But we are a bit ahead of the world - our government took responsible
actions earlier than many other countries, both regarding avoiding
Covid deaths, and also on the economic front by avoiding an
unsustainable level of public debt.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/aug/17/is-the-era-of-zero-interest-rates-gone-for-good
But we are a bit ahead of the world - our government took responsible
actions earlier than many other countries, both regarding avoiding
Covid deaths,
and also on the economic front by avoiding an
unsustainable level of public debt.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/aug/17/is-the-era-of-zero-interest-rates-gone-for-good
Is the era of zero interest rates gone for good?
Jeffrey Frankel
euro currency notes
Interest rates in the eurozone had been at or below 1% since 2009.
Rates briefly dropped below zero in 2015. Photograph: assalve/Getty
Images
What a difference two years make. In 2021, when interest rates were
near zero in the US and the UK and slightly negative in the eurozone
and Japan, the consensus was that they would remain low indefinitely. Astonishingly, as recently as January 2022, investors put the
probability of rates in the US, eurozone and the UK rising above 4%
within five years at only 12%, 4%, and 7%, respectively. After
adjusting for expected inflation, real interest rates were negative
and projected to stay that way.
In fact, despite the US Federal Reserve and other central banksÂ’
aggressive monetary tightening, real interest rates remained
significantly negative until late 2022. Moreover, long-term rates
increased more moderately than short-term rates: by October 2022, the
yield curve had inverted, signalling that financial markets were
expecting central banks to reduce short-term rates in the near future.
This sentiment stemmed from the widespread expectation that the US and
global economies would enter recession.
The Fed recently raised its policy rate to 5.25%. In the US and many
other countries, real interest rates have also moved into positive
territory. And now that the US appears to have avoided a recession
after all, rates will probably stay well above zero for a while.
In 2021, some monetary economists believed that the “neutral” real
interest rate had fallen below zero. This shift was widely viewed as a long-term phenomenon, with the exception of occasional cyclical
fluctuations, such as interest-rate spikes during periods of unusually expansionary fiscal policy. Given the FedÂ’s 2% inflation target, the
zero real interest rate seemed to imply that the equilibrium nominal
interest rate should fall to below 2%, on average. But US nominal
interest rates cannot fall into negative territory, owing to the
so-called zero lower bound.
In Europe and Japan, nominal interest rates did fall slightly below
zero, as low as -0.5%. This was the effective lower bound. If the
equilibrium real interest rate was negative and the effective lower
bound on nominal rates was close to zero, the global economy would be
in serious trouble. Under such conditions, monetary policy would often
be too tight to achieve the economyÂ’s equilibrium rate of growth in
gross domestic product. The responsibility for maintaining full
employment would thus have to revert to fiscal policy, which is often politically fraught. This scenario is the “secular stagnation”
hypothesis, popularised by the former US treasury secretary Lawrence H Summers in 2013.
When it comes to fiscal policy, one silver lining of chronically low
real interest rates is that they make elevated levels of public debt
more sustainable. Governments could operate with primary budget
deficits (which exclude interest payments) and still manage their
debt, as it would decrease relative to GDP over time. With interest
rates having risen, however, the US debt is suddenly a problem again.
The debt-to-GDP ratio is expected to resume its upward path from here
on out. This was one of the reasons that Fitch Ratings downgraded US
debt from its longstanding AAA credit rating on 1 August. The global
rise in real interest rates has also worsened debt problems elsewhere, especially in developing countries.
In 2021, investors and economists could be forgiven for believing that equilibrium interest rates had settled close to zero for the
foreseeable future. After all, short-term rates in the US had been
near-zero for nine of the previous 13 years, from 2009 to 2015 and
again from 2020-21. Similarly, interest rates in the eurozone had been
at or at or below 1% since 2009 and dropped below zero in 2015. In
Japan, interest rates have remained under 0.5% since 1996. Such
prolonged periods of low interest rates had not been observed since
the Great Depression.
Major countriesÂ’ nominal and real interest rates had been trending
downward since at least 1992. Moreover, comprehensive analyses
spanning seven centuries of data on long-term real interest rates have identified a gradual but persistent decline since the Renaissance, at
about 1.2 percentage points a century.
