Zealand is a young country, is not like Europe with a long history in economics. There is a fundamental difference between the two. In many European countries the process of manufacturing started because people needed tools, equipment and machinery - building their houses and farm their land. They needed transport on land, sea, lakes and rivers. They needed power and communication. Many big companies today started with a "Two men band" (ABB) and manufactured for the public, entirely "Homemade". The situation created jobs and highly skilled people "“ and yes over time it provides prosperity and wealth because it was and sill is, next to the export business "Homemade".

Let's have a look what happen here in New Zealand with a few, but important example. Do we manufacture tractors or any other machinery for our agriculture industry ?
Do we manufacture any rolling stock for transport apart from buses ?
Do we manufacture rolling stock for public transportation ?
Do we manufacture any equipment for the power industry ?
Do we manufacture equipment for communication ?
Do we manufacture any equipment for our national security, safety ?
Do we manufacture any equipment for the service and building industry ?
Do we manufacture any equipment/ machinery to build our road system ?

Mostly bloody imported !!

As I mentioned above usually strong segments in a successful nation's economy such as "Light Industry" are here in NZ missing. That is the most important reason why our economy as a whole is unbalanced and heavily indebted. We live in a consumption culture with too much emphasis on the Real Estate industry. We don't have a manufacturing culture. Tax and other problems described by others are only the symptoms but not the real cause for the dilemma.

I think we must fundamentally change our economic path. The architects and brains of this country need to address this problem with a new strategy. A nation cannot work day in day out, long hours and literally spend their salaries/ wages back into foreign bank accounts.
A good start:
Creating and implementing policies to introduce and support a "Green Light Industrial economy" in the current climate are essential. This provides economic potential, it makes us as a nation less depended, creates skilled jobs etc. It also makes the job for already existing manufacturers much easier (supply, research etc.)
Please read my first and other articles on that blog:

Good info:
http://www.scenta.co.uk/eco/eco%20careers/cit/1730840/uk-industry-govern...

But then many Kiwis would not like do have a high standard of living, but a happy one. Are we prepared to live with less, less services, less consumption
less healthcare, less education "“ obviously money has to come from somewhere.

A trough is a depression caused by too much wind. I have never paid knowingly to be depressed.

Because our agriculture has an industrial background, unlike most of the countries we like to compare ourselves to. Industrial economies are focused on efficiently producing goods for sale, not at being self-sufficient. Anything else is directed by what society wants/ will tolerate.

Walter : Why don't you contact Gareth Morgan . I have been to one of his seminars , and he marvels that anything substantive is manufactured in NZ at all . Am sure he will give you a robust response . Top fellow , Gareth .

Hi Rogie
I'm busy "manufacturing" paintings and sculptures in beween reading/ writing articles here. So no time for more seminars or government bla bla - actions.

I guess Bernhard has a better link to the all important media then Gareth

Maybe Gareth should sack Bill & John - in case Hell.en doesn't. By the way: Are the Top Nats still a team - I think they are widely spaced- cchhhrrrrrr!

Wally you are right, but I'm even not capable for local politics - too much of a futurologe and not enough patience - bad mix in politics. :-)

Agriculture manufacturing and exporting , during the 1980s and 90s was all the go, mostly driven by talented No 8 wire engineers etc thoughout NZ , however it also was hard physical work, under appreciated and took a lot of R & D dollars, also now has to be certified and certified again and every government department get their whack.......Was much easier to sell , or renovate, lease your owned workshop buildings to Government departments , overseas companies, and buy renovate and sell house property....then retire.....shame really...

Les,
I'm not saying you are wrong, of course government policy as far as Export/ Manufacturing concern should/ must, even has an obligation to introduce better market conditions.
Revenues are shrinking and so the government should - unnecessary spending has to stop. I personally hope the general public plus the media of NZ is beginning to be political motivated, peacefully legislate for changes- and hopefully not only when it is too late turning into riots.

Just when I thought New Zealand's politicians and the majority of the public will never pick up and understand my thoughts this is happening:
Please listen:

http://www.greens.org.nz/speeches/keep-manufacturing-nz-more-good-econom...

Bernhard,
Surrounded by academics, certainly a more practical approach will help rather then hearing the same drum again and again:

http://www.interest.co.nz/ratesblog/index.php/2009/10/15/bernard-hickey-...

http://www.interest.co.nz/ratesblog/index.php/2009/11/11/rbnz%e2%80%99s-...

Walter