Quote:
Originally Posted by effCup
I don't equate continuity of the leader/figure-head necessarily with sound/stable economic or political management. That's a game of deck chairs.
|
I am still intrigued as to why you would imply NZ is somehow lacking in sound/stable economic and political management-I omitted to mention in my previous comments that in the period alluded to earlier we have also been hit with two massive earthquakes-5 years apart-which have had massive costs-the February 2011 quake is rated the third most expensive natural disaster in history:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/...c...most-expensive
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/ar...ectid=10795342-which in scale vastly exceed any natural disaster Australia has experienced.
The damage to basic infrastructure in particular was massive on both cases-and we are still recovering-in the case of Christchurch in a localised urban area,and in the case of the Nov 2016 quake, SI major transport and communication links were utterly destroyed-which have far more direct effects on the economy.
-and even with this, the NZ economy coped with barely a blip-from a nation of less than 5 million people-I would argue the exact opposite of what you are implying-ONLY a sound and stable economy and government could have coped with a natural disaster on this scale....life went on, taxes didn't go up-and the government recorded a surplus. Rather extraordinary considering!
just because the NZ economy is small, and has only a moderate rate of growth, is no reason to assume it is unstable and mismanaged-we have never been proponents of boom and bust economics...