Ireland from a New Zealand perspective.

Battleneter

Hi guys

I am a kiwi living in NZ. I have been reading this forum on and off over 6 months or so. I have taken a interest in a few countries economies Ireland being one of them for a couple of reasons. First NZ and Ireland population are very similar and from about 5-10 years ago Ireland made was used as a poster child here for what NZ should be doing (not so much now :P). And yet so many Irish moved here which always seemed a little odd.

Just a FYI NZ's economy is sluggish with about 7.3% unemployment (now stable I think) and a public deficit of around 7.5% GDP supposedly back in the black in around 4 years, luckily NZ historical debt has been modest.

I appreciate GDP is a poor indicator of true living standards due to largely wealth distribution. What I am REALLY trying to understand is how Ireland's left NZ and other countries for dead around 10 years ago with improving its GDP?, how did Ireland have years of 9% growth?

ei.sdraob

Battleneter wrote: »

how did Ireland have years of 9% growth?

everything from 2003 on was a lie

1huge1

Export led economy of the 1990's. It was brillaint but it is long gone.

zootroid

A few factors have been discussed at length for our "success", our education system (which I don't think is of any great standard), and our low corporation tax rate (which was a huge help, but is now being replicated). But there are other reasons which I often think are neglected.

I think geographical factors certainly played a part, Ireland is much closer to its neighbours than New Zealand is, so exporting our goods to our customers in Europe would be much cheaper. Also, there is only a 5 hour time difference between Ireland and the US, and we are English speaking, so any American companies looking to set up in Europe could decide between us and the UK. Our low corporation tax rate probably swung it in our favour there. New Zealand is 3-4 hours flight away from Australia, and their population is only 20m, so Ireland has a much bigger market on its doorstep.

Also, when it comes to investment, while NZ and Ireland have similar populations, NZ is 4 times bigger than Ireland, so it would cost less to build infrastructure here. Eg, to drive from Dublin to Cork would only take about 3 hours, whereas Auckland to Wellington would take much longer, so the cost of building a motorway in between would be much less (Dublin to Cork that is). And let's not forget that being part of the EU has opened up free trade with 15-27 countries as the EU expanded, and we were also recipients of generous EU structural funds to help us with our infrastructure.

clearz

Battleneter wrote: »

What I am REALLY trying to understand is how Ireland's left NZ and other countries for dead around 10 years ago with improving its GDP?, how did Ireland have years of 9% growth?

I think if there was an easy answer to that an you knew the formula you would be a rich man.
I say it's because Ireland had such a crap economy up until the 90's it was easier for us to get those huge growth figures because of all the catching up we had to do. Just as China is seeing huge growth now because it also is catching up (Rise of the middle class)

kuntboy

That skanger Bortie Ahorn sold our futures down the river so he could get re-elected.

Scofflaw

1huge1 wrote: »

Export led economy of the 1990's. It was brillaint but it is long gone.

To some extent. In the Nineties we had a low cost base, a well-educated and under-employed youthful population, a favourable tax and political/regulatory regime for FDI, extremely active FDI-hunting agencies and politicians, a strong ex-pat network, and very little to lose. We had increasing access to the markets of Europe, as good or better than our traditional access to UK markets, and strong lobby groups in the corridors of Brussels. We had clever back to work schemes designed to make transition to the workforce easy, low barriers to entry for startups, pro-business banks, cheap housing and office stock, and a huge market right on our doorstep - and for the first time our lack of a strong industrial sector was an advantage, because we had no need to retrain and pacify a load of rust-belt workers. While we had a tradition of union participation, so much of the potential workforce had survived on emigration or unemployment benefit that it wasn't a universal feature. If it was work, we wanted it - we were quite genuinely lean, mean, and bloody grateful.

All that, and of course our initial base was so low that we benefited from the usual "new economy" GDP boost - one more motorway in the UK makes little difference, but here it did, and the investment is pretty much the same.

