Here's our summary of key economic events over the weekend that affect New Zealand, with news investors are much less sure rate cuts will come in 2024.
This week, given that American jobs growth remained strong in March, all eyes will now turn to their inflation data with CPI due out on Thursday. That is expected to show inflation rising there slightly to 3.5%, but core inflation easing slightly to 3.7%. Any variations will likely colour market responses. The Americans will also release PPI data this week, along with consumer sentiment survey results for April.
Of course this week our own RBNZ reviews its OCR. And they will be joined by Canada and the EU. Australia will release its NAB business sentiment survey results, along with the Westpac consumer sentiments survey results, both tomorrow (Tuesday).
China will release its CPI and PPI data along with new lending data for March, also both on Thursday.
Over the weekend China released its March FX reserves level and it was little-changed as it has been over the prior three months.
In the US, their economy added many more jobs than expected. Analysts were thinking the expansion would be +200,000 in March from February, but in the end the headline seasonally adjusted gain was +303,000. On an actual, unadjusted basis the gain on employer payrolls was +659,000. The wider household survey saw an even larger rise of more than +1.04 mln in the month to 161.4 mln people employed both on employer payrolls and the self-employed. Adding more than +1 mln paid jobs in a month is very expansionary. Guessing here, but strong immigration (both legal and illegal) is helping fuel the expansion.
Average weekly pay rose +4.1%, bolstering this strength although that was slightly lower than the +4.3% rise to February. In any case it is more than inflation and it shows that even after absorbing the migrant flow it remains 'real'.
Today investors are looking past the fact that the Fed may delay rate cuts, realising the American economy is in much better shape than they have assumed, and equity prices rose on Friday, even though bond yields were rising too.
The US$5 tln US consumer debt market has been expanding marginally recently although it did show a faster than usual rise in January. The February data out on Friday shows a slower rise and one less than expected. This market indebtedness level runs at 17.8% of US GDP, very much higher than the New Zealand equivalent which is only 3.7% of our GDP.
Unfortunately, Canada's labour market isn't showing the same robust expansion in March as the US has, essentially marking time with little change after February's good gains.
Australian retail sales are rising but slower than their inflation rate. They were up +1.6% in February from a year ago. But in that same time their inflation indicator rose 3.4%. Any way you look at it, that is a volume drop.
The Australian goods trade surplus halved in February from the same month a year ago. It came in at a +AU$6.5 bln surplus, down from +AU$12.9 bln in February 2023. The reasons is the combination of falling exports (-2.4%), and import growth staying high (+17.1%). Of particular note is that both rural and non-rural exports fell more than -3%, but that gold exports were up +25% on that basis.
An updated KPMG/University of Sydney report shows that China is sharply reducing its investments in Australia in favour of other Belt & Road states - in fact investing in B&R partners so it can wind down exposure to Australia. A prime example is in nickel mining where China has invested in cheaper (and 'dirtier') nickel mining and processing in Indonesia. Overall in 2023 Chinese investment in Australia fell to AU$1.4 bln, and its lowest level in seventeen years (pandemic excepted).
The UST 10yr yield is now at 4.40% and up +1 bps from Saturday, up +20 bps in a week. This is its highest since late November, so a strong bond market signal. The key 2-10 yield curve inversion is little-changed at -35 bps. And their 1-5 curve inversion is less at -68 bps. And their 3 mth-10yr curve inversion is now at -98 bps and less as well. The Australian 10 year bond yield is now at 4.20% and little-changed. The China 10 year bond rate is holding at just on 2.30%. The NZ Government 10 year bond rate is now at 4.70% and unchanged but up +6 bps for the week.
The price of gold will start today a little higher by +US$3 from this time Saturday at US$2329/oz and yet another all-time high.
Oil prices have slipped a minor -50 USc to just on US$86.50/bbl in the US while the international Brent price is now down a bit more at just over US$90.50/bbl.
The Kiwi dollar starts today at just on 60.1 USc and unchanged from Saturday. Against the Aussie we are firmer at 91.5 AUc. Against the euro we are unchanged at 55.5 euro cents. That all means our TWI-5 starts today just on 69.2 and unchanged.
The bitcoin price starts today firmer at US$69,783 and up +2.9% from this time Saturday. Volatility over the past 24 hours has been modest at just on +/- 1.5%.
Daily exchange rates
Select chart tabs
The easiest place to stay up with event risk is by following our Economic Calendar here ».
