[alphaalpha101]

1% growth is completely irrelevant. That's what I said: effectively in recession. The difference between 1% growth and 1% shrink is nothing.

There's no reason we shouldn't be growing much more quickly. But we're not going to do so in a neoliberal world. That's just not going to happen. Draining the wealth of society to a small group of people that spend little money just doesn't drive growth.

People can't spend and drive the economy when they're dirt poor.

[matt4077]

Growth in 2016 was 4%, not 1% and not -1%: https://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=d5bncppjof8f9_&...

It seems like NZ is growing at a pace of around 3%p.a. You're free to argue that there's some fantastic economic system that only you know, but most people will rightfully be sceptical of such claims unless you have a few examples of countries at NZ's high level of development growing at a much higher pace.

Other than that I've lost track of what were arguing. It appears as if you just start making completely unrelated arguments when you're proven wrong.

[alphaalpha101]

>Growth in 2016 was 4%, not 1% and not -1%: https://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=d5bncppjof8f9_&....

No it was not. Not per-capita. Growth ignoring population changes is literally completely irrelevant. It has never been relevant.

>It seems like NZ is growing at a pace of around 3%p.a. You're free to argue that there's some fantastic economic system that only you know, but most people will rightfully be sceptical of such claims unless you have a few examples of countries at NZ's high level of development growing at a much higher pace.

NZ before the horrific and inhumane neoliberal reforms of the 1980s ruined this beautiful country was growing at a much faster rate that it has ever grown since.

>Other than that I've lost track of what were arguing. It appears as if you just start making completely unrelated arguments when you're proven wrong.

Lol