Header Ad Module

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How can good planning encourage economic growth?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • How can good planning encourage economic growth?

    The good folk of Whakatane face an issue common to rural areas. How do we improve our growth and in particular our ecconomic growth and what can we as a Local Authorities do to help? There has to be some good ideas around?

    What do we have...

    Natural resources, climate, land and space. The Council owns valuable coastal land, it has a low level of debt and the ability to invest in the long term.. It has legislative authority and planning powers.. Local Maori are very wealthy and are actively looking to invest..

    Suggestions to date..

    More funding to the Regional ecconomic development agency .. All talk and no walk IMHO. A waste of time really..

    Build an impressive Library/Museum/Art Gallery.. Get real .. at $20 - 30M I don't think it's cost effective.

    Rezone more industrial and residential land ... Maybe .. That seems to be the "build it and they will come" argument.. anyone know if that actually works?

    Public private partnership with developers for targeted residential (eg retirement villages .. low cost housing )

    Invest in technology particularly broadband (Govt assistance available) with the aim of attracting business relocation.

    Anything I'm missing?

    Russell ORR

  • #2
    Build a Disney theme park
    Reduce rates
    Establish a rent-free business park to attract more industry


    Oh I know copy southland:
    Build an international airport :-)
    No fees for students _ do you have a polytech in Whakatane? Maybe establish one..

    There must be loads of possibilities -

    Comment


    • #3
      There are exceptions, but long term economic growth tends to be associated with population growth.

      So the question back to you is - what can the WCC do to encourage more people to move to the area and / or encourage those living in the area already to breed even more?*

      It might be that as a local council there is very little they can do (the LGA 2002 might limit their activities, etc), but the regional economic development agency might have more discretion in it's spending.

      In Invercargill (granted we have the Invercargill Licensing Trust and the Community Trust of Southland) the SIT Zero Fees scheme was great in attracting new residents (and new money) into the town.

      Think of the challenges people face when they move:

      - finding accomodation
      - relocation costs
      - finding work, schools, etc

      Maybe the WCC or the economic development agency can help with these via covering the costs of relocation, matching people with jobs, and even subsidising school fees.

      Anyway, this is all just me rabbitting on...



      * I did hear a story once of a region (perhaps in France, I cannot recall exactly) that was worried about a falling or stagnant population. In an attempt to encourage more amorous local relations a local TV station started broadcasting porn late at night. It worked. People got it on more and the babies followed.... Humans are so gullible!
      Last edited by Mark_B; 11-09-2009, 03:07 PM.
      Comments may not be relevant to individual circumstances. Before making any investment, financial or taxation decision you should consult a professional adviser.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Mark_B View Post
        There are exceptions, but long term economic growth tends to be associated with population growth....
        Interesting point. Southland has experienced a boom and the population has barely moved. What did change was the resource use (fertile farm land) from pastoral sheep to dairying. Much more money was generated per hectare but overall no more people were required.

        Indeed with sheep farming declining, shearers, meatworkers, and truckies all lost work.

        I don't disagree with you Mark but there is also a myth that a big population = economic prosperity. If that was true, India and China would own the world. Instead a mere 350 million Americans could buy both countries.

        I like Whakatane. As a community you need to decide whether economic growth for the sake of growth is what you really want. In truth, what's wrong with the place right now? Wonderful soils, beautiful coast-line, good weather, not far from the big smokes of Hamilton and Auckland.

        Comment


        • #5
          Require all prospective MPs to sit intelligence and aptitude tests and publish the results for all NZers to see.
          The mission of any business enterprise should include the aim to develop economic conditions rather than simply react to them.

          Comment


          • #6
            I like Whakatane. As a community you need to decide whether economic growth for the sake of growth is what you really want. In truth, what's wrong with the place right now? Wonderful soils, beautiful coast-line, good weather, not far from the big smokes of Hamilton and Auckland
            You are right .. Whakatane is a great place but to be brutally honest the issue for us is survival. The problem is that infrastructural maintenance and operating costs are increasing faster than incomes and population (ratepayers). It is simply more economic to run larger denser population centres.

