@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:

@Hooroo said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:

@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:

@Hooroo said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:

@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:

@voodoo said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:

@Godder would personally make me very happy too!!!

How would that happen? The govt has put us (at great cost) on the road to total elimination of the virus, unless Aus can do the same then we cannot let them i without 14 day quarantine. We have been told repeatedly the dangers of exponential growth, now the govt is going to pay a price for the line of scare mongering.
By taking this path when nobody else has, then we have no option but to remain isolated as the rest of the world forms its own networks.

I am curious as to your thoughts on how the New Zealand economy is going to be different given everything that is happening in the world despite our lockdown. Do you think the New Zealand economy would be significantly different had we done it under your thought process?

Yes.

Significantly? I don’t. Somewhat? Yes.

Cool you don't think having all businesses open and tourist ventures helped would significantly change the economy. Ok

Tourism was dead in the water even if we did nothing - nobody is coming here for a holiday while Coronavirus is rampant, because everywhere else is doing distancing and lockdowns and quarantines. Who would come here for a holiday when they have to pay 2-3 times as much for a seat to have distance on the plane because it's required by their home country anyway, and then sit in quarantine for 2 weeks on arrival back home? Flights and airlines have stopped operating. Airlines are insolvent and collapsing all around the world.

Overseas trips are among the first luxuries to be cut by people who have lost jobs or have uncertainty about their future prospects and there's a whole lot of that now.

Domestic tourism is not happening in any sort of volume either, even without a lockdown - too much fear and uncertainty.

12% of the economy, 13% of our jobs, mostly gone overnight (we'll keep some for domestic tourism). Required isolation and border controls sped it up a bit, but even without those, it was going to be a quick end.

Related but separate from tourism, domestic business travel (and associated accommodation/restaurants) is taking a huge dive - people discovered online meetings long before we reached level 4 (my employer worked that out before levels were instituted). It could be years before that level of travel is back, if ever. Likewise, if working from home becomes a lot more prevalent, how much does leasing of commercial office space reduce over time?

This is all relatively direct spending. What about indirect spending? Conservatively, we have already wiped 10% off GDP and increased unemployment to 10% (from 4%), and probably increased underutilisation to 15% (from 10%). GDP is simply a measure of spending in the economy, and if $31 billion didn't get earned or spent, that's a lot of money not available to buy a coffee with, to go out for dinner, to buy clothing, get a haircut (people still get haircuts, but fewer in a year). It's not going to be essential spending that gets cut, it's the discretionary spending.

If we just opted for social distancing and quarantining/isolation for border arrivals instead of lockdown, how many small businesses go to the wall in a year anyway because their income is down 20-30% and falling with no way to make it viable because their bank and landlord won't assist them? How many business owners increase their hours to 70-80 per week in an unsustainable and ultimately futile attempt to make it work? How many broken marriages, mental breakdowns, suicides do we get in that pathway? Is it more or less than the current pathway? Do we get worse or better outcomes from going tough now and soft later, or from going softer now but tougher for longer?

The premise of the current plan is that the total pain will be less if we get it done quickly than if we drag it out, especially because government can provide a lot more support in a short space of time than over a longer time frame.

We should see the next part of the government's financial support package this week - our current support is a good start, but hopefully this week provides a lot more support for small businesses especially as they need it.

Side note - a lot of owners of small businesses are in personal financial trouble because of personal guarantees. One of the reasons for companies as a legal entity was limited liability, but personal guarantees have made that a lot less of a reality. I would like to see personal guarantees banned to make limited liability companies actually limited liability, or if that isn't done, at least make them void if the failure was due to the pandemic (similar to the safe harbour announced for trading while insolvent if the insolvency is principally due to the pandemic). If someone added mortgages on residential property to fund business, I wouldn't be upset about that either...

The Silver Fern

Godder