Many of those advantages were temporary - anyone can lower their corporation tax rate, and cost bases inevitably rise with prosperity. We were always going to run out of people to do the work, with the inevitable effects on wages, but the decision to waive the limitation on accession state access allowed us to suck in a huge number of accession state nationals. Our own nationals got used to good jobs straight out of college, or skipped college altogether.

Unfortunately, the political necessity to keep the party going even while our advantages eroded involved slowly dismantling the regulatory framework so that the economy could run hotter - no limits or dampers were to be put on growth, but the mismatch between the rising costs of living, the spiralling costs of housing, and the slow real growth of wages meant an increasing reliance on easy credit to fill the gap.

The government, meanwhile, kept its foot on the gas with a series of pro-cyclical budgets. At no point do they seem to have realised the extent of their encouragement of the growing property/development-focused imbalance in the economy, which eventually became a huge cancer that sucked in nearly all available investment and workforce capacity, ate huge proportions of people's income, spurred the banks to a competitive spiral of increasingly dubious lending, and allowed the governing party to buy elections by shifting taxes to a property basis and away from the visible income taxation, thereby balancing the revenue base of the state on top of an increasingly obvious bubble - but two or three years ago, anyone pointing out the bubble was derided as a crank and doom-monger. The progressive lightening of income tax, and outright removal of people from the income tax net, took the place of real rises in wages in much of the economy, while the government tried to maintain entry to the property tax net by regular sweeteners for first time buyers. Problems were never solved - more money was imply thrown at issues, and we barely cared, because we thought we had plenty of it.

A lot of our advantages remain in place, even if slightly eroded, but the bursting of the bubble economy has inevitably left a huge debt hangover, broken banks, an over-inflated public sector, and a mood of depression.

Our GDP growth during the Celtic Tiger period (now settled, apparently, as c. 1994-2001) was solid, export-led growth, with infrastructural investment, service improvement, and a progressive business environment. Our post-Tiger phase was characterised by unsustainable credit-led growth of an economy being progressively eaten by a cancerously growing development sector and a collective insanity that blew up a massive property bubble. We don't have a name for it yet, but I'd call it the "furor Hibernica" or "Celtic madness" period.

cordially,
Scofflaw

eoinbn

We were starting from a low base which makes GDP growth easier. We received billions from the EU(mainly Germany, poor guys!) and were seen as a good place for multi-national's due to a solid eduction system, low to moderate wages and low corporation tax. On top of that we have an obsession with owning our own home in Ireland so all these people that were entering the workplace were taking out mortgages which also fuels GDP growth.

dunsandin

We were hungry, we got fat, we may well diet, then we will get hungry again.......................................................boom,bust,boom anyone?Sounds like the cycle of life and the economy really.

jmayo

Battleneter wrote: »

Hi guys

I am a kiwi living in NZ. I have been reading this forum on and off over 6 months or so. I have taken a interest in a few countries economies Ireland being one of them for a couple of reasons. First NZ and Ireland population are very similar and from about 5-10 years ago Ireland made was used as a poster child here for what NZ should be doing (not so much now :P). And yet so many Irish moved here which always seemed a little odd.

Just a FYI NZ's economy is sluggish with about 7.3% unemployment (now stable I think) and a public deficit of around 7.5% GDP supposedly back in the black in around 4 years, luckily NZ historical debt has been modest.

I appreciate GDP is a poor indicator of true living standards due to largely wealth distribution. What I am REALLY trying to understand is how Ireland's left NZ and other countries for dead around 10 years ago with improving its GDP?, how did Ireland have years of 9% growth?

Part of our success was down to our young educated cheap workforce.

BTW I reckon the graduates were much better educated and harder working back in the 80s/90s than now, but I know I will be slated for that generialisation.

