Here's our summary of key economic events over the long weekend that affect New Zealand, with news we return from our long holiday weekend with the rest of the world delivering improved economic performances.
The Chinese Lantern Festival has ended China's New Year celebrations and shows that the feared aggressive surge in infections did not hold back their re-opening. Hospitals and health services are swamped, but the relief drove Spring Festival travel and spending. However long this momentum will last is still an open question. And it seems likely the benefits will be spread unevenly across the country.
China's big state-owned banks are being co-opted into offering unsecured credit card loans for as low as 3.6% to try and keep the holiday momentum going. Worryingly for China, such lending is nowhere near where it was before the pandemic originally hit in early 2020. Mortgage rate cuts for new house buying are spreading too. Perhaps unsurprisingly in retrospect, mortgage loan growth in China was almost non-existent in 2022 (+1.5%, item #6). But that is a huge shift.
The private services PSI survey for China confirmed the official PSI rebound in their services sector in January. (Recall this same private survey did not confirm the factory improvement.)
The end of pandemic restrictions is restarting a migration of China's wealthy to move overseas taking their money with them. Canada is the most favoured destination but the shift to Singapore is substantial too. Other countries will get this flow too. A feature of the 2023 flows is the urgency that these migrants bring with their desire to leave.
Meanwhile, Hong Kong retail sales fell -0.7% in December on an inflation-adjusted basis, but that was a lesser decline that the -5.3% drop in November. For the whole 2022 year, sales fell -3.4% on an inflation-adjusted basis.
In the US there were positive surprises all over the place over the weekend. The biggest was from their labour market where the headline gain in non-farm payrolls came in very much higher than anyone expected, up +516,000 in January. That's its best January increase ever. Only a +185,000 gain was expected. And this data is from the usual "Establishment Survey" of employers. The data from the "Household Survey", which in the past has been less positive, is in fact even more positive this month, up +894,000 employed on the same seasonally adjusted basis. Unadjusted both surveys give a January level the best in more than a decade, probably longer.
Their unemployment rate is now its lowest since 1969.
Any way you look at this, it is strong. More people are in paid employment than ever before; either 160.1 mln in the Household Survey, or 155.1 mln in the employer survey (and the difference is probably unincorporated sole traders).
Also 'positive' in an economics way, wage growth is slowing. Average weekly earnings in January were up +4.7% from a year ago.
But the strong American results don't end there.
The widely-watched ISM services PMI reported a strong recovery in January, up from a small retreat in December. New order levels were the star here. The January level reports a healthy expansion again, and largely confirms the non-farm payrolls report. This is in contrast to the US Markit services PMI we reported earlier last week, which didn't show these gains; a rise to be sure, but that report was contracting still.
We should perhaps also note that the US Federal Government deficit is now less than 5% of GDP, a stunningly quick correction from the -15% level when Trump left office. (When Obama left office it was -3.4% of GDP.) If is also back well below the GFC levels. And not to be ignored, the State governments are now running record surpluses. Of the big states, California brought in a record a +US$42 bln surplus in 2022. Texas is starting 2023 after recording a +US$33 bln surplus. Florida had a +US$22 bln surplus. New York, New Jersey and Illinois are other big states also with big surpluses. All up, American states delivered a 2022 surplus of more than +US$250 bln. That takes a full -1% off the US public deficits. American public finances are actually in relatively good shape, especially when you realise that 21% of their Federal debt is actually owed to itself (agencies like the Fed, or Social Security Administration). Messing with their 'debt limit' is just beat-up partisan politics and both sides understand that - but it plays well to the 'deplorables'.
In Canada, housing sales in their largest city, Toronto (population 6.3 mln), "collapsed" to just 3100 in January, -40% below year-ago levels and prices down -20%.
In the EU, their producer price data didn't come down in December as it had trended earlier. In fact it rose unexpectedly, but 'only' at a +13% annualised rate from November, about half the year-on-year rate.