            There is also the issue of compliance. For example Govt imposes higher Drinking water standards and says they must be met by every rural water scheme. There are some big costs involved and few users to pay for it.. Sure there are subsidies but that is all they are.. there are still costs to be met locally and it is hard to sell the need to folk who dont see a problem with their water..

            I dont agree Mark_B. Whakatane has had steady population growth but our economic prosperity is not increasing. What we need is more income earning, rate paying people. Just increasing the population increases costs without increasing our rating base.

            Local Pulp and Paper mills have played a large part in the economic prosperity of the area since 1955 but that has been steadily decreasing in recent years. I have just finished sitting on the Resource consent hearings (Discharge to Air and water and landfill) for CHH (Tasman Mill) and that decision will be out in a few weeks.

            Whatever happens will not hide the fact that the mill is old and facing stiff competition. The day will come...

            Meantime our District has to find a way to just rertain what we have at the moment. We dont want a Surfers Paradise either but we do want all the services. nice parks, streets, and warm fuzzies that every one in the big smoke has .. we just cant afford it at the moment.. Our infrastructure has been running down and there will be a day of reckoning if we dont do something about it now..

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Austrokiwi View Post
              Require all prospective MPs to sit intelligence and aptitude tests and publish the results for all NZers to see.
              The intelligence and aptitude of MPs is a direct reflection of the people who voted for them... are you sure you want to know?

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Jumpin View Post
                Build a Disney theme park
                Reduce rates
                Establish a rent-free business park to attract more industry


                Oh I know copy southland:
                Build an international airport :-)
                No fees for students _ do you have a polytech in Whakatane? Maybe establish one..

                There must be loads of possibilities -
                I think these are great ideas......especially the Theme park....make Whakatane a destination.....Marine World theme park maybe?
                The rest are equally good ideas.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Winston001 View Post
                  Interesting point. Southland has experienced a boom and the population has barely moved.
                  Invercargill was losing people throughout the 1990's. Not any more. The population rose and, according to Stats NZ, has stablised (not ideal, but waaaaaaay better than falling).

                  Winston I said that population growth -> economic growth (that was the question, by the way).

                  Its a certainty that the Chinese economy is bigger now with 1.345 billion mouths to feed than when it had only 500 million mouths to feed - that is economic growth.

                  Wikipedia notes:

                  Although still poor by the world's standard, the People's Republic of China's rapid growth [has] managed to pull hundreds of millions of its people out of poverty since 1978. Today, about 10% of the Chinese population [down from 64% in 1978] live below the poverty line of US$1 per day...


                  Originally posted by Winston001 View Post
                  I don't disagree with you Mark but there is also a myth that a big population = economic prosperity.
                  Actually you do disagree with me - you said it right there. But it doesn't bother me that you do, we're both entitled to our opinions.


                  Originally posted by Winston001 View Post
                  If that was true, India and China would own the world. Instead a mere 350 million Americans could buy both countries.
                  Yeah, that would be funny, 307 million Americans buying up China with all that money they've borrowed from China and on whose continued reinvestment they rely for their economic prosperity!

                  It may come as a surprise to you, but The People's Republic of China holds over $US 800 billion in US T-Bonds and is the largest such investor in the US economy.

                  As CNN recently put it:

                  America met with its lead banker this week and was forced to answer plenty of tough questions about its spending habits.

                  So who owns who?
                  Last edited by Mark_B; 11-09-2009, 06:58 PM.
                  Comments may not be relevant to individual circumstances. Before making any investment, financial or taxation decision you should consult a professional adviser.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Shalodge View Post
                    I dont agree Mark_B. Whakatane has had steady population growth but our economic prosperity is not increasing. What we need is more income earning, rate paying people. Just increasing the population increases costs without increasing our rating base.
                    Perhaps if you'd bothered to take what I wrote to the next logical step instead of not thinking beyond you might have realised that you can attract certain types of people to town by doing certain things (I did, btw, mention helping match prospective residents with jobs).