Part of our success was down to fact we had low corporation taxes and grants from our devleopment organisation (IDA) attracting in high tech companies.
Also our membership of the EU was and our English speaking background was helpful in attracting US multinationals especially the computer related entities.

Also something that should not be forgotten is some of these same multinationals had Irish Americans in prominent positions. I know ex chariman of Motorola, who I once had the pleasure of chatting to in a university lab was one of these who had Irish ancestry and was proud if it.

Also our IDA did a huge amount of work in attracting in companies that were on the rise in world markets.
We attracted in Micorosft in late 80s just when they were really taking over the network operating systems.
Then we attracted in Intel and Dell in early 90s.
Simarly we had earlier attracted in IBM, DEC (from way back in 70s), Analog Devices, Ericsson, Alcatel.
We also got Oracle, Lotus, HP, Xerox, Motorola, Compaq (when they took over DEC), APC, Cisco plants.
More recently we got the likes of Google.

I think we managed to get all the big players bar maybe Sun and CA.

All of these added hugely to our growth as the dot com and telecoms bubbles ramped up in the late 90s.

BTW what part of NZ are you in ?
Don't be despondent you may never have our growth levels due to your location look on the bright side you damm well wont have the same level of corruption, incompentence, unethcial behaviour that has led to our cockups either.

Battleneter

Cheers for the replies, its clear there is no exact one answer. It seems location, Competitive tax system and competitive work force during the Celtic tiger years are key factors.

I was wondering if the competitve company Tax system which lured business away from the UK had added to the Irish Soverign debt? So effectively using borrowed public money to fund the private sector or is that misguided?

I think NZ's economy has shown steady predictable improvements over the decades and has weathered the recession better than most, but we are always 2nd fiddle to the Aus economy.

If it makes you guys feel any better, its well known the Australian economy on PAPER has weathered the recession way better than most. But when you talk to many Aussies they all complain about rocketing cost of living etc
.
Read this from yesterday BUT focus on the 100+ comments at the bottom for example

http://www.news.com.au/money/money-matters/prices-go-up-the-cost-of-living-at-a-glance/comments-e6frfmd9-1225859344076


Its "feeling" like the only people benefiting from any countries gains atm are the richest 10%, and the average family in the OECD just keeps getting poorer.

jmayo wrote: »

BTW what part of NZ are you in ?
Don't be despondent you may never have our growth levels due to your location look on the bright side you damm well wont have the same level of corruption, incompentence, unethcial behaviour that has led to our cockups either.

Christchurch - South Island Population around 380,000. I am not really despondent, to be honest I have a pretty good IT job and payed my last Mortgage payment last year things are fairly good. Just examining "the grass is greener over there" syndrome.

K-9

Battleneter wrote: »

I was wondering if the competitve company Tax system which lured business away from the UK had added to the Irish Soverign debt? So effectively using borrowed public money to fund the private sector or is that misguided?

No, because sovereign debt was so high here in the 80's, Government debt was prioritised.

Indeed, there was an argument from the opposition that too much priority was being given to service a low Government debt, by 2005 second lowest to Luxembourg in the EU 15, money which could have been spent elsewhere.

Ireland's national debt falls to the equivalent of around eight months' tax revenue.

[FONT=arial, helvetica, sans-serif]Interest payments on Ireland's national debt are just one fifth of what they were 10 years ago, according to the National Treasury Management Agency.

In its latest annual report, which was published today, the NTMA said Ireland's total national debt had also been reduced to the equivalent of around eight months' tax revenue.

When the agency was established in 1990, it took more than three months' tax revenue just to pay interest on the debt.

Speaking at the launch of the report today, NTMA chief executive Michael Somers said Ireland had the second-lowest GDP-to-debt ratio in the EU15, the countries that made up the European Union before its expansion to 25 members in May 2004.

"Apart from Luxembourg, we're the lowest among the original member states," he said.



So, we went from 25% of Tax Revenues servicing INTEREST alone in 1990 to the TOTAL DEBT being 66% of Tax Revenues.