Possible explanations for the decline in real interest rates include
slowed productivity growth, demographic shifts, growing global demand
for safe and liquid assets, rising inequality, lower capital-goods
prices, and a savings glut coming from east Asia. Other factors such
as longer lifespans and reduced transaction costs could help explain
why real rates have been declining for centuries.
To be sure, prominent economists did not dismiss the potential for
future interest-rate increases. But while they acknowledged the
possibility of periodic rate spikes, many viewed such increases as
unlikely in the short term and transitory in the long run. In 2018,
Summers argued that the US is “likely to have, by historical
standards, very low rates for a very large fraction of time going
forward, even in good economic times.” In 2020, jointly with Jason
Furman, Summers reiterated that “real interest rates are expected to
remain negative”. As recently as June 2022, the former IMF chief
economist Olivier Blanchard observed: “The long decline in safe
interest rates stems from deep underlying factors that do not appear
likely to reverse anytime soon.”
Short-term nominal interest rates are now above 5%, and real interest
rates have returned to positive territory. While some monetary
economists still expect interest rates to revert to zero, they may
have been overly influenced by the dramatic shifts of 2008-21. After
all, the prospect of equilibrium interest rates reaching zero or
negative territory was almost unthinkable before the 2008 global
financial crisis (at least outside Japan).
While I cannot predict the future, I am sceptical that interest rates
will return to zero anytime soon. If this assessment is correct, it
bodes well for monetary policy, which would be less constrained than previously. But high real interest rates are bad news for fiscal policymakers, who could find themselves once again constrained by unsustainable debt-to-GDP ratios.
Jeffrey Frankel is a professor of capital formation and growth at
Harvard University. He served as a member of President Bill ClintonÂ’s Council of Economic Advisers.
On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 08:23:35 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:
But we are a bit ahead of the world - our government took responsible >>actions earlier than many other countries, both regarding avoiding<snipped>
Covid deaths, and also on the economic front by avoiding an
unsustainable level of public debt.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/aug/17/is-the-era-of-zero-interest-rates-gone-for-good
I have snipped the article text as it is readily available from the
link provided.
Our national debt has increased substantially primarily because of
pandemic mitigation measures. As the article confirms interest rates
are nowhere near as low as they were in pre-pandemic times so the
taxpayer will be burdened with interest costs in the years to come - >potentially higher than the cost of running some Government
departments. It is also worth remembering that none of that borrowing
was used to increase the capacity of our Health system - nothing spent
on employing more nurses and doctors - no additional spending to
increase Health-related assets. So all that spending has gone now and
there is nothing to show for it.
While our national debt is low compared to some other countries, there
are reasons why it was as low as it was pre-pandemic. Those reasons
are even more evident with the current rising interest rates.
On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 09:35:09 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:
On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 08:23:35 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>wrote:
But we are a bit ahead of the world - our government took responsible >>>actions earlier than many other countries, both regarding avoiding<snipped>
Covid deaths, and also on the economic front by avoiding an
unsustainable level of public debt.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/aug/17/is-the-era-of-zero-interest-rates-gone-for-good
I have snipped the article text as it is readily available from the
link provided.
Our national debt has increased substantially primarily because of
pandemic mitigation measures. As the article confirms interest rates
are nowhere near as low as they were in pre-pandemic times so the
taxpayer will be burdened with interest costs in the years to come - >>potentially higher than the cost of running some Government
departments. It is also worth remembering that none of that borrowing
was used to increase the capacity of our Health system - nothing spent
on employing more nurses and doctors - no additional spending to
increase Health-related assets. So all that spending has gone now and >>there is nothing to show for it.
There was a large amount spent on health related issues - as those in
New Zealand during the height of the Covid pandemic are aware.
And yes
money was spent on recruiting new nurses and doctors, but that was
obviously curtailed during the pandemic.
While our national debt is low compared to some other countries, there
are reasons why it was as low as it was pre-pandemic. Those reasons
are even more evident with the current rising interest rates.
Which is why Labour are setting out how proposed spending in the
future will be paid for . . .