139 Comments
On 18th March of this year scientists in Antarctica recorded a daily temperature that was 38.5C above its seasonal average: a world record. In NZ that would be the same as us recording a March daily temperature of +55C.
The linked article describes their shock and horror at this new record:
Particularly pertinent given the opinion piece this site recently published (suggesting that we should ignore worst case scenarios for coastal inundation)
is this paragraph:
''Nevertheless, there is now a real danger that some significant sea level rises will occur in the next few decades as the ice sheets and glaciers of west Antarctica continue to shrink. These are being eroded at their bases by warming ocean water and could disintegrate in a few decades. If they disappear entirely, that would raise sea levels by 5m – sufficient to cause damage to coastal populations around the world. How quickly that will happen is difficult to assess. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has said that sea levels are likely to rise between 0.3m to 1.1m by the end of the century. Many experts now fear this is a dangerous underestimate. In the past, climate change deniers accused scientists of exaggerating the threat of global warming. However, the evidence that is now emerging from Antarctica and other parts of the world makes it very clear that scientists did not exaggerate. Indeed, they very probably underrated by a considerable degree the threat that now faces humanity''
The Guardian is the Fox News of the vegan world.
Whilst climate change is serious for all of us to be aware of - so is the need to refer to objective 'news' when referencing such an important topic - not the typical subjectively biased garbage that defines The Guardian.
I tend to keep the news source relevant for the topic... others might learn from such wisdom
https://www.si.com/fannation/wrestling/hulk-hogan-ric-flair-wrestlemania
Shock? Horror? The exact same thing happened in 2022.
https://phys.org/news/2024-01-extreme-east-antarctica-driven-atmospheri…
"The extreme temperatures were driven by an intense 'atmospheric river': a concentrated band of atmospheric water vapor transporting heat and moisture from the subtropics deep into the Antarctic interior.
Scientists found that convection and tropical cyclone activity in the Indian Ocean was a major source of moisture, which was then quickly transported to Antarctica thanks to an increased waviness in the jet stream that linked the low and high latitudes. This led to an atmospheric river intensifying near the coastline, reinforcing atmospheric blocking deep into East Antarctica and driving the tropical airmass deep into the Antarctic continent.
The atmospheric river intrusion led to thick cloud cover over the East Antarctic Plateau, trapping heat in the lower atmosphere. Mixed with scattered solar radiation, these conditions ultimately resulted in intense surface warming."
"thanks to an increased waviness."
Yeah, human caused global heating is breaking up the polar vortices.
https://scied.ucar.edu/learning-zone/climate-change-impacts/why-polar-a…
NZ may or may not be a net CO2 sink (I suspect the reality is as with most statistics the methodology (pre)determines the result)...however there is no dispute I am aware of that atmospheric CO2 levels are increasing with all the expected (and probably many unexpected) repercussions
You shared one report with massive margins of error that suggested that the land mass of NZ absorbs more CO2 than it produces. As I said yesterday, I am willing to accept that given that over many millions of years different parts of the globe have broadly balanced out as net emitters / absorbers depending on their flora, fauna, location etc. However, perhaps because I studied as an engineer and scientist, I also have to apply a modicum of critical thought here.
The question for me what difference have the millions of people that have lived and are living in NZ had on the country's net absorption of CO2? The answer to that is fairly obviously - NZ is top of the global charts for cumulative net CO2 emissions per capita. Why? Because humans moved here and set about destroying the ecosystem - quickly eroding the positive impact that our lush environment had on the rest of the world. We have an opportunity to undo some of the damage we have done - and to make our country somewhere that our kids and their grandkids will want to live.
JFOE while you cite ONE part of the article, you ignore the fact that NZ doesn't even rank in the total emissions tables. It has long been established that NZ's total contribution to global warming is so small that if were became carbon negative tomorrow it would not change the path the world is on one iota.
This doesn't mean we shouldn't do anything, but it does mean we can take a breath and build a better more sustainable nation without the knee jerk actions so many seem to be calling for.
Climate change and the response to it is each individual citizen's of this planet responsibility. With New Zealand emissions per Capita on the 5th rank we do have that responsibility and more is required from us than the average Chinese, Indian or other citizen from a developing country!