Sadly all that good work has been undone in a few short years.
[/FONT]

marco_polo

Battleneter wrote: »

Christchurch - South Island Population around 380,000. I am not really despondent, to be honest I have a pretty good IT job and payed my last Mortgage payment last year things are fairly good. Just examining "the grass is greener over there" syndrome.

Let me be the fist to offer to trade places

K-9

Interest payments will be about 20% of tax revenues next year.

MysticalRain

marco_polo wrote: »

Let me be the fist to offer to trade places

My thoughts exactly. I spent some time living in NZ and left feeling grass was definitely greener over there compared with Ireland.

ei.sdraob

K-9 wrote: »

In its latest annual report, which was published today, the NTMA said Ireland's total national debt had also been reduced to the equivalent of around eight months' tax revenue.

Now at this point of time our debt is 80 billion (See NTMA) that excludes NAMA and about 20billion left to borrow this year....

It would take over 2 years to collect that in taxes and other government income

How rapidly things deteriorate

irishh_bob

clearz wrote: »

I think if there was an easy answer to that an you knew the formula you would be a rich man.
I say it's because Ireland had such a crap economy up until the 90's it was easier for us to get those huge growth figures because of all the catching up we had to do. Just as China is seeing huge growth now because it also is catching up (Rise of the middle class)

+1 , while ireland has been wealthier than new zealand for about ten years , new zealand was wealthier than ireland for the previous 150

dunsandin

marco_polo wrote: »

Let me be the fist to offer to trade places

There'll be no talking of fists around here, keep it civil:D

Battleneter

I think its easy to get wrapped up in current day doom and gloom. Ireland has clearly made large progress in the last 15 odd years, even if it looses half of that before fully stabilizing Ireland will still be ahead more than the average western nation growth. Economies are a marathon not a sprint.

There is negativity around the 7.3% unemployment rate here, but when I think back NZ like other western nations was running at around 10%! in the early 90's when I got my first fully time job entering the work force. Helps keep things in perspective, these boom and bust cycles have largely happened before.

Ireland is definitely on my list of countries to visit when i do a Euro trip next year, love your accents :P and I feel Ireland is a country that still has a soul.

RichardAnd

Battleneter wrote: »

Ireland is definitely on my list of countries to visit when i do a Euro trip next year, love your accents :P and I feel Ireland is a country that still has a soul.

Sorry to disappoint but 90% of people traded theirs for a 3 bedroom semi

beeno67

I know these figures are 2 years old and a lot has changed in the last 2 years but basically 2 years ago Ireland was twice as rich as New Zealand.

http://siteresources.worldbank.org/DATASTATISTICS/Resources/GNIPC.pdf

GNI Ireland $49,770

GNI New Zealand $25,200

Nate--IRL--

beeno67 wrote: »

I know these figures are 2 years old and a lot has changed in the last 2 years but basically 2 years ago Ireland was twice as rich as New Zealand.

GNI... fine, now check the Gross National Debt. Or even better the Total External Debt. We were never rich, in much the same way that a mortgage doesn't make you rich.

Nate

Battleneter

beeno67 wrote: »

I know these figures are 2 years old and a lot has changed in the last 2 years but basically 2 years ago Ireland was twice as rich as New Zealand.

http://siteresources.worldbank.org/DATASTATISTICS/Resources/GNIPC.pdf

GNI Ireland $49,770

GNI New Zealand $25,200

As a country I agree so called key indicators are much higher, but there is a but!

What i have been trying to figure out is wealth distribution and costs of living in diff countries. I work with a Irish chap who has recently come back from visiting family in Ireland and he is adamant the average family standard of living is about the same.

