Comments on: OCR just a rod for exporters’ backs, says Productive Economy Council http://www.pec.org.nz/2009/09/ocr-just-a-rod-for-exporters-backs-says-productive-economy-council/ The Productive Economy Council represents a growing community of people that wish to see New Zealand return to the upper end of the OECD in terms of GDP per capita. Thu, 09 Sep 2010 13:04:29 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7.1 hourly 1 By: Selwyn Pellett http://www.pec.org.nz/2009/09/ocr-just-a-rod-for-exporters-backs-says-productive-economy-council/comment-page-1/#comment-11 Selwyn Pellett Thu, 10 Sep 2009 05:08:57 +0000 http://www.pec.org.nz/?p=136#comment-11 Mark you are right and wrong. I think when about 1% of the population even knows there is a problem that it's too early to jump to the solution. We have many ideas and possible solutions but right now the drive is to ensure that the debate starts over the need for change and identification of what doesn't work in the current policy settings. We are well down that track and the submissions to the banking enquiry used Singapore as the comparison. Its only one option but it has certainly worked for them. Feel free to comment on that as well. Regards, Selwyn Mark you are right and wrong. I think when about 1% of the population even knows there is a problem that it’s too early to jump to the solution. We have many ideas and possible solutions but right now the drive is to ensure that the debate starts over the need for change and identification of what doesn’t work in the current policy settings. We are well down that track and the submissions to the banking enquiry used Singapore as the comparison. Its only one option but it has certainly worked for them. Feel free to comment on that as well. Regards, Selwyn

]]> By: Mark Thomson http://www.pec.org.nz/2009/09/ocr-just-a-rod-for-exporters-backs-says-productive-economy-council/comment-page-1/#comment-10 Mark Thomson Thu, 10 Sep 2009 03:15:24 +0000 http://www.pec.org.nz/?p=136#comment-10 I think you would contribute far more to a constructive public policy debate if you were to do more than merely hint at what you think a better approach would be than current tools and objectives. You say - "Our research shows that our monetary policy, our small and totally open economy, our preponderance to property speculation and the tax incentives that fuel that speculation are the cause of the dollar’s volatility. If we fix these boundary conditions we can help control that volatility." This *could* be interpreted in a whole range of ways... that we should impose tariffs on imports, rent controls, a capital gains tax, foreign exchange controls... any or none of which you may actually be advocating. Is it too much to ask you to tell us what you really think? I think you would contribute far more to a constructive public policy debate if you were to do more than merely hint at what you think a better approach would be than current tools and objectives.

You say - “Our research shows that our monetary policy, our small and totally open economy, our preponderance to property speculation and the tax incentives that fuel that speculation are the cause of the dollar’s volatility. If we fix these boundary conditions we can help control that volatility.”

This *could* be interpreted in a whole range of ways… that we should impose tariffs on imports, rent controls, a capital gains tax, foreign exchange controls… any or none of which you may actually be advocating. Is it too much to ask you to tell us what you really think?

]]>