On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 13:20:25 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 09:35:09 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> >>wrote:
On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 08:23:35 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>wrote:
But we are a bit ahead of the world - our government took responsible >>>>actions earlier than many other countries, both regarding avoiding >>>>Covid deaths, and also on the economic front by avoiding an >>>>unsustainable level of public debt.<snipped>
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/aug/17/is-the-era-of-zero-interest-rates-gone-for-good
I have snipped the article text as it is readily available from the
link provided.
Our national debt has increased substantially primarily because of >>>pandemic mitigation measures. As the article confirms interest rates
are nowhere near as low as they were in pre-pandemic times so the >>>taxpayer will be burdened with interest costs in the years to come - >>>potentially higher than the cost of running some Government
departments. It is also worth remembering that none of that borrowing >>>was used to increase the capacity of our Health system - nothing spent
on employing more nurses and doctors - no additional spending to
increase Health-related assets. So all that spending has gone now and >>>there is nothing to show for it.
There was a large amount spent on health related issues - as those in
New Zealand during the height of the Covid pandemic are aware.
Read again what I said. I was referring to increased capacity, not
increased Health costs. There was not and is not any plan to increase
the capacity capabilities of any aspect of medical healthcare that is >typically impacted by pandemics.
The 'large amount spent' that you refer to are the non-repeating costs
of implementing vaccination facilities (now largely finished with
ongoing vaccination within the capacity of primary healthcare
providers).
And yesStarted relatively recently and a normal recruitment activity to try
money was spent on recruiting new nurses and doctors, but that was >>obviously curtailed during the pandemic.
and replace lost staff. No capacity increase at all.
While our national debt is low compared to some other countries, there >>>are reasons why it was as low as it was pre-pandemic. Those reasons
are even more evident with the current rising interest rates.
Which is why Labour are setting out how proposed spending in the
future will be paid for . . .
On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 14:36:52 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:
On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 13:20:25 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>wrote:
On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 09:35:09 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> >>>wrote:
On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 08:23:35 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>wrote:
But we are a bit ahead of the world - our government took responsible >>>>>actions earlier than many other countries, both regarding avoiding >>>>>Covid deaths, and also on the economic front by avoiding an >>>>>unsustainable level of public debt.<snipped>
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/aug/17/is-the-era-of-zero-interest-rates-gone-for-good
I have snipped the article text as it is readily available from the >>>>link provided.
Our national debt has increased substantially primarily because of >>>>pandemic mitigation measures. As the article confirms interest rates >>>>are nowhere near as low as they were in pre-pandemic times so the >>>>taxpayer will be burdened with interest costs in the years to come - >>>>potentially higher than the cost of running some Government >>>>departments. It is also worth remembering that none of that borrowing >>>>was used to increase the capacity of our Health system - nothing spent >>>>on employing more nurses and doctors - no additional spending to >>>>increase Health-related assets. So all that spending has gone now and >>>>there is nothing to show for it.
There was a large amount spent on health related issues - as those in
New Zealand during the height of the Covid pandemic are aware.
Read again what I said. I was referring to increased capacity, not >>increased Health costs. There was not and is not any plan to increase
the capacity capabilities of any aspect of medical healthcare that is >>typically impacted by pandemics.
The 'large amount spent' that you refer to are the non-repeating costs
of implementing vaccination facilities (now largely finished with
ongoing vaccination within the capacity of primary healthcare
providers).
And yesStarted relatively recently and a normal recruitment activity to try
money was spent on recruiting new nurses and doctors, but that was >>>obviously curtailed during the pandemic.
and replace lost staff. No capacity increase at all.
While our national debt is low compared to some other countries, there >>>>are reasons why it was as low as it was pre-pandemic. Those reasons >>>>are even more evident with the current rising interest rates.
Which is why Labour are setting out how proposed spending in the
future will be paid for . . .
There has also been considerable spending on Dunedin Hospital (to
prevent the hospital getting smaller as parts became unusable), and
there is also now a commitment to major spending in Nelson for similar >reasons; work has also had to be done in other hospitals that were not
up to earthquake standards; and the budget for pharmac has also been >considerably increased. Staffing may also be easier with increases to
pay for nurses . . .