But German factory orders unexpectedly rose +3.2% in December from November, topping market forecasts of +2% and reversing a downwardly revised -4.4% fall in November. However, as positive as the December gain was, it is still -10% lower than year-ago levels.
Retail sales in Australia fell by -3.9% in December from November, unrevised from the flash data but reversing from a +1.7% rise in the prior month. This was their first decline in their retail trade in 2022 following eleven straight monthly rises.
Retailers are hurting and will be one factor behind the collapse of listed BNPL firm, OpenPay. (Maybe Canstar's 'Outstanding Value" shield masks a bitter truth; it has never been profitable selling its service for less than it cost. Few BNPL firms are profitable. It's chicken-roosting time.)
In Australia, the value of new home loans for owner-occupied homes in Australia fell -4.2% in December from November, sliding for the seventh straight month and coming in worse than forecasts for a -2.75% decline. Refi is strong there however.
And here's an interesting factoid in the nationalist bragging rights corner; Australian GDP (on the up), is about to overtake Russian GDP ( which is falling now). Russia won't qualify for the G20 any more.
Air cargo volumes sagged in December and didn't get back to 2019 pre-pandemic levels as expected. And if it wasn't for strong North American gains the situation would have been a lot worse. China's weakness is still showing in this activity.
Passenger volumes are recovering with momentum, but are still miles below pre-pandemic levels even if the recent trends are strongly up. Again, the drag here is China, although nowhere, including North America, is back to the old normal.
The UST 10yr yield starts today at 3.64% and up a sharp +12 bps from this time Saturday. Markets are changing their tune on what the strong labour market data means for the Fed. The UST 2-10 rate curve is slightly more inverted at -82 bps. But their 1-5 curve is less inverted at -108 bps. However, their 30 day-10yr curve is a lot more inverted at -119 bps. The Australian ten year bond is up +5 bps at 3.54%. The China Govt ten year bond is little-changed at 2.92%. The New Zealand Govt ten year is starting today at 3.96% and unchanged and still its lowest since September 2022.
Wall Street is ending its Monday session down -0.6% on the S&P500 on the same jobs market implications. Overnight, both London and Frankfurt fell about -0.8% but Paris fell -1.3%. Yesterday, Tokyo ended its Monday session up +0.7%. However, Hong Kong fell another sharp -2.2%. Shanghai ended down -0.8% yesterday. The ASX200 ended down -0.3% yesterday and of course the NZX50 didn't trade for the holiday.
The price of gold will open today at US$1867/oz and up +US$5 from this time Saturday.
And oil prices start today little-changed, still at just under US$74/bbl in the US. The international Brent price is now just over US$80/bbl.
The Kiwi dollar is softer as the greenback surges. It is now at 62.8 USc and down another -¾c from Saturday. That's its lowest in a month. All commodity currencies are on the move down. Against the Australian dollar we slightly firmer at 91.5 AUc. Against the euro we are little-changed at 58.6 euro cents. That all means our TWI-5 starts today at 70.5 and down -20 bps from Saturday.
The bitcoin price is now at US$22,999 and down -2.6% from this time Saturday. Volatility over the past 24 hours has been modest at +/- 1.1%.
The easiest place to stay up with event risk today is by following our Economic Calendar here ».
Daily exchange rates
Select chart tabs
83 Comments
Gov Orr is readying his high interest missile to shoot down and destroy the inflation balloon drifting across aotearoa
Whereas all that balloon required was a bow and arrow.
TA says spending intentions are low but "slightly less pessimistic" while Rod Duke is saying he doubts there will be a 2023 recession. Is the archery set on special at Rebel
Isn't that the ideal scenario? Hard for retailers to put prices up when spending intentions are low, so yes that archery set probably is on special.
Alas, bow and arrow sets are largely unavailable at Rebel Sport (I checked). They do have a bow and foam arrow set though. Make of that what you will.
Rebel Clothing. The sports section is getting woefully small and pathetic.
You might want to check the price sticker under the "special" price sticker, before deciding it is in fact "on special"?
