New Zealand can't blame the Christchurch earthquake for its poor performance, or even the lack of minerals. Singapore and Hong Kong have far fewer natural advantages but do considerably better than either NZ or Australia.

The difference is due to the tax and regulatory environment. Low taxes and a non-intrusive government make a huge difference. NZ has high taxes and a highly intrusive nanny state.

Australia and NZ fisrt embarked on programs of economic reform when their terms of trade were at their worst. The Kiwis seemed to tire of the change process quicker than us, though our current government, which seems almost proud of its economic irrationalism, has been more enthusiastic in winding back reforms than its Kiwi equivalents were. The difference is that Australia has been bailed out by its terms of trade boom, driven primarily by base metal and energy prices. NZ has not received the same boost, being more dependent on 'soft commodity' exports.

Democratic governments are much better at responding to crises, such as Australia's 'bannana republic' moment, than they are at reversing long processes of decline. NZ's relative stagnation and weakness is not a new phenomenon, and also pre-dates the latest resource boom of the 'lucky country'. Ultimately, it is failed government policies driving the Kiwis' economic malaise, not a lack of coal or iron ore. The fact that everyone has become used to emigration as a solution to the problem suggests an alarming lack of political will to change things on the other side of the Tasman.

DavidL

"Singapore and Hong Kong have far fewer natural advantages"

Crap. They are both sitting in the middle of the trade routes of Asia while poor old New Zealand is as far away as any other place on earth to anything. The only thing they are handy to is the "Lotus eaters" from the pacific islands who once they become New Zealand citizens come over to Oz.

David

The election results confirm that elections are almost always decided by the one third of people who don't understand either politics, [lots and lots of non core promises,] The actual issues, or basic high school economics! I mean, as lovely as it might be, you can't live on scenery; or, a few successful films!
Even as Mr (piggy) Muldoon made his only ever really humorous comment, he was one of those less intellectual Kiwis, who decided to remain. Another basket case economy, Ireland, is famous for exporting it's very best minds; and, like most service economies, it remains its only real success?
The ongoing earthquakes remain a problem, with what few tourists still able to actually afford to travel, staying away in droves.
Tectonic shifts don't usually create such enduring activity; and, could be a sign that the old Banks Peninsula Volcanic activity; is reawakening!
I certainly wouldn't want to live there!
The Irish found an answer and created a economic miracle; by investing in their own people and their better ideas; and, became the Celtic tiger.
Then killed it; by allowing debt laden foreign speculators, unfettered access into their already overheating housing market!
The Kiwis could succeed; by following the early Celtic tiger example, but not the last part.
Nor should they allow a govt marching to the mindless drum of already thoroughly disgraced trickle down economic rationalism; to privatize their few remaining income earning assets!
The money these far too few entities earn for consolidated revenue, will eventually have to be largely replaced; and, where is it going to come from?
The non existent tourists or the economic stagnation the current govt seems to be so desperately trying to create; or, those able to see the writing on the wall and fleeing from it?

Can you blame them? Their country is full of damn Kiwis. I'd emigrate too.

The kiwis made the mistake years ago trying to make it into a cheap manufacturing destination. Now their people want proper wages, so they come here. It's about time AU and NZ became one. Another state of AU.