On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 15:40:21 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 14:36:52 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> >>wrote:
On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 13:20:25 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>wrote:
On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 09:35:09 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> >>>>wrote:
On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 08:23:35 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>>wrote:
But we are a bit ahead of the world - our government took responsible >>>>>>actions earlier than many other countries, both regarding avoiding >>>>>>Covid deaths, and also on the economic front by avoiding an >>>>>>unsustainable level of public debt.<snipped>
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/aug/17/is-the-era-of-zero-interest-rates-gone-for-good
I have snipped the article text as it is readily available from the >>>>>link provided.
Our national debt has increased substantially primarily because of >>>>>pandemic mitigation measures. As the article confirms interest rates >>>>>are nowhere near as low as they were in pre-pandemic times so the >>>>>taxpayer will be burdened with interest costs in the years to come - >>>>>potentially higher than the cost of running some Government >>>>>departments. It is also worth remembering that none of that borrowing >>>>>was used to increase the capacity of our Health system - nothing spent >>>>>on employing more nurses and doctors - no additional spending to >>>>>increase Health-related assets. So all that spending has gone now and >>>>>there is nothing to show for it.
There was a large amount spent on health related issues - as those in >>>>New Zealand during the height of the Covid pandemic are aware.
Read again what I said. I was referring to increased capacity, not >>>increased Health costs. There was not and is not any plan to increase >>>the capacity capabilities of any aspect of medical healthcare that is >>>typically impacted by pandemics.
The 'large amount spent' that you refer to are the non-repeating costs
of implementing vaccination facilities (now largely finished with
ongoing vaccination within the capacity of primary healthcare
providers).
And yesStarted relatively recently and a normal recruitment activity to try
money was spent on recruiting new nurses and doctors, but that was >>>>obviously curtailed during the pandemic.
and replace lost staff. No capacity increase at all.
While our national debt is low compared to some other countries, there >>>>>are reasons why it was as low as it was pre-pandemic. Those reasons >>>>>are even more evident with the current rising interest rates.
Which is why Labour are setting out how proposed spending in the
future will be paid for . . .
There has also been considerable spending on Dunedin Hospital (to
prevent the hospital getting smaller as parts became unusable), and
there is also now a commitment to major spending in Nelson for similar >>reasons; work has also had to be done in other hospitals that were not
up to earthquake standards; and the budget for pharmac has also been >>considerably increased. Staffing may also be easier with increases to
pay for nurses . . .
All 'business as usual' - maintaining capability - not the significant >capacity improvements that could legitimately be funded by increased >Government debt.
On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 16:03:20 +1200, Crash <nog...@dontbother.invalid>Instead of repeating Labour's feral propaganda show some proof Rich! As to the pot holes. some useless Labour MP blamed them on the cyclone. Funny how people were complaining about them long before the cyclone and why didn't Labour start fixing the pot
wrote:
On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 15:40:21 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 14:36:52 +1200, Crash <nog...@dontbother.invalid> >>wrote:
On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 13:20:25 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich...@hotmail.com> >>>wrote:
On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 09:35:09 +1200, Crash <nog...@dontbother.invalid> >>>>wrote:
On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 08:23:35 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich...@hotmail.com> >>>>>wrote:
But we are a bit ahead of the world - our government took responsible >>>>>>actions earlier than many other countries, both regarding avoiding >>>>>>Covid deaths, and also on the economic front by avoiding an >>>>>>unsustainable level of public debt.<snipped>
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/aug/17/is-the-era-of-zero-interest-rates-gone-for-good
I have snipped the article text as it is readily available from the >>>>>link provided.
Our national debt has increased substantially primarily because of >>>>>pandemic mitigation measures. As the article confirms interest rates >>>>>are nowhere near as low as they were in pre-pandemic times so the >>>>>taxpayer will be burdened with interest costs in the years to come - >>>>>potentially higher than the cost of running some Government >>>>>departments. It is also worth remembering that none of that borrowing >>>>>was used to increase the capacity of our Health system - nothing spent >>>>>on employing more nurses and doctors - no additional spending to >>>>>increase Health-related assets. So all that spending has gone now and >>>>>there is nothing to show for it.
There was a large amount spent on health related issues - as those in >>>>New Zealand during the height of the Covid pandemic are aware.
Read again what I said. I was referring to increased capacity, not >>>increased Health costs. There was not and is not any plan to increase >>>the capacity capabilities of any aspect of medical healthcare that is >>>typically impacted by pandemics.