Kiwis are tied in that missile, in case we all forget.
Someone should coin a term for the left wing version of "deplorable".
It is not a term we should EVER see from a real journalist.
Not only that, the comment is dead wrong.
The reason is simple; Chaston clings to counting something which counts nothing. As do almost all who benefit from this short-term rape of future generation's access to resources, or ability to enjoy a benign habitat.
Owe something to yourself so that's OK? Spare me. Why did you need to have it on your 'books' at all, then?
Simple question - inconvenient/uncomfortable answer.
Wow the Australian economy is bigger than Russias. And with 6x less people to share it with.
It’s good that we compare ourself to Aus as it sets the bar very high, but I think we are a bit hard on ourselves considering they are very much the lucky country economically.
If only we knew it. Instead everyone is bitter and miserable, looking for someone to point the finger at because life's not perfect.
+1. And if you dare say things aren’t that bad here you are labeled as out of touch.
Happy and content with life = looney left Cindy lover.
I agree, most here are bitter about either house prices, co-governance or "Cindy". As for Australia, well they are shipping coking coal to China again so maybe the woke here will boycott them? They are a wealthy country, $3.5T in private Super is incredible, but they are sitting on the motherlode of resources.
Still room to increase our economic prosperity by accessing more of the US$1.5 trillion market across the Tasman. We have posted goods surpluses with Oz for years and more targeted support (immigration, instant depreciation) could go further.
The overall position is in deficit, however due to the eyewatering amount of "financial services" we import from Oz. Do your bit and take your business to a local bank where possible.
To try and bring a bit of science to the ‘I Reckons’, I just searched for NZ’s Gini coefficient, to see where we stand internationally in terms of inequality. However the most recent international data seemed to be missing NZ.
Does anyone know why this is?
Is Gini based on income or assets?
If it’s income then we must be one of the most equitable countries in the world. Very high minimum wage, working class welfare (WFF), and at the other end of the spectrum we don’t have many on extremely high salaries.
If it’s assets then our stupidly high house prices make for awful inequality.
Ahh found it. Amongst developed countries we are one of the worst, but similar to Australia and significantly better than the UK and the USA.
https://data.oecd.org/inequality/income-inequality.htm
However, to your question, it only accounts for income, and not assets. If you did an income inequality and asset combination, I would suggest NZ would look very ugly. Then if you throw in our cost of living relative to incomes, even uglier…Gini addresses disposable incomes but not costs of living.
So I would say, compared to Australia, our inequality is similar but our general standard of living is significantly lower, in terms of how far our income goes.
I wonder how those other countries get better income equity than us? It looks like they either need very high tax rates or to just be poor.
But to come back to the original point, lets take a fairly worst case example of working class poverty: two adults earning minimum wage supporting 2 kids. Such a family would get paid $1412 a week after tax, plus WFF of $72 a week (less than I thought, have I got that right?). Let's say they pay $550 a week in rent (would they also get accommodation supplement?), that leaves $1,868 a fortnight. This is very close to how much our family of 4 spends per fortnight (we spend ~$2000). I would say we live fairly well, we don't have expensive cars or phones or TV subscriptions, but we eat pretty well and don't exactly count our pennies.
Many of the Nordic and Eastern European countries are better. And yes that involves higher taxes and more distribution.
The poorest countries actually have the highest levels of inequality.
Btw I am not out to bag NZ. I have nowhere near the same negative views of NZ as Brock does, for example.
But if you look at it objectively, we are average or worse than average on many measures in terms of developed economies.
Doesn’t mean overall that NZ is a bad place to live. Although it is for many, and increasingly so.
"and increasingly so" - I am not convinced of that.
Interesting. You don’t think increasing numbers of people are struggling? The data is pointing that way.
So Have I got this right - you are basically a centre-right ‘progressive’. You would vote for National in a jiffy if they did much more in public transport.
Because that’s the way you come across. As someone without much empathy or care for poverty and its growing predominance.
