Posted on 05/12/2006 5:46:52 PM PDT by blam
New Zealand warned over exodus to Australia
By Paul Chapman in Wellington
(Filed: 13/05/2006)
New Zealand risks becoming a mere "shell country" if it continues to lose people to Australia at the current rate, according to Jim Bolger, the former prime minister.
Mr Bolger, who governed from 1990 to 1997, said in a speech to his centre-Right National Party that so many "good people" were migrating that New Zealand faced the "hard question" of whether it should become part of Australia as a "conscious decision" or simply be "absorbed by osmosis".
Australia's founding constitution, dating from 1901, gave New Zealand the right to become a part of its larger neighbour if it chose to do so. The clause has never been revoked.
Mr Bolger's warning comes only days after official statistics showed that the westward exodus across the Tasman Sea reached a net 20,713 in the year to March, or almost 400 a week.
For a country with a population of little more than four million, the figure represents a significant loss, and the rate has doubled in the past two years.
This week's announcement of personal tax cuts in Australia's budget has only heightened fears that the numbers will continue at similar levels, since it is acknowledged that personal wealth is a prime consideration among potential migrants.
New Zealand's opposition blames the Labour Party's comparatively high tax regime for increased emigration.
Economists estimate that real incomes in Australia are more than 30 per cent higher than in New Zealand, and a "common market" type arrangement allows free movement of labour between the two countries.
New Zealand has a long history of supplying Australia with population. In contrast, the trickle of Australians to New Zealand is almost negligible.
New Zealand's income per head is lower than in seven of the eight Australian states and territories, the exception being Tasmania.
Other reasons cited by migrants are Australia's sunnier weather, the lure of bigger cities, and an easy-going lifestyle into which New Zealanders can readily assimilate.
Maoris, who tend to be low paid, are fleeing their ancestral homeland at an even greater rate than New Zealanders of European blood.
One recent study revealed that, if present trends continue, within a few decades more than one third of all Maoris will live in Australia.
Hmmmmmm.
John Howard or Helen Clark. Decisions, decisions...
Is this anything really new? Hasn't this gone on for a long time depending on tbe economic situation between the two countries?
If you divided this country into liberal and conservative halves, you would have to build a wall to keep them (liberals) out after it turned into a hell in about two years. I suspect the same kind of issue contributes to the exodus from New Zealand.
Socialism fails every time that it is tried, for the ruled, those that seek power it harnesses many useful idiots.
TT
So they are literally, "taxing them out of existence".
Why would anyone want to leave the most beautiful country on earth.
Canada could become part of the United States.
To eat maybe?
Let them eat sheep.
Australia could always give Russell Crowe back to the Kimis.
True for any country.
Aside from Helen Clark, it might be the earthquakes.
And Queensland is the more conservative of areas. Many support John Howard.
Kinda sounds like Mexico
We whould erect a sign at the border.
"Would the last person leaving Mexico, please turn out all the lights."
Except in spanish of course.
Taxes.
And US part of Mexico.
In fact, even in good economic times New Zealand still had/has also lost populations to Australia. Probably akin to Canadians going to the US for work and immigration. One additional factor is that once you are a New Zealand citizen the minute you step out of the plane in Sydney you can go rush in to apply for any jobs courtesy to the Common Labour Market polocy. (Although you can't share Australia's social welfare goodies - you need to buy health insurance etc).
The only thing that keeps expat New Zealanders in Australia at 455,000 rather than 2.5 million is it takes 3 hours to fly to Australia's East Coast from NZ.
"And US part of Mexico."
Come on, to conquer a country you need three factors:
1) Superior manpower i.e. numerical supremacy in populations;
2) Superior technologies; and
3) A determined population.
You may say that Mexico has number 3. Well, there are plenty in both Blue and Red states America that are equally determined to stop this to happen. So it is a tie.
Number 1 is obvioualy false. Mexico has only 1/3 of the US's population, and even if you assume "all Mexico-descent Americans are traitors" this still leaves you 40% of the US's population. The US wins hands down.
And number 2? You can forgive number 1 if you have very superior technologies that are used for wars, as the British famously did in 18th/19th century India. Now please wake me up on the day when UNAM (Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México) announces a revolutionary nanotechnology-based handheld size supercomputer replacements. The US once again wins hands down on this point.
,,, Michael Cullen is soon to read his 2006 budget. All he knows how to do is come up with new taxes while present ones are misappropriated. Auckland is faced with a roading crisis and the road user charges tax is spent on welfare. Aussie's looking great!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.