The 'large amount spent' that you refer to are the non-repeating costs >>>of implementing vaccination facilities (now largely finished with >>>ongoing vaccination within the capacity of primary healthcare >>>providers).
And yesStarted relatively recently and a normal recruitment activity to try >>>and replace lost staff. No capacity increase at all.
money was spent on recruiting new nurses and doctors, but that was >>>>obviously curtailed during the pandemic.
While our national debt is low compared to some other countries, there >>>>>are reasons why it was as low as it was pre-pandemic. Those reasons >>>>>are even more evident with the current rising interest rates.
Which is why Labour are setting out how proposed spending in the >>>>future will be paid for . . .
There has also been considerable spending on Dunedin Hospital (to >>prevent the hospital getting smaller as parts became unusable), and >>there is also now a commitment to major spending in Nelson for similar >>reasons; work has also had to be done in other hospitals that were not >>up to earthquake standards; and the budget for pharmac has also been >>considerably increased. Staffing may also be easier with increases to >>pay for nurses . . .
All 'business as usual' - maintaining capability - not the significant >capacity improvements that could legitimately be funded by increased >Government debt.It was a radical change from the 9 years of the Key/English
governments - when the only maintenance on hospitals was essential
work - and not even then. The work being done to replace decayed and
no longer suitable hospital buildings and equipment did not start
until Labour were in Government. There was more capital investment in private hospitals than in public under the National-led governments.
That was the same with roads - 9 years of half the essential
maintenance spending under National (they spent it on major new roads)
led to pot-holes galore. The wage settlement was also a catch-up
after years of National cut-backs by not meeting inflation.
On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 14:36:52 +1200, Crash <nog...@dontbother.invalid>The Dunedin hospital became smaller because Labour realised they'd stuffed up another costing and couldn't afford yet another of their worthless promises Rich! Staffing for nurses will be a struggle for as long as we have your utterly feral and useless
wrote:
On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 13:20:25 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 09:35:09 +1200, Crash <nog...@dontbother.invalid> >>wrote:
On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 08:23:35 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich...@hotmail.com> >>>wrote:
But we are a bit ahead of the world - our government took responsible >>>>actions earlier than many other countries, both regarding avoiding >>>>Covid deaths, and also on the economic front by avoiding an >>>>unsustainable level of public debt.<snipped>
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/aug/17/is-the-era-of-zero-interest-rates-gone-for-good
I have snipped the article text as it is readily available from the >>>link provided.
Our national debt has increased substantially primarily because of >>>pandemic mitigation measures. As the article confirms interest rates >>>are nowhere near as low as they were in pre-pandemic times so the >>>taxpayer will be burdened with interest costs in the years to come - >>>potentially higher than the cost of running some Government >>>departments. It is also worth remembering that none of that borrowing >>>was used to increase the capacity of our Health system - nothing spent >>>on employing more nurses and doctors - no additional spending to >>>increase Health-related assets. So all that spending has gone now and >>>there is nothing to show for it.
There was a large amount spent on health related issues - as those in >>New Zealand during the height of the Covid pandemic are aware.
Read again what I said. I was referring to increased capacity, not >increased Health costs. There was not and is not any plan to increase
the capacity capabilities of any aspect of medical healthcare that is >typically impacted by pandemics.
The 'large amount spent' that you refer to are the non-repeating costs
of implementing vaccination facilities (now largely finished with
ongoing vaccination within the capacity of primary healthcare
providers).
And yesStarted relatively recently and a normal recruitment activity to try
money was spent on recruiting new nurses and doctors, but that was >>obviously curtailed during the pandemic.
and replace lost staff. No capacity increase at all.
There has also been considerable spending on Dunedin Hospital (toWhile our national debt is low compared to some other countries, there >>>are reasons why it was as low as it was pre-pandemic. Those reasons >>>are even more evident with the current rising interest rates.
Which is why Labour are setting out how proposed spending in the
future will be paid for . . .
prevent the hospital getting smaller as parts became unusable), and
there is also now a commitment to major spending in Nelson for similar reasons; work has also had to be done in other hospitals that were not
up to earthquake standards; and the budget for pharmac has also been considerably increased. Staffing may also be easier with increases to
pay for nurses . . .