If you look at house hold income and just convert the currencies to $US, house hold incomes are similar in fact slightly higher in NZ. There are other factors to consider of course, housing costs etc, this is a tad dated but it shows something interesting.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_household_income
New Zealand [7] 62,556 NZD 2007 1.54 US$41,000
Ireland 35,410 EUR 2005 1.02 US$35,000

Not really trying to compare "just" NZ to Ireland, its just that this is a Irish forum.....

Its becoming clear GNI/GDP is a poor indicator of the standard of living.

At this point I am thinking the extremely wealthy in a number of Western countries are simply getting richer while the average person crawls ahead much slower or even drifts backwards.

Scarab80

Battleneter wrote: »

As a country I agree so called key indicators are much higher, but there is a but!

What i have been trying to figure out is wealth distribution and costs of living in diff countries. I work with a Irish chap who has recently come back from visiting family in Ireland and he is adamant the average family standard of living is about the same.

If you look at house hold income and just convert the currencies to $US, house hold incomes are similar in fact slightly higher in NZ. There are other factors to consider of course, housing costs etc, this is a tad dated but it shows something interesting.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_household_income
New Zealand [7] 62,556 NZD 2007 1.54 US$41,000
Ireland 35,410 EUR 2005 1.02 US$35,000

Not really trying to compare "just" NZ to Ireland, its just that this is a Irish forum.....

Its becoming clear GNI/GDP is a poor indicator of the standard of living.

At this point I am thinking the extremely wealthy in a number of Western countries are simply getting richer while the average person crawls ahead much slower or even drifts backwards.

You are probably looking for GDP adjusted for PPP (Purchasing Power Parity) which attempts to factor in the cost of living.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita

Ireland is ranked 9th based on 2009 IMF figures with adjusted GDP per capita of $39,468, NZ is 33rd at $26,708

Battleneter

Scarab80 wrote: »

You are probably looking for GDP adjusted for PPP (Purchasing Power Parity) which attempts to factor in the cost of living.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita

Ireland is ranked 9th based on 2009 IMF figures with adjusted GDP per capita of $39,468, NZ is 33rd at $26,708

ummmm we have established Ireland has a higher GDP, however GDP (ppp) may not be a lot better.

I am suggesting that higher GDP/PP does not translate into a higher standard of living for the general population
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_household_income

The welath is "perhaps" better distributed in a country like NZ, or perhaps a LOT of the profit is going off shore in Ireland?, I am not sure.

Scarab80

The Gini co-efficient measures how equal wealth distribution is in a country...

http://hdrstats.undp.org/en/indicators/161.html

The lower the co-efficient the more equal the wealth distribution, ireland is 34.3, NZ is 36.2

GNI (PPP) removes the impact of Foreign Companies operating in Ireland

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GNI_(PPP)_per_capita

Ireland is $37,350 and NZ is $25,090

Battleneter

Doesn't really explain why household incomes are at least the same if not higher in NZ. If Ireland generates more wealth were is that wealth going?

Scarab80

Must be bigger households in New Zealand. Seems to be the only remaining variable.

If they divided population by number of residential properties in Ireland and applied an average family size it would greatly underestimate household income due to the number of empty / second properties.

Doesn't seem like they would do that but i'm all out of ideas

Battleneter

Scarab80 wrote: »

Must be bigger households in New Zealand. Seems to be the only remaining variable.

If they divided population by number of residential properties in Ireland and applied an average family size it would greatly underestimate household income due to the number of empty / second properties.

Doesn't seem like they would do that but i'm all out of ideas

lol umm no cant see that the housing boom also happened here and NZ is still prodmantely European decent.

I also work with about 10 odd poms in my department. They say much the same thing, living standards are similar to England give or take here and there, and yet the UK has higher GDP/PPP. They do say professional opportunities in the UK are better but that's largely a Population thing with working in IT there. They generally state the lifestyle is better here and makes up for it.

Is it not possible a small percentage of the population are holding a greater percentage of the wealth when comparing certain countries, that seems to me to be the most likely explanation.

