Systems of governance aren't tangential to poverty and wealth or whatever we're discussing are they? Seems pretty intrinsic to me. What's your ideal model?
As a thought experiment, look at small rural towns across the country. Some are prosperous while others are in decline. Look at what makes them successful and extrapolate that across NZ vs other countries then wealthy and poverty stricken families:
1 - Thriving towns are usually anchored to a strong, scalable industry. This is a trickle down where money spread through the town.
For NZ to be successful we need to prioritise successful industries with competitive advantages.
For families they need to prioritise education and attributes that make you highly employable.
2 - Towns with proactive councils, business groups, and iwi partnerships tend to punch above their weight. They chase investment, support events, and make it easier to build or start businesses. Others stagnate under risk-averse, resistant to change and/ or fragmented leadership.
Extrapolated to NZ, positivity and can do attitude. Currently weβre the risk averse resistant to change
For families get involved in the community, give everything a go and evolve with changes rather than resisting them.
3 - many invest in themselves with good cafes, decent schools, outdoor recreation, safety. That attracts remote workers, retirees, and tourism. Others donβt evolve and lose even their own locals to nearby centres.
In NZ case, pro industry, infrastructure, strong social support
In families case, invest in yourselves (education), housing, investments. Essentially live within your means and prioritise your future instead of living for the moment.
Just a little thought experiment!