On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 3:46:02?PM UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:
On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 14:36:52 +1200, Crash <nog...@dontbother.invalid>The Dunedin hospital became smaller because Labour realised they'd stuffed up another costing and couldn't afford yet another of their worthless promises Rich!
wrote:
On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 13:20:25 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich...@hotmail.com>There has also been considerable spending on Dunedin Hospital (to
wrote:
On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 09:35:09 +1200, Crash <nog...@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:
On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 08:23:35 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
But we are a bit ahead of the world - our government took responsible<snipped>
actions earlier than many other countries, both regarding avoiding
Covid deaths, and also on the economic front by avoiding an
unsustainable level of public debt.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/aug/17/is-the-era-of-zero-interest-rates-gone-for-good
I have snipped the article text as it is readily available from the
link provided.
Our national debt has increased substantially primarily because of
pandemic mitigation measures. As the article confirms interest rates
are nowhere near as low as they were in pre-pandemic times so the
taxpayer will be burdened with interest costs in the years to come -
potentially higher than the cost of running some Government
departments. It is also worth remembering that none of that borrowing
was used to increase the capacity of our Health system - nothing spent
on employing more nurses and doctors - no additional spending to
increase Health-related assets. So all that spending has gone now and
there is nothing to show for it.
There was a large amount spent on health related issues - as those in
New Zealand during the height of the Covid pandemic are aware.
Read again what I said. I was referring to increased capacity, not
increased Health costs. There was not and is not any plan to increase
the capacity capabilities of any aspect of medical healthcare that is
typically impacted by pandemics.
The 'large amount spent' that you refer to are the non-repeating costs
of implementing vaccination facilities (now largely finished with
ongoing vaccination within the capacity of primary healthcare
providers).
And yesStarted relatively recently and a normal recruitment activity to try
money was spent on recruiting new nurses and doctors, but that was
obviously curtailed during the pandemic.
and replace lost staff. No capacity increase at all.
While our national debt is low compared to some other countries, there
are reasons why it was as low as it was pre-pandemic. Those reasons
are even more evident with the current rising interest rates.
Which is why Labour are setting out how proposed spending in the
future will be paid for . . .
prevent the hospital getting smaller as parts became unusable), and
there is also now a commitment to major spending in Nelson for similar
reasons; work has also had to be done in other hospitals that were not
up to earthquake standards; and the budget for pharmac has also been
considerably increased. Staffing may also be easier with increases to
pay for nurses . . .
Staffing for nurses will be a struggle for as long as we have your utterly feral and useless government in power!
On Thu, 17 Aug 2023 22:45:51 -0700 (PDT), John BowesA complete lie. The health system has been neglected by Labour just as much as National over the years.
<bowesjohn02@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 3:46:02?PM UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:
On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 14:36:52 +1200, Crash <nog...@dontbother.invalid>The Dunedin hospital became smaller because Labour realised they'd stuffed up >>another costing and couldn't afford yet another of their worthless promises >>Rich!
wrote:
On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 13:20:25 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich...@hotmail.com>There has also been considerable spending on Dunedin Hospital (to
wrote:
On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 09:35:09 +1200, Crash <nog...@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:
On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 08:23:35 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
But we are a bit ahead of the world - our government took responsible >>> >>>>actions earlier than many other countries, both regarding avoiding
Covid deaths, and also on the economic front by avoiding an
unsustainable level of public debt.
<snipped>https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/aug/17/is-the-era-of-zero-interest-rates-gone-for-good
I have snipped the article text as it is readily available from the
link provided.
Our national debt has increased substantially primarily because of
pandemic mitigation measures. As the article confirms interest rates
are nowhere near as low as they were in pre-pandemic times so the
taxpayer will be burdened with interest costs in the years to come -
potentially higher than the cost of running some Government
departments. It is also worth remembering that none of that borrowing >>> >>>was used to increase the capacity of our Health system - nothing spent >>> >>>on employing more nurses and doctors - no additional spending to
increase Health-related assets. So all that spending has gone now and >>> >>>there is nothing to show for it.
There was a large amount spent on health related issues - as those in
New Zealand during the height of the Covid pandemic are aware.