                    Hmmm... people in jobs earn income (a major leap in thinking, I know...)

                    If you focus on who or what it is you want to attract then your answers will become clearer.

                    Invercargill wanted to attract students to SIT so what did they do? They offered ZERO fees. It worked a treat.

                    Otoh, if you want to attract entreprenuers and would be business operators then do something that is meaningful to them. Perhaps a business incubator or mentor service??? Access to finance (or other monetary or in-kind assistance) on favourable terms for prospective business owners who jump through certain hoops (one of which may be to employ local labour)?

                    It isn't rocket science.

                    Good luck with it all.
                    Last edited by Mark_B; 11-09-2009, 07:24 PM.
                    Comments may not be relevant to individual circumstances. Before making any investment, financial or taxation decision you should consult a professional adviser.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Well we could target oldies and students but I feel we should be looking for people with skill and talent to generate jobs and prosperity and they are not normally folk under 18 or over 70...

                      We actually have enough people earning benefits in our patch and I find they are the ones that tend to cost us rather than contribute...

                      Lets take it that we want to attract workers, employers, business people, tourist operators and entrepreneurs... how do we do this? Affordable housing?? Low rates?
                      Rates holiday for first year?? free parking? free internet? tarseal their driveway.. what?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        We actually have enough people earning benefits in our patch and I find they are the ones that tend to cost us rather than contribute..
                        What areas of NZ does this not apply to?
                        "There's one way to find out if a man is honest-ask him. If he says 'yes,' you know he is a crook." Groucho Marx

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Perhaps going off topic a little:

                          I think NZ is far to generous with Unemployment ( and its defacto: The sickness benefit). Despite all the criticism of European socialist policies I think NZ could take a large helping form the European book. School and University leavers are not eligible for unemployment benefits......You are only included in the unemployment benefits if you have been employed. While employed you pay insurance that insurance gives you up to 6 months unemployment benefits. If you need support beyond that you enter work programms( in some countries). NZ needs to raise its productivity and one of the ways of doing this is ensuring the individual is responsible for him/her self. Far too many in NZ see unemployment benefits a right not a priviledge.
                          The mission of any business enterprise should include the aim to develop economic conditions rather than simply react to them.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Mark_B View Post

                            Its a certainty that the Chinese economy is bigger now with 1.345 billion mouths to feed than when it had only 500 million mouths to feed - that is economic growth.
                            Mmmmm.....consider Ethiopia. At the time of the 1984 famine the population was 40 million. The spectre of famine has arrived again. The population today - 80 million. Ethiopia is the poorest country in the world with a negative wealth index figure.

                            As for China and the USA, there is no comparison between the wealth of the two nations. The average income (from World Bank figures) in China is about US$2,500pa and in the US about US$38,000pa.

                            The relative savings and GDP are also vastly different. Savings China - $848. USA - $15,344.

                            China's GDP - $3.251 Trillion. USA GDP (with one quarter the population) $13.84 Trillion.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              The US Treasury estimates that the US has a external debt of $13,773,000,000,000, or about $42,000 per person.

                              The CIA estimated China's external debt at $379,800,000,000 - a mere $300 or so per person.

                              The IMF estimates China has a current account surplus of $399,325,000,000, and the US a current account deficit of $664,125,000,000.

                              Again, the CIA estimated China's real GDP growing at about 9%+ per annum in 2008, with the US at 1.4%.

                              The IMF estimated that China's 9% growth represented 21% of the increase in Gross World Product, which rose by 3.2% in 2008.


                              The 21st century isn't shaping up too good for Uncle Sam.

                              It's an apparently inevitable fact that within a matter of a few decades the Chinese economy will be the most powerful in the world.

                              But you're right... it isn't all about bums on seats. Certainly population increases do contribute to economic growth, but to achieve growth per capita you need to upskill and value add - something rapidly industrialising nations are now doing very well.
                              Last edited by Mark_B; 11-09-2009, 11:19 PM.
                              Comments may not be relevant to individual circumstances. Before making any investment, financial or taxation decision you should consult a professional adviser.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X