They also say that about recycling, and that we should all do our bit for society, yet global plastic production has only increased over the last 70 years:
Global plastic production | Statista
Realistically it is a ploy from the producers to offload the environmental responsibility to the consumer when in fact if they produced less, or invested in more easily recycled plastics, we would have less waste product.
We can all do little bits and pieces, but the real change needs to be driven by policy and enforcement on those that have the greatest impact.
I suggest you start protesting outside the Warehouse and Kmart stores then, and start demanding that poor people are banned from those establishments since they are ruining the environment. I agree with you. The junk that those places sell contributes massively to the waste problem that exists, purely because the junk that they sell only lasts a few years because it is cheap, and people end up buying it over and over again when it would have been cheaper to buy a more expensive product and the very beginning, and long term it would have cut the waste that you speak of by 75% or more. But good luck with that. You would just get thrown to the ground by the mob on it's way to the cheap TV section.
It's not poor people consuming, it's the super rich, houses that are far too big, new cars every few years, overseas holidays, expensive imported food and clothes.
I know people cry envy when this is pointed out and is the main reasons parties like ACT want to reduce govt. They know a strong government institution will get the mandate to redistribute resources as we enter the emergency phase where resources become increasingly scarce.
Oh. I see. The top 10% own 90% of the assets or something like that, but those 10% buy more throw away crap than the 90% of others. Sorry, but that simply is not true, and if it were, then they would no be in the top 10% either now would they. They know a strong government institution will get the mandate to redistribute resources as we enter the emergency phase where resources become increasingly scarce LOL.....if resources were that scarce would you not first mandate to stop making crap out of them that just ends up at the dump a short time after purchase.
You may very well think that. The comment I made referred to a study showing 57 companies were responsible for 80% of global climate emissions - which had increased since the Paris agreement.
NZ is in a good place to adapt to climate change, despite its 0.17% share of global climate emissions.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-04-05/small-cohort-of-mega-polluters-p…
PS the increasing frequency of ad hominem attacks & personal abuse on this sites commentators by a few agenda driven people should be a concern for all.
…and that is why we must stay here to add balance and reality when these outbursts of nonsense by agenda driven people occur. They lost the election, still haven’t got over it, and they think that the disaster that occurred in the last six years can continue. It won’t, they know it, and therefore the world will end.
I am yet to meet anyone without an agenda.
Your 'balance and reality' are another man's lunacy, and theirs, are yours.
Science attempts to provide a guiding light to help us navigate out of the fog of ideological wars. The constant refining and synthesising of evidence, with robust and informed challenge, has led us to understand that the world is round, that gravity exists, and that plants absorb CO2 and provide us with oxygen. The same science is now telling us to make some urgent changes to how all of us live so that we don't destroy the planet.
You ignore the fact that "The Science" can be easily corrupted, no different to any other activity where humans are involved. I recommend this reading if you can get a copy, or I can loan you mine - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betrayers_of_the_Truth but more has been written on the subject.
Funnily enough, during the US senate investigation a few decades back into corruption in the science, issues with replication of results and the way research was paid for and by whom was one young Albert Arnold Gore Jr. Some say that the gained knowledge has served him well and not the way you would think.
Yes, you certainly had a few folk who took the money from status quo profiteers in the matters of tobacco, DDT, ozone etc. through the same sort of tactics used against scientific investigation of climate change. Where trying to sow doubt and confusion in opposition to wider scientific findings is the basic strategy of opposing action. Discussed in books such as Merchants of Doubt.
Definitely highlights a good reason to not blindly trust the blanket denialists who are likewise status quo-focused, instead of the very many scientists out there openly releasing their data and workings for others to critique and review.
Indeed, deniervilles favourite meme of "you can't trust the science" mainly stems from their "greed is good" heroes down at corporate central, where they are trying to sell you something that will kill you because they spent a few dollars developing it.
Earth sciences, with no profit driven motive, is how human knowledge moves forward, as opposed to the latest marketed wonder drug promising all night erections, but causes Altzhiemers years down the track.
The obvious bit is when the projections that they make never come true, then the excuses come. The science is settled of course, and these things are going to happen, but then they don't. When questioned these experts come back with the excuse that things are very complicated, there are many variables, and therefore we cannot be expected to get things right. 'Climate change' means thing are constantly evolving and changing and this makes things even more difficult for us. But, of course the science is settled, they already knew everything.....
This seems an oddly emotional interpretation of something rather uncontroversial, that adding more data points will enhance accuracy.