Read again what I said. I was referring to increased capacity, not
increased Health costs. There was not and is not any plan to increase
the capacity capabilities of any aspect of medical healthcare that is
typically impacted by pandemics.
The 'large amount spent' that you refer to are the non-repeating costs
of implementing vaccination facilities (now largely finished with
ongoing vaccination within the capacity of primary healthcare
providers).
And yesStarted relatively recently and a normal recruitment activity to try
money was spent on recruiting new nurses and doctors, but that was
obviously curtailed during the pandemic.
and replace lost staff. No capacity increase at all.
While our national debt is low compared to some other countries, there >>> >>>are reasons why it was as low as it was pre-pandemic. Those reasons
are even more evident with the current rising interest rates.
Which is why Labour are setting out how proposed spending in the
future will be paid for . . .
prevent the hospital getting smaller as parts became unusable), and
there is also now a commitment to major spending in Nelson for similar
reasons; work has also had to be done in other hospitals that were not
up to earthquake standards; and the budget for pharmac has also been
considerably increased. Staffing may also be easier with increases to
pay for nurses . . .
Dunedin Hospital had been made smaller by National
letting wards and other parts of the hospital decay so much that they
could not be used - they wanted to make it larger, but that became
difficult as Covid hit - due to changes in pricing and materials
availability - and also it becoming clear that other parts of the
health system that had been neglected needing help. We now have Nelson >hospital with a major upgrade as well'; there will be other that need
to catch up after National's neglect.
Staffing for nurses will be a struggle for as long as we have your utterly >>feral and useless government in power!
Why do you say that, John? Would National have paid them more than
14.5%?
On Thu, 17 Aug 2023 22:45:51 -0700 (PDT), John Bowes
<bowes...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 3:46:02?PM UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:Dunedin Hospital had been made smaller by National
On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 14:36:52 +1200, Crash <nog...@dontbother.invalid>The Dunedin hospital became smaller because Labour realised they'd stuffed up another costing and couldn't afford yet another of their worthless promises Rich!
wrote:
On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 13:20:25 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich...@hotmail.com>There has also been considerable spending on Dunedin Hospital (to
wrote:
On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 09:35:09 +1200, Crash <nog...@dontbother.invalid> >> >>wrote:
On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 08:23:35 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
But we are a bit ahead of the world - our government took responsible >> >>>>actions earlier than many other countries, both regarding avoiding<snipped>
Covid deaths, and also on the economic front by avoiding an
unsustainable level of public debt.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/aug/17/is-the-era-of-zero-interest-rates-gone-for-good
I have snipped the article text as it is readily available from the
link provided.
Our national debt has increased substantially primarily because of
pandemic mitigation measures. As the article confirms interest rates >> >>>are nowhere near as low as they were in pre-pandemic times so the
taxpayer will be burdened with interest costs in the years to come - >> >>>potentially higher than the cost of running some Government
departments. It is also worth remembering that none of that borrowing >> >>>was used to increase the capacity of our Health system - nothing spent >> >>>on employing more nurses and doctors - no additional spending to
increase Health-related assets. So all that spending has gone now and >> >>>there is nothing to show for it.
There was a large amount spent on health related issues - as those in >> >>New Zealand during the height of the Covid pandemic are aware.
Read again what I said. I was referring to increased capacity, not
increased Health costs. There was not and is not any plan to increase
the capacity capabilities of any aspect of medical healthcare that is
typically impacted by pandemics.
The 'large amount spent' that you refer to are the non-repeating costs >> >of implementing vaccination facilities (now largely finished with
ongoing vaccination within the capacity of primary healthcare
providers).
And yesStarted relatively recently and a normal recruitment activity to try
money was spent on recruiting new nurses and doctors, but that was
obviously curtailed during the pandemic.
and replace lost staff. No capacity increase at all.
While our national debt is low compared to some other countries, there >> >>>are reasons why it was as low as it was pre-pandemic. Those reasons
are even more evident with the current rising interest rates.