Well here is a local knowledge question . Prior to the last few years, was the living standard considered better in Ireland over Britain or much the same?

Scarab80

Battleneter wrote: »

lol umm no cant see that the housing boom also happened here and NZ is still prodmantely European decent.

I also work with about 10 odd poms in my department. They say much the same thing, living standards are similar to England give or take here and there, and yet the UK has higher GDP/PPP. They do say professional opportunities in the UK are better but that's largely a Population thing with working in IT there. They generally state the lifestyle is better here and makes up for it.

Is it not possible a small percentage of the population are holding a greater percentage of the wealth when comparing certain countries, that seems to me to be the most likely explanation.

Well here is a local knowledge question . Prior to the last few years, was the living standard considered better in Ireland over Britain or much the same?

I don't think it's down to wealth distribution due to the Gini co-efficient, maybe there are a few outliers who distort this but i don't think it can explain the big difference. But i have a new theory!

We invested a lot of money into infrastructure projects in the last 20 years as we were coming from a very low base, this would be wealth created but not distributed to families. Also we paid down our national debt to pretty much zero (sorting that out nicely right now) and put 25bn or so into a pension reserve fund, once again wealth created not distributed. How does NZ compare in this regard?

As regards Britain we were probably about the same, earned more but paid more for everything.

nordisk celt83

If you're interested in standards of living rather than wealth... The accepted international measurement is the HDI (human development index.) It's regularly updated by the United Nations, and the most recent one dates from December 2009.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hdi

Scarab80

nordisk celt83 wrote: »

If you're interested in standards of living rather than wealth... The accepted international measurement is the HDI (human development index.) It's regularly updated by the United Nations, and the most recent one dates from December 2009.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hdi

Snap!

Battleneter

nordisk celt83 wrote: »

If you're interested in standards of living rather than wealth... The accepted international measurement is the HDI (human development index.) It's regularly updated by the United Nations, and the most recent one dates from December 2009.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hdi

Yea seen that, bit tricky to take much from that when once again that GDP rears its ugly head in the formula and I am thinking GDP is not a accurate indicator of living standards.

IE Uk is 21 and yet as I already knew UK and Ireland have very similar living standards.

• Life Expectancy Index =
• Education Index =
  • Adult Literacy Index (ALI) =
  • Gross Enrollment Index (GEI) =
• GDP =

So nope I generally think this is bollocks sorry

Battleneter

Scarab80 wrote: »

I don't think it's down to wealth distribution due to the Gini co-efficient, maybe there are a few outliers who distort this but i don't think it can explain the big difference. But i have a new theory!

We invested a lot of money into infrastructure projects in the last 20 years as we were coming from a very low base, this would be wealth created but not distributed to families. Also we paid down our national debt to pretty much zero (sorting that out nicely right now) and put 25bn or so into a pension reserve fund, once again wealth created not distributed. How does NZ compare in this regard?

As regards Britain we were probably about the same, earned more but paid more for everything.

Hmm maybe. NZ infrastructure spending is fairly flat, only one big increase in the early 80's. A addition pension fund was started in the last five years, but you may be on to something there.

Brussels Sprout

Hi OP,

I spent a year living in NZ-6 months in Christchurch and 6 in Wellington. When I first arrived there in 2007 I had left Ireland just at the peak of the bubble. I must admit I was really surprised at how low the wages were over there. I was only on a work-travel visa so I took the highest paid job I could find which was $14 an hour and I found it impossible to live on it. Last year I went back and worked as an engineer for considerably more and this time it was a lot more comfortable. Overall though I felt that the prices of goods and services were only slightly less than in Ireland whereas the wages were way lower. I think this was reflected in people's lifestyles: cars were older, houses were simpler and people stayed in to drink for most of the night before going to town later on. As other's have pointed out we were the one's living a lie all along and in the future we'll be going through a period of adjustment so that soon I think our lifestyles will be very similar.

