I don’t think our Government realises that economic growth means keeping people employed, fed, housed, educated and meeting their basic needs. I believe it means unity, affirmative action and kindness.
It means building houses, hospitals, and schools, and providing decent public services for everyone.
Sacking thousands, record departures overseas, and less money spent in New Zealand sucks an economy dry. Businesses can’t thrive with less money circulating or under those conditions.
It’s not just about selling us and any moveable resources to overseas carpetbaggers and pillaging people. New Zealanders need to come first.
Mary-Ann de Kort, Gisborne.
Flawed argument for growth
Simon Bridges presents a seriously flawed argument for supporting economic growth (Comment, January 16).
His basic metaphor of medical diagnosis crashes to the ground with the loss of young talent branded as a cancer.
Oops. Cancer is uncontrolled growth, not the opposite. This is confusion in my opinion.
Real GDP growth is by no means the most reliable measure of an economy’s overall health. Whether it comes from the Economist, economists or politicians, that is confusion.
GDP measures only the economy’s size, not its condition, regardless of whether that size is achieved by healthy, unhealthy, or even disastrous means.
Claiming that as a small, remote, economy we have less ability than other countries to deal with shocks and crises, natural or artificial, is nonsense in my opinion.
With a small population density, I believe we have more ability than most countries to feed ourselves and build simple wooden housing.
The business-as-usual approach to growth does nothing to share our wealth more evenly.
If growth has to slow down and then reverse at some point, then recession has to be embraced and planned intelligently.
The current recession might be the biggest since 1991, but that does not make it the “worst”.
Recessions have been bad only because we were not prepared for such an obvious possibility. Again, quantity is being confused with quality here.
For Bridges to label greater growth, in other words more of the same, “boldness in reform” is spin verging on illiteracy.
Gavin Maclean, Gisborne.
Dog danger
Thanks to the efforts of several life-saving medical teams, my dad survived a cardiac arrest nearly four hours into the Wellington marathon in June – on his 80th birthday.
His road to recovery has been smooth and positive overall, largely due to his commitment to staying fit and healthy. One way my parents maintain their fitness is by walking their dogs to the local “dog-friendly” park – a seemingly straightforward and safe activity.
However, in mid-November, my dad was attacked by a dog that jumped a fence and tore into his calf muscle.
Given his recently implanted heart device and three stents, the stress of the incident could have been fatal. Thankfully, the wound has healed well, thanks to excellent care from the local GP practice.
I am relieved my boys weren’t with him at the time, as the situation could have been even worse. The incident also brought back vivid memories of another dog attack in 2018 when I was bitten while walking my own dog in the same neighbourhood.
Now, staying with my family in Gisborne for the holidays, we’re deeply grateful to have my dad with us for the years to come. However, it feels wrong that the simple joy of walking the dogs has become a potentially dangerous activity.
Instead of feeling free to enjoy the outdoors, it now feels like navigating a minefield. Do other readers share similar concerns?
Karen Mayhew, Dunedin
The Gisborne Herald welcomes letters from readers. Please note the following:
- Letters should not exceed 350 words.
- They should be opinion based on facts or current events.
- If possible, please email.
- No noms-de-plume.
- Letters will be published with names and suburb/city.
- Please include full name, address and contact details for our records only.
- Local letter writers are given preference.
- Rejected letters are not normally acknowledged.
- Letters may be edited, abridged, or rejected at the Editor’s discretion.
- The Editor’s decision on publication is final. No correspondence will be entered into.