Or perhaps not odd, but fairly standard?
Climate change doubters have a favorite target: climate models. They claim that computer simulations conducted decades ago didn't accurately predict current warming, so the public should be wary of the predictive power of newer models. Now, the most sweeping evaluation of these older models—some half a century old—shows most of them were indeed accurate.
But in reality, it turns out models performed rather well:
https://www.science.org/content/article/even-50-year-old-climate-models…
https://eps.harvard.edu/files/eps/files/hausfather_2020_evaluating_hist…
It's not just 'people' like you who likely have no scientific training or background, it's other scientific experts in the field who have to peer-review it. If the study has methodology that is flawed then it's highly likely to be picked up by the reviewers or by subsequent studies which fail to replicate the result.
...and that is exactly what has been happening. These models are shown to be flawed constantly....but, of course all these articles remain published and treated as fact, when that is not the case. Shall we re-visit the Covid models and see how accurate they are...they are still peer reviewed and are on the internet for all to see, unless they were withdrawn to due the embarrassment of the flawed models, made up by incompetent experts. Maybe we should look at the interest rate modelling, which is what this article is really about. They were also wrong too remember. Experts say lower interest rates, no inflation, blah blah blah. Look how right they were...
Bollocks! There's nothing controversial about the science behind human caused global heating. It's basic physics.The heating is actually obvious to all except extremist ideologues and the idiots that have been brainwashed by them.
https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/8a40df68-8069-4010-bf30-20165cf9a3c5
I consider statistics to be a science and they are incredibly easy to manipulate.
The Green trope is labelling anyone who asks a question regarding climate change science as "climate change deniers" when in fact very few actually deny climate change at all. The climate is always changing and most likely always will. Auckland has had a period of less than average rainfall in recent years, yet you would never know.
Exactly, the climate is changing, always has, always will. All these people are paid to predict what might happen next, and they make it sound like a catastrophe and then it does not happen. People begin to think they are idiots for trying, and they are labelled 'deniers' or 'eco-terrorists' or whatever the activates word of the day is for people that think they are idiots.
True, I guess droning on about something that neither they or anyone else understands and telling people the solution is to do what they say is much easier than doing actual work. I do note that the Greens and Labour did talk about planting all these trees (1 billion of them) over the last six years as that was going to consume all this carbon. What they actually did was spend millions on buying new trees, found at that NZers were either too lazy or didn't care and all the trees died. So, they did achieve net zero there, i.e. zero action. Same goes for many more of their so-called solutions. Lots of noise, no action. Net Zero. It really is comical. Seems they are more concerned about the protection of rainbow crossings these days rather than the environment....
There's quite a bit of debate around that. In my experience, those who are pro-pine are from the 'economist' tribe where all reductions or sequestration is indistinguishable - for example the New Zealand Initiative tend towards this. Pines are the cheapest way to sequester and save the country money on reducing emissions elsewhere.
Most 'greenies' you talk to don't think so clearly in terms of cost (sometimes to their detriment as that leads us to dumb policies like EV rebates), and would much prefer to promote native reforestation.
I'd agree with the NZI on much of their thoughts on carbon pricing, but also think pushing pine trees across the countryside is insanity.
I think we all know how this works now. Just like Covid, all the people who tried to say "yes Covid is real but its not as bad as the Govt says it is" were derided as lunatic conspiracy theorists and were promptly fired, definanced, and deplatformed. There is no money in not being alarmist about something. But stoke fear and panic, and you can charge what you like, for whatever rubbish you want to pretend will fix the problem, and no one will ever question you. The more alarmist something is, the more money that flows into the pockets of those involved in it.
Just like Covid, all the people who tried to say "yes Covid is real but its not as bad as the Govt says it is" were derided as lunatic conspiracy theorists and were promptly fired, definanced, and deplatformed
Some of those who claimed "Covid is real...." were correct. For the wrong reasons. But anyway.
Remember Cindy saying that being vaxed would mean people would not die and would not transmit Covid? In hindsight, dreadful fear mongering from a leader.
Then you had the pink-haired academic who spouted other mistruths, then being awarded NZer of the Year (from memory).
It really was a time of leadership based on half-baked understanding and decision making.
There are striking similarities. If we are in so much danger then why is the leader of the Australian Green party using private jets? It's the hypocrisy that I can't stomach, that and the fact that's it's poorer in society most negatively impacted by rising food prices and the cost of living and shelter due to climate policies.
Your concern for the poor would be laudible if it was genuine.
https://www.foodstuffs.co.nz/news-room/2023/Extreme-weather-continues-t…
Auckland has had a period of less than average rainfall in recent years
What metric are you basing that on? What's your definition of recent years? You heard about the Auckland anniversary floods right?
https://www.metservice.com/towns-cities/locations/auckland/past-weather
My Source? The actual data rather than the media narrative or you looking out the window.
Right... so when you say "recent years" you mean "recent years up to 2022"
You could refer to more up to date "actual data" such as the metservice link i provided which covers the current and previous years as well as historical averages.
This most recent data might help explain why the "media narrative" differs from your stats.nz report
No surprise that fossil fuel companies are at the top. Funny, though, to wave celebratory hands in the air as if that reduces the need to change, as if there's some victory for premature curmudgeonhood and harrumpers of "common sense". As if there's a revelation, that no one knew that fossil fuels were contributing to climate change.
Very much highlights the need to start to plan better than our change to heavily fossil fuel dependant transport direction, while undermining less carbon intensive and more maintainable alternatives. Especially on options that have terrible ROI and are effective subsidies for private industry donors. And that'll hugely increase our reliance on and cost from bitumen in future too.
New Zealand is a carbon sink
This is beside the point. It's like saying "I have a dozen trees on my property and you have none, therefore you need to rein yourself in buddy (but not enough that you can't still provide me with all the cheap tat I'm accustomed to please)". The oceans are also a carbon sink. Can I put a factory out there and ignore my responsibilities as a citizen of the planet?
It is exactly the point. If net zero is such an important thing (which I disagree with anyway, but that is beside the point), then when you find out that you already have it, or that you already got there, why would you then want to further punish yourself by removing important variables so the calculations are completely wrong and you therefore have to punish yourself further...sounds insane to me.
The true measure would be the difference compared with pre-settlement. Up or down? That's what matters and that difference will almost be entirely down to human activity. This is why we should be looking at CO2 output on a per capita basis - not per nation, town, continent, or whatever other arbitrary delimitation gives us a political excuse to abrogate our responsibilities.
Any idea what your annual CO2 output likely is? How far you can get in your ICE vehicle per kg of CO2? Apparently you wouldn't care so long as 'NZ is a carbon sink'. Or have I somehow mistaken your argument?
Who cares. I travel around the world on long haul flights, but at the same time I enable people to use far less fossil fuels and human resources, thereby saving C02, I guess, but the real reason is saving money, so these companies (my clients) can make bigger profits, and therefore pay investors higher dividends. But, I would say I provide a massive decrease in C02 emissions, but that is not the purpose.
What you are saying, in a financial sense, if, we as a country, had no debt whatsoever (which is sadly not the case because of the last six years of incompetence), we should increase taxes and punish ourselves by re-paying debt we don't actually have, and if we tire of that, we should then start paying some other countries debt. That would be insanity.
New Zealand kids can remain uneducated and unskilled, because in 30-40 years we will need people to spoon feed and wipe the bums of all the immigrants we are importing to replace them in the work force. Luckily for us, people in China and India are remaining in school, and getting an education, and then moving to NZ to buy all the houses.
As long as those NZ employers share a portion of their financial gains from exploiting low-skilled migrants with Nat-ACT i.e., donate generously to their party funds, the tap will not be located.
The concern for the government should be on high net migration keeping non-tradable inflation in NZ higher for longer. Another external price shock (major global supply chain issue, persistently high energy prices, etc.) will aggravate the pain to the economy in the medium term from this population sugar hit.
Skipping Meals and Working Overtime: The Sacrifices Americans Make to Afford Housing
- Half of homeowners and renters struggle to afford their housing payments, a recent Redfin survey found.
- Roughly 1 in 5 people who struggle to afford housing have skipped meals and/or worked extra hours to help cover costs, while about 1 in 6 have delayed medical care.
- Skipping vacations was the most common sacrifice among white and Asian respondents, while Black respondents were most likely to work extra hours.
- A surprisingly high share of millennials—most of whom are not retired—have dipped into retirement savings so they can afford housing.
People Are Not Inflation Idiots
And have a look at food prices, up 35–50 percent since 2019 and still rising. It’s not even of this world to tut-tutting people for feeling that this much of an increase in 5 years amounts to getting worse
Probably worth clarifying that US consumer debt does not include mortgages. In NZ we borrow on our houses to spend on other stuff. A few salient facts...
- US mortgages outstanding are about $20 trillion - a shade over 70% of GDP.
- NZ mortgages are around $355bn - about 87% of GDP.
- US interest paid on mortgages is about $750bn per year - about 2.5% of GDP.
- NZ interest paid on mortgages is $21bn - about 5.2% of GDP.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/minister-louise-upston-questions-go…
Minister Louise Upston questions Government paying $2.34 billion in rent, mortgage supplements
Excerpt: "All of the rental accommodation supplement goes to private landlords: tenants who can’t afford the entire cost of where they live get the state help, then those tenants pass that state subsidy across to their landlord via their weekly rent."
Amazing levels of entitlement shown, eh. We subsidise landlords over $2 billion per annum (not including price subsidies, or welfare when houses get shaken or flooded), yet we had years of plaintive shrieking of them losing their dignity at having to pay tax like other folk do.
So $2 billion of rental yield welfare subsidies plus $3 billion of tax cuts. Absolute entitlement.
"They do pay tax like other folk"
Some do. And the wise ones will ... eventually.
I was looking at paying tax on my newer rentals when the last government removed interest deductibility. Now that it's going back to 100% it'll be quite a few years (again) before I'll be paying tax. Gotta love carried forward losses.
The great thing about renting residential property is, unlike real businesses, it's typically not the owner's primary income. They don't need profit to put food on the table because they'll get that from their day job. Load up as much debt as the bank will give them, push any excess deductions forward and hopefully by the time these deductions are to be extinguished they can leverage up more debt for another rental. Or keep gradually loading their OO mortgage against the rentals.
Rinse and repeat until it's time to sell for tax free capital gains.
Government considering ways and means to claw back some Landlord friendly tax incentives they over promised on? How do they claw back without socking the poor tenant who can least afford it? Watch this space....
Who do capital gain chasers, uh-hem Landlords vote for in 2026? A party who will likely giveth with one, taketh the other or one (that when it suits) proposes full blown tax reform i.e. CGT and wealth taxes? It's a minefield for the lovers of brick and mortar!
Which reinforces that it is dam difficult to get rid of govt programmes once they are implemented -regardless of the right or wrong.
SMP scheme for farmers took years to scrap - school lunches will be the same even though it is clear that many recipients dont need the state to feed them
SMPs introduced by Muldoon in 1978. Scrapped by Lange/Douglas soon after the 1984 election victory. Muldoon wanted to retain and strengthen the rural vote. Like all subsidies it was self defeating, a denial of reality. It caused the meat industry already in dire trouble to blunder on into an even greater crisis and created fish hooks in markets such as the USA that did not allow import of subsidised product.
The SMP subsidies were then compounded by the single ownership of all sheep meat by the the NZ Meat Producer’s Board. That galvanised the processors into even more production beyond actual market(s) capacity and as well a lot of not altogether great quality, quick hard frozen for example. Between these two iniatives of Muldoon believe around NZ$2 billion went down the gurgler. Inevitably subsidies end up going down their own vortex.
Without it, those 364,000 tenants would end up on the public housing waitlist. So before you get rid of it, please work out whether the AS subsidy is cheaper than the cost of building them all brand new "warm and dry" houses for which they pay 25% of their benefit money towards. I'd wager that it is.
Just like Labour should have worked out that forcing landlords out of the private rental market by removing a few million dollars of tax deductions resulted in a quadrupling of numbers on the public housing waitlist and a 1000% increase in the cost of emergency housing. And we await with baited breath to find out how much Kainga Ora had to spend to house these people.
The landlord becomes the whipping boy.
We have over 300,000 people on a main benefit, there are over 100,000 on jobseeker government support, wonder how many are claiming the accomodation support payment, if they got a job and paid tax its a win win for the goverment/taxpayer and we would have to bring in record numbers of imigrants such as Labour did in the 2023 year.
Actually, Treasury said it only serves to raise rents.
Do you have any stats to support your claim that landlords were exiting the rental market en masse? Seems like everywhere folk look it only shows rental stock rising.
Either way, spending taxpayer money on building new supply seems a much better investment than as a welfare handout to speculators on existing houses.
Great, so that huge surplus of rental houses should be translating into lower rents any time soon then? All those currently taking the AS can just go find somewhere cheaper to live because there's more rental houses than tenants. And everyone should be allowed to run an AirBnB as there is too many of them.
An updated KPMG/University of Sydney report shows that China is sharply reducing its investments in Australia in favour of other Belt & Road states - in fact investing in B&R partners so it can wind down exposure to Australia. Hmmmmm...
AUKUS to Push Forward With Expansion Despite Quarrels Between Allies
Announced on September 15, 2021, the AUKUS trilateral partnership between the United States, United Kingdom, and Australia promised to bolster Australia's fleet with nuclear-powered submarines and increase defense cooperation among countries in the Asia-Pacific region. The deal led to a diplomatic rift between Australia and France after Canberra reneged on a $66 billion contract with Paris to develop 12 advanced conventionally powered attack submarines.
The terrible problem facing the US Navy
Damn this low unemployment economy
Well the just as well the USN has the 90 plus nuke subs already up & running, whereabouts at any one time anyone’s guess, because that’s the critical naval factor now. Nobody going to catch up to that particular fleet in our lifetime I would wager unless of course some demigod crazy, somewhere in power, tempts fate at which point neither that nor anything else in fact , will matter that much.
Jablon, the rear admiral, gave some more details on how US Navy subs are dispersed.
Twenty-five of the fleet’s 49 attack subs are stationed in the Pacific, he said. But some of those subs – Jablon would not provide specifics – are unavailable for maintenance or other reasons, he said.
Some analysts say that could be up to two-thirds of the fleet.
Expert's warning to US Navy on China: Bigger fleet almost always wins
“An old rule-of-thumb holds that for every vessel operating, two others are required — one preparing for deployment and a second standing down from recent operations,” Sweeney wrote in Proceedings.
Of course, China’s fleet would likely face similar maintenance demands, but it need only cover two oceans – the Pacific and Indian – giving the PLA Navy an advantage in the total number of subs in the Indo-Pacific.
Meanwhile, numbers from the US Congressional Budget Office point to another potential problem for US attack submarines – the fleet is expected to shrink to 46 boats by 2028, before new building programs fully kick in and bring the fleet to as many as 69 boats by 2052.
And last month, US Navy Secretary Carlos Del Toro told a House Appropriations subcommittee that construction of new Virginia-class submarines was “significantly behind” schedule, saying the building was occurring at a rate of 1.4 subs a year, well behind the planned two per year. Link
In reality numbers are academic. Let’s face it. Just one of these vessels, from any nation on any side, either in attack or retaliation, can deliver destruction, devastation that would make Hiroshima & Nagasaki look like modest dust bowls. The ban the bomb movement in the 60’s and on were more than just cognisant. Let’s just hope that they weren’t precognitive.
Over the weekend China released its March FX reserves level and it was little-changed as it has been over the prior three months.
Biden reaches out to Xi Jinping with eye on financial stability
Biden initiated the call. Conceivably, Washington, faced with multiple problems at home and abroad, needs China more than the other way around. Bogged down in the conflicts in Gaza and Ukraine, it can ill afford a confrontation in the Taiwan Straits. Again, the US needs China’s cooperation in important areas such as fentanyl control, climate change, Artificial Intelligence, green-energy transition, etc. — and, most important, financial stability.
Yeah, nothing to see here. Because as we all know, nobody 'leaves money on the table' by underutilising properties...
https://www.thepost.co.nz/nz-news/350237686/10m-homes-some-falling-apart-pulled-market/
When you are in negative equity but possess a non-NZ passport, you just mail the bank the keys, leave the car in the airport long term parking lot, and then go off to another country leaving all your debts behind. Considering the number of newly minted permanent residents over the last couple of years who have constituted the majority of First Home Buyers, this could turn out to be a substantial problem if house prices keep falling.
who would've thought China will move away from Australia after Aussie chose to see China as enemy.
Cambodia wants to divert Southeast Asia’s Mekong River into a planned US$1.7 billion, Chinese-financed shipping canal to reach a deep-sea port at Kep near Sihanoukville on southern Cambodia’s Gulf of Thailand coast.
The Funan Techo Canal would enable Cambodians to be “breathing through our own nose,” said newly elected Prime Minister Hun Manet, son and heir to long-time authoritarian former prime minister Hun Sen.
https://asiatimes.com/2024/04/cambodia-getting-a-china-backed-game-chan…
We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.
Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.