I miss Christchurch a lot by the way-Hagley Park and the banks of the Avon are beautiful and I never got tired of seeing the mountain tops from the streets. Wasn't a big fan of driving home Manchester street though-that's definitely something that I'd rather I didn't see over here!

davepatr07

I'm on the 1 year WHV myself based outside Welly but lived in Auckland (expensive!) and Christchurch. Nice country, friendly people but mad drivers!

I can understand how some things are expensive because of geographical location. Food I'm finding is more expensive than back home but then again we have more competition in the retail market.

Rent isn't too bad if you look carefully. Though as you say if you are in the lower paid bracket it can be hard to live on it $10-16 an hour. A lot of people say it's easier to make money in Oz, but Oz's cost of living is going up I believe (battleneter's link supports this).

I get the impression that there was no overspending here like it was back home. Things seem to be more regulated and controlled. Back home it was "party like mad and forget about the inevitable hangover!" Saving for a rainy day never came to FF's head!

pfy2k

Irelands situation is mainly to do with the "Ah sure it will be alright" and "As long as I am alright Jack" mentality!:rolleyes: Not for the good of society and social justice for the average person! Thats why we are in the EU PIIGS catergory. We have a lot in common with the Med. Country's, except to ability to riot!:) Unless its over Northern Ireland!:(

irishh_bob

davepatr07 wrote: »

I'm on the 1 year WHV myself based outside Welly but lived in Auckland (expensive!) and Christchurch. Nice country, friendly people but mad drivers!

I can understand how some things are expensive because of geographical location. Food I'm finding is more expensive than back home but then again we have more competition in the retail market.

Rent isn't too bad if you look carefully. Though as you say if you are in the lower paid bracket it can be hard to live on it $10-16 an hour. A lot of people say it's easier to make money in Oz, but Oz's cost of living is going up I believe (battleneter's link supports this).

I get the impression that there was no overspending here like it was back home. Things seem to be more regulated and controlled. Back home it was "party like mad and forget about the inevitable hangover!" Saving for a rainy day never came to FF's head!

its often said that ireland and new zealand are quite common , i must say ive always found this to be in most cases , unfounded , kiwis are by nature , a financially prudent people , they are also a very modest and not in the least bit showy folk , they dont do bling , thier not into big fancy houses , ten ( and even twenty ) year old cars are common place , the same cannot be said for ireland , hate to bring it down to the level of religon but new zealand is a very protestant place ( in a cultural sense ) in the same way canada is , where as we in ireland are more like the italians minus the super hot women and plus the crap weather

Battleneter

irishh_bob wrote: »

its often said that ireland and new zealand are quite common , i must say ive always found this to be in most cases , unfounded , kiwis are by nature , a financially prudent people , they are also a very modest and not in the least bit showy folk , they dont do bling , thier not into big fancy houses , ten ( and even twenty ) year old cars are common place , the same cannot be said for ireland , hate to bring it down to the level of religon but new zealand is a very protestant place ( in a cultural sense ) in the same way canada is , where as we in ireland are more like the italians minus the super hot women and plus the crap weather

Yea I think a lot of what you say is correct, accept the religion part. NZ is probably one of the least religious country on earth, the vast majority of the population never step foot in a church accept at weddings and funerals lol. Agree Kiwi's are largely modest, a bit to much which is one of our problems when competing with loud Australians :P

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

Hi OP,

I spent a year living in NZ-6 months in Christchurch and 6 in Wellington. When I first arrived there in 2007 I had left Ireland just at the peak of the bubble. I must admit I was really surprised at how low the wages were over there. I was only on a work-travel visa so I took the highest paid job I could find which was $14 an hour and I found it impossible to live on it. Last year I went back and worked as an engineer for considerably more and this time it was a lot more comfortable. Overall though I felt that the prices of goods and services were only slightly less than in Ireland whereas the wages were way lower. I think this was reflected in people's lifestyles: cars were older, houses were simpler and people stayed in to drink for most of the night before going to town later on. As other's have pointed out we were the one's living a lie all along and in the future we'll be going through a period of adjustment so that soon I think our lifestyles will be very similar.