Which is why Labour are setting out how proposed spending in the
future will be paid for . . .
prevent the hospital getting smaller as parts became unusable), and
there is also now a commitment to major spending in Nelson for similar
reasons; work has also had to be done in other hospitals that were not
up to earthquake standards; and the budget for pharmac has also been
considerably increased. Staffing may also be easier with increases to
pay for nurses . . .
letting wards and other parts of the hospital decay so much that they
could not be used - they wanted to make it larger, but that became
difficult as Covid hit - due to changes in pricing and materials availability - and also it becoming clear that other parts of the
health system that had been neglected needing help. We now have Nelson hospital with a major upgrade as well'; there will be other that need
to catch up after National's neglect.
National certainly would have handled it far better and sooner than your inept Labour shambles Rich!Staffing for nurses will be a struggle for as long as we have your utterly feral and useless government in power!Why do you say that, John? Would National have paid them more than
14.5%?
Rich80105 <Rich...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 17 Aug 2023 22:45:51 -0700 (PDT), John Bowes
<bowes...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 3:46:02?PM UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:
On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 14:36:52 +1200, Crash <nog...@dontbother.invalid> >>> wrote:The Dunedin hospital became smaller because Labour realised they'd stuffed up
On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 13:20:25 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich...@hotmail.com>There has also been considerable spending on Dunedin Hospital (to
wrote:
On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 09:35:09 +1200, Crash <nog...@dontbother.invalid> >>> >>wrote:
On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 08:23:35 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich...@hotmail.com> >>> >>>wrote:
But we are a bit ahead of the world - our government took responsible
actions earlier than many other countries, both regarding avoiding >>> >>>>Covid deaths, and also on the economic front by avoiding an
unsustainable level of public debt.
<snipped>https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/aug/17/is-the-era-of-zero-interest-rates-gone-for-good
I have snipped the article text as it is readily available from the >>> >>>link provided.
Our national debt has increased substantially primarily because of >>> >>>pandemic mitigation measures. As the article confirms interest rates >>> >>>are nowhere near as low as they were in pre-pandemic times so the
taxpayer will be burdened with interest costs in the years to come - >>> >>>potentially higher than the cost of running some Government
departments. It is also worth remembering that none of that borrowing >>> >>>was used to increase the capacity of our Health system - nothing spent
on employing more nurses and doctors - no additional spending to
increase Health-related assets. So all that spending has gone now and >>> >>>there is nothing to show for it.
There was a large amount spent on health related issues - as those in >>> >>New Zealand during the height of the Covid pandemic are aware.
Read again what I said. I was referring to increased capacity, not
increased Health costs. There was not and is not any plan to increase >>> >the capacity capabilities of any aspect of medical healthcare that is >>> >typically impacted by pandemics.
The 'large amount spent' that you refer to are the non-repeating costs >>> >of implementing vaccination facilities (now largely finished with
ongoing vaccination within the capacity of primary healthcare
providers).
And yesStarted relatively recently and a normal recruitment activity to try >>> >and replace lost staff. No capacity increase at all.
money was spent on recruiting new nurses and doctors, but that was
obviously curtailed during the pandemic.
While our national debt is low compared to some other countries, there
are reasons why it was as low as it was pre-pandemic. Those reasons >>> >>>are even more evident with the current rising interest rates.
Which is why Labour are setting out how proposed spending in the
future will be paid for . . .
prevent the hospital getting smaller as parts became unusable), and
there is also now a commitment to major spending in Nelson for similar >>> reasons; work has also had to be done in other hospitals that were not >>> up to earthquake standards; and the budget for pharmac has also been
considerably increased. Staffing may also be easier with increases to >>> pay for nurses . . .
another costing and couldn't afford yet another of their worthless promises
Rich!
Dunedin Hospital had been made smaller by NationalA complete lie. The health system has been neglected by Labour just as much as
letting wards and other parts of the hospital decay so much that they >could not be used - they wanted to make it larger, but that became >difficult as Covid hit - due to changes in pricing and materials >availability - and also it becoming clear that other parts of the
health system that had been neglected needing help. We now have Nelson >hospital with a major upgrade as well'; there will be other that need
to catch up after National's neglect.
National over the years.
Why do you persist with such lies?
Staffing for nurses will be a struggle for as long as we have your utterly >>feral and useless government in power!
Why do you say that, John? Would National have paid them more than
14.5%?
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 297 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 107:40:09 |
| Calls: | 6,662 |
| Calls today: | 4 |
| Files: | 12,209 |
| Messages: | 5,335,499 |