That’s fine, it’s just a bit curious that’s all.
"You don’t think increasing numbers of people are struggling" - compared to when? Minimum wage has gone up from $15.75 in 2017 to $21.20 in 2023, that is 35% and way ahead of inflation. I don't know for certain but I feel like the definition of struggling gets looser by the year. Which is great, we should be moving ahead and we shouldn't have the levels of poverty they had many moons ago, but its then hard to say people are struggling more now than then.
" You would vote for National in a jiffy if they did much more in public transport."
Not really. I actually believe in a fairly high tax rate with the government investing in areas that only they can, particularly education but also health and infrastructure (such as public transport). Handouts are a wasted investment IMO, a short term fix that creates a long term problem. I'm not against our current welfare state at present, but I don't really want it expanded.
But I'm also not a fan of people who don't try in life and then complain that they have nothing. I guess that is the centre-right side of me. And I hate criminals, lock them all up forever I say, that is the far right side of me!
I also believe strongly in market forces (and not crony capitalism), but I believe the government has a role to play to ensure the market is paying the true price for things like environmental damage. Things like the fuel tax subsidy are a double negative for me, subsidising transport (why?) and subsidising environmental damage (why?).
$550 in rent? Maybe when viewed nationally. Add on $150 for Auckland, though.
Although they don't have to live in Auckland. And if they do hopefully at least one income earner would be on more than minimum wage.
But can you see why I get a bit annoyed when everyone is claiming that you can't live off NZ wages when our household seems to live fairly well off effectively 2x minimum wage (In our case we earn significantly more and choose to use most of it to slam the mortgage). We have been living off that amount or less for a number of years.
Sure some families don't have two income earners or have more kids, so yes it isn't the worst case scenario.
Lol. One only needs to look at the number of Utes on our roads to understand where kiwis spend so much..many probably on tick plus monthly insurance, RUC, fuel.... i reckon only about 5% of the total volume of utes are justified. I suspect around 10-20% of annual income for many are wasted on a Ute just to look cool.
That and the unnecessary size of mortgages (buying to big, too flash at the peak), rents, baches, boats, flash caravans and huge motorhomes etc..
Explains why so few of us successful, middle aged, basic home owners with cheap jap cars .. are surfing the best breaks during the week (instead of working to pay for bling cars and houses). So def not complaining :)
$150+$132 equals 15% less to spend. Respectfully JJ that's substantial. With zero room for anything unexpected to go wrong.
We probably spend a fair chunk of that on house insurance and maintenance which a renter wouldn’t need to. We could also shave probably $80 a week off our food bill if we tried (and still eat fairly well). Like I said we don’t really watch our pennies or try to live frugally, we just don’t throw money away.
There is a big difference between David's claims and that IMF table. Can David post a link to support Aussie becoming bigger than Russia.
The chart in the Wikipedia page says the data is from '22. Depending when exactly in the year a lot may have changed since then.
Yes particularly for Russia.
"Maybe Canstar's 'Outstanding Value" shield masks a bitter truth"
Canstar (originally Canex) will give you a star for just about anything you want - if you pay for it.
Andy Willink started it up in the early 90's after he left Toronto Dominion Bank as an early predecessor to Interest.co.nz - a banking rate comparison site, and 'giving' stars was a smart extension to highlight 'the best' rates.
And here's an interesting factoid in the nationalist bragging rights corner; Australian GDP (on the up), is about to overtake Russian GDP ( which is falling now). Russia won't qualify for the G20 any more.
GDP is calculated by adding up value-added activities. This is the problem with the financial sector - what is the value added? It is so difficult to work out the value added by the financial sector that a fictional value is made up and added onto GDP. The difficulty in calculating the figure is because essentially there is no value added, only value extracted and so in reality, it should be deducted from GDP. Link
"why did 99% of City workers not understand the system they were participating in!?"
Because that 99% aren't paid to think, but as we all are, just to do. It's not until much later a frightening understanding of 'where it all come from' sinks in.
