Shearer wants hands-on our money

David Shearer is trying to convince us we’d be better with a more hands-on government.

What he means is he wants his hands on more of our money to redistribute in ways that will help some at the cost of many.

The some he helps won’t necessarily be those in need and the many it costs won’t only be those who can afford it.

He doesn’t back up his desire for a more hands-on approach with facts, possibly because, the facts wouldn’t back him up.

Hands-on economies are struggling and countries which have weathered the global financial crisis better, are those which have a less hands-on approach.

The countries that best weathered the crisis were exactly those that have followed the so-called neoliberal agenda.

According to the Heritage Foundation’s Index of Economic Freedom, the world’s six freest economies are Hong Kong, Singapore, Australia, New Zealand, Switzerland and Canada (see table).

These six have avoided anything like the deep and prolonged recessions of more interventionist countries.

The IMF continues to forecast higher growth for the six than for countries further down the freedom list.

Even more important, both unemployment and youth unemployment are lower in the more free-market economies.

“Hand’s-on” countries like Sweden seem unable to design an economic system that avoids a quarter of their young people being unemployed.  In the six freest economies, youth unemployment is half socialist Europe’s. . . 

New Zealand’s youth unemployment is higher than it was because of a left-wing hands-on approach, the removal of the youth wage.

. . . Still, Mr Shearer has done us a favour by launching a “hands-on / hands-off” debate.

It highlights the risks of departing from successful free-market economics towards the kind of EU-style interventionism first begun by Jim Anderton and continued ever since.

We have  clear choice.

There’s the hands-on our money approach of David Shearerpisos and Labour’s potential coalition partners.

Or the more moderate approach of National and its allies which prefer to address the barriers to growth and employment then allow people to get on with their lives and businesses.

About these ads

7 Responses to Shearer wants hands-on our money

  1. inventory2 says:

    David Shearerpisos; love it! And don’t forget Ele; if Russel Norman is the Minister of Finance and the money runs out, he’ll simply fire up the printing presses…

  2. Um, from the more correct libertarian/classical liberal point of view, to be ‘moderately hands on’, as you call National, is like being a ‘little bit pregnant’ ;) No thanks.

  3. homepaddock says:

    Have to credit the Shearerpisos to a Facebook friend. Scary thoughts like Nomanomics aren’t easily forgotten.

  4. robertguyton says:

    Inventory2 and his low-brow, straight from the Tory Book of Sound Bites, snipes represents the eutrophic mud at the bottom of the political lagoon, that’s widely known, but for you, Ele, an intelligent woman, to be joining him is a bit “icky”. Stick to intelligent debate, is my advice to you and don’t get fall into the sulfurous muck with Mr Stock – you’ll only spoil your nice blue pinny.

  5. TraceyS says:

    Did you forget an “r” in there Ele? or did you really mean “No-man-omics”?!

  6. homepaddock says:

    Maybe it was a Freudian slip as it is economics fit for no man and no woman.

  7. scotty says:

    Theres one thing worse than printing money,
    Thats borrowing the same printed money at a rate of 300 mil pw and booking it up to your grand children,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,162 other followers

%d bloggers like this: