3News » Home

Growth

Mon, 15 Mar 2010 12:59p.m.

By Nandor Tanczos

One of the great mysteries of New Zealand politics is why our Governments always strive to be more like Australia. If the rest of us wanted to live in Australia, we'd move there.

To be fair they only mean economically speaking. Growth rates, wages rates, that sort of thing. The abstract measurements that sound impressive, but tell us nothing about what is important. Despite economists' attempts to reduce every value to a dollar amount, GDP - the sum of monetary transactions - cannot describe our psychological, social, cultural or ecological well-being. Neither do growth rates tell us about the levels of police corruption, intransigent judicial racism or mindless jingoism in a country.

We know that economic growth stopped adding to human happiness from about the 1960's, in the West, which makes the political obsession with it hard to fathom. But more importantly economic growth now seems to be making us less well off, overall. It's like spending the pension savings on fags and booze – the faster we do it, the worse off we are. So I wasn't trying to be clever when pointing out some of Australia's less savoury characteristics. Increasing New Zealand's economic growth will inevitably lead to a lower standard of living, in my opinion. Some of us will have more money and more stuff, but all of us will lose something of greater value.

Where would economic growth come from? The Government has floated the idea of digging up areas of high value conservation estate in order to flog off the minerals underneath. Right now, in Happy Valley on the West Coast, a rare ecosystem that is home to a number of rare or endangered species, is being pillaged to dig up coal to sell off-shore. Burning it will increase greenhouse gas emissions worldwide, leaving an ecological debt to our descendants, while the coal is expected to last around a decade. Ten years on, the coal will be gone, the money will be gone and we will have lost something far more precious, forever. The Government proposes more of that.

We can increase dairy output. This goes hand in hand with the killing of our streams and rivers, from taking more water for irrigation and increased run-off, even with best practise farming methods. It drives the consolidation of land ownership and the corporatisation of farming, with young farmers less and less able to afford to buy their own farm. Rural communities are being altered forever by the resulting transient workforce and lower population density.

Corporatisation and environmental destruction are not inevitable processes. They are the outcome of political decisions. What New Zealand, and the world, needs is not more growth, but a move to a steady state economy. There is already enough for everyone, but we are finding it hard to shake the idea that “bigger is always better”. Working out how to live within our ecological means is a much more worthy goal than copying our cousins over the ditch.

Nandor Blog

 

 

Nandor Tanczos, is a social ecologist and rastafarian of Hungarian and Cape Coloured ancestry.

 

He has been a businessman and a beggar, a legislator and an outlaw, and is currently a community educator, freelance writer and orator.

 
Subscribe to this blog by email
  

 

Comments [11]

Jeremy
24 Mar 2010 12:53a.m.

Hey Nandor. This is first class work. Your saying the things that need to to be said which are always eschewed in the mainstream media and political discourse. An interesting point to make in regards to the GDP measurement is that it is a product of neo-liberal economics and therefore espouses a metaphysical position not tenable to the infinitely complex realities of human psychology and and ecological sustainability. In fact im pretty sure if we used other indicators such as a "happiness measurement" we would find that we are less happy now with all our "stuff" than before the 1960's even with all the economic growth and accumulation of wealth. If your interested in the happiness measurement check out this article: www.smallisbeautiful.org/buddhist_economics/english.html

Nandor
18 Mar 2010 8:40p.m.

Thanks to everyone for the comments. Stauss, you raise an important point. While population continues to grow, resource consumption will grow. Stabilising population is one of the major challenges human beings face in the world today, along with the excessive consumption of the rich world. Having said that, economic growth in NZ has not been a function of population increase, so your refutation on that point is spurious. The fact is, as Luke said, that beyond a level reached decades ago, increasing the amount of their stuff does not make people better off by any sensible measure. Most people know this, and express a preference for quality of life over economic growth. That preference is ignored by both blue and red governments when developing policy. That doesn't mean we should stop improving the quality of goods produced (economic development). In fact the push for economic growth tends to decrease quality (especially durability) but increase volume. Hence the boom in $2 shops. In addition, your comments about the lessons of communism are highly simplistic. I have family who had to flee communist tyranny under threat of death and I can assure you it wasn't in order to be able to buy Nikes. The problem is that you conflate economic growth with material progress with well being. They are just not the same thing.

Rimu
17 Mar 2010 9:14p.m.

Great blog post, Nandor. However, without an RSS feed of this blog, I fear I will miss future posts of yours :-/

Tadhg
17 Mar 2010 9:03p.m.

Bravo Nandor! A fine first piece. Good choice of website too, I think its awesome that you have re-entered the mainstream. Kia kaha mate, look forward to reading more of your work. Heres hoping that you can spark thoughtful fires in people, and not just inflame their prejudices. I have faith....

Jon Field
17 Mar 2010 4:39p.m.

you are right Nandor but for some people their belief system does not allow them to understand. We don't need to grow the economy, we need to share the world's resources in a way that helps everyone with out further wrecking this fragile planet that we live on. Keep saying what is right, maybe one day more people will listen - Arohanui Bro

Luke
17 Mar 2010 3:38p.m.

@struss: Um, by growth I think Nandor was refering to growth of the physical economy as opposed to population growth, in particular I think what he is refering to is that there is a diminishing return for happiness with increasing wealth past a certain wealth for every individual. Once all your dreams have been fufilled and you have dreamed new ones and done them you will find that gradually your new goals are less money dependant. If you think about it it makes sense.

James
16 Mar 2010 3:10p.m.

Strauss - you mention failed communist states - but there is plenty of failure within capitalist market driven states. I dont believe in communism as I believe people need the opportunity to acheive - but we need diff measures of achievement rather than a simple GDP measure.

strauss
16 Mar 2010 11:05a.m.

Nandor, are you stuck in a time warp? Growth stopped adding to human happiness in about 1960; we know that, you say !!?
Then we also know that in 1960 NZ had a population of less than 3 million; now it's over 4. If we wouldn't have had growth, we would certainly not have the same level of happiness today.
Point2: Nandor, haven't you learnt anything from the failed communist states over the last couple of decades? It taught us that economical growth, material progress, is an essentual human requirement. People will not quietly stand by if a 'State' decides that they can not improve their materialistic wellbeing; end of storey!

Nandor
16 Mar 2010 9:07a.m.

Kia ora Nick. Thanks for your comment. There are lots of resources you can look at about the concept of a steady state economy. This is a good starting point <http://steadystate.org/discover/>, covering the historical development of the idea and some of its basic principles. In general, though, the idea is that in any economy the market is generally very good an dealing with questions of allocation of resources. We use mostly use taxes to deal with distribution questions (social welfare, public health, etc). The question that usually gets ignored is the one of scale. What is the appropriate size of the economy? That actually needs to be determined first, and the other factors must operate within those limits if we want to have a civilisation that lasts past our own lifetimes. Put another way, a steady state economy would minimise throughput of resources through the economy while attempting to maximise general well-being. James, I entirely agree. There is a lot of interesting work being done on Genuine Progress Indicators, Happiness Indexes and these sorts of things, some in this country. Until we have ways of measuring well-being, we will find it hard to develop policies to effectively promote it. btw It is interesting that Simon Kuznets, a pioneer in econometrics and a man who did a lot of work on the standardisation of GDP, was highly critical of the use of GDP as a measure of wealth, or of welfare.Today it has become the most fetishised metric of economic performance.

Nick
15 Mar 2010 4:06p.m.

That's all very nice but what the hell is a 'steady state economy'. There are two things a government can do that can destroy a nation, one is to over-regulate the economy killing off the competative spirit and forcing the and brightest elsewhere. The other is to too little regulation resulting in a culture of greed and short term gain and massive environmental and social damage. Complicating things for New Zealand is that we do not exist in isolation if we get too tough on the multinationals they'll pull out leaving a lot of pain behind.

James
15 Mar 2010 2:14p.m.

Good blog Nandor - what the world needs is a new way of measuring things outside GDP - some kind of sustainable growth/happiness index? What do you think?

Post a comment

Name:
Email: (Won't be published)
Comment:


3News Video 3News Audio

Blogs