I miss Christchurch a lot by the way-Hagley Park and the banks of the Avon are beautiful and I never got tired of seeing the mountain tops from the streets. Wasn't a big fan of driving home Manchester street though-that's definitely something that I'd rather I didn't see over here!

Thanks all good comments and the Irish are always welcome here , yea anything close to minumum wage is hard to survive but not "live", its basically the working poor. Most lower skilled jobs are not paid well and at the top of the scale people can get more going off shore. I feel those in average skilled jobs earn similar amounts to AUS,UK if you understand what I mean.

I think perception is largely the circles you move in like in any counrty. I consider us to me about a average family. For reference I earn just over $29 an hour and our house is 220squre meters, where most houses in our suburb are under 25 years old, good insulation etc. I drive a 2004 car and may upgrade in the next year or two, but yea Kiwis do tend to hold onto there cars longer, but hey they are a crap investment :P

If your memory is good most inner city suburbs houses like in Linwood, Woolston, Sydenham are generally pretty old wooden clad simple 50-80 year old houses. I see this too in Australian cities like Melbourne a lot of old inner city houses where most tourists will spend much of there time (or backpackers).

If you dont mind me asking what sorry of Engineer are you? and what did you get here$ and now back in Ireland?

irishh_bob

Battleneter wrote: »

Yea I think a lot of what you say is correct, accept the religion part. NZ is probably one of the least religious country on earth, the vast majority of the population never step foot in a church accept at weddings and funerals lol. Agree Kiwi's are largely modest, a bit to much which is one of our problems when competing with loud Australians :P




Thanks all good comments and the Irish are always welcome here , yea anything close to minumum wage is hard to survive but not "live", its basically the working poor. Most lower skilled jobs are not paid well and at the top of the scale people can get more going off shore. I feel those in average skilled jobs earn similar amounts to AUS,UK if you understand what I mean.

I think perception is largely the circles you move in like in any counrty. I consider us to me about a average family. For reference I earn just over $29 an hour and our house is 220squre meters, where most houses in our suburb are under 25 years old, good insulation etc. I drive a 2004 car and may upgrade in the next year or two, but yea Kiwis do tend to hold onto there cars longer, but hey they are a crap investment :P

If your memory is good most inner city suburbs houses like in Linwood, Woolston, Sydenham are generally pretty old wooden clad simple 50-80 year old houses. I see this too in Australian cities like Melbourne a lot of old inner city houses where most tourists will spend much of there time (or backpackers).

If you dont mind me asking what sorry of Engineer are you? and what did you get here$ and now back in Ireland?

when i said new zealand was a very protestant place , i meant ( as highlighted ) in a cultural sense only , the south island is especially protestant in charechter , very scottish and old english , in the best possible sense i might add , i lived and worked in new zealand for a while at the end of the 1990,s , its my favourite country in the world after my own

Battleneter

irishh_bob wrote: »

when i said new zealand was a very protestant place , i meant ( as highlighted ) in a cultural sense only , the south island is especially protestant in charechter , very scottish and old english , in the best possible sense i might add , i lived and worked in new zealand for a while at the end of the 1990,s , its my favourite country in the world after my own

ah ok IC IC, yea fair call, a lot of English say comments like the South Island feels like England 20 years ago, not the technology etc, but the overall look and more the feel ( I wouldn't know lol).

I have considered moving to Aus in the last few years as on paper there economy is doing a bit better and wages are higher, but at my level of job (kinda mid level skilled) the wages seem very similar, plus id have to have a more expensive house etc, been to Aus many times.

Really just trying to get a feel for true living standards in diff countries, but I guess personnel circumstances play a huge part also.