Noted elsewhere, rural and essentially elderly population produce 81% of export earnings and yet account for 6% (?) Of GDP. Yeah rite.
Forgot to add that as a contract milker my contribution to gdp is to service industry not Agri, go figure.
Don’t imagine Putin will lose any sleep if Russia doesn’t attend the G20. His immediate concern is militarily and turning push into shove to the west. If this forthcoming spring offensive falters & stalls then Putin will lose a lot more than sleep.
This proxy war really worries me. And the Ukrainians seem determined to remain independant. Its going to be impossible for Russia to hold long term without genocide. I just do not understand putins logic.
Any "end game" seems a long way off at this point. You've got three participants (Ukraine, Russia and NATO) all of whom are unlikely to want to give an inch.
I've got an old school friend who has been in Ukraine, frequently near the front lines, reporting since the invasion. One thing he keeps mentioning over and over is just how dogged and determined the Ukrainians he's met are - even though they are suffering substantial losses and outnumbered, there is an iron will to keep fighting (and to be fair they appear to be doing a good job of it)
So you've got Ukraine, with a large population of fighting age people, and a will to keep battling. You've got NATO, which is more than happy to keep supplying weaponry as it's an easy route to weakening one of your key enemies; let a third party "do the dirty work" with your equipment, which makes perfect sense I guess. Finally you've got Russia, with its inexhaustible population of potential recruits/conscripts, plenty of resources and military production capabilities, and most importantly a leader for whom any backwards step at this point is probably game over for his leadership.
Short of some massive breakthrough by Russia that causes the whole defence to topple over (as opposed to the current "give a bit, take a bit" fighting) it seems that some of those NATO projections of an 8-10 year conflict would be fairly accurate.
Nice post.
yep who knows? Somehow I doubt 8-10 years. I would wager between another 2-3 years.
For me, at some point Russia’s sheer weight of size will count. I think there will come a point where Ukraine’s loss of life starts getting a bit intolerable to them, and there could be a negotiation where some of the eastern parts of Ukraine go to Russia.
Or not…. Ukraine does seem very determined, and it’s their sovereign territory after all, not territory they took from the Russians.
The Dnieper river was a formidable barrier, to advancing eastwards for both Napoleon & Adolf. It will provide the same for Russia westwards. There were four huge battles for Kharkov in WW2 as it controls the territory southwards , east of the Dnieper. If Russia wants to topple Kiev, first Russia must take Kharkov. What Putin’s objective might have come down to now is securing all former Ukrainian territory east of the Dnieper and then create a fortified border running west to east at some point south of Kharkov. Of course that is still a huge border, a swathe of territory, difficult and expensive to control.
Russian occupation would be catastrophically brutal. Ukraine know this and so will fight until the very end. Nothing inspires resolve more than one's family and freedom.
Ukraine will not roll. It will be up to Russia;
Either Russia de-escalates and withdraw, or Russia escalates to a point that draws in "active" participation from other nations.
Exactly, if you are a Ukrainian male of fighting age you can't leave Ukraine anyway, and most don't want to.
Putin's claim to "denazify" Ukraine really means killing or disappearing anyone he does not like; huge numbers have been relocated sideways or downwards without trace.
So you stand and fight, for your lives, not for a salary.
Exactly again. Holodomor. Pre & post WW2. Ukrainians have not forgotten, some still living experienced it. No Ukrainian could possibly imagine that Putin is going to be an easier tyrant than Stalin.
I think the 8-10 year predictions were based around the intensity of the conflict decreasing at some point, and effectively it becoming a complete stalemate with isolated skirmishes.
The end is probably going to be a case of who "bleeds out" first.
Russia has the larger manpower reserves, but their strategy at the moment does seem to entail going for the Zerg Rush approach (for anyone familiar with Starcraft terminology - aka throwing an endless number of seemingly worthless, disposable bodies at the target until you make some gains). Life is cheap to them ... I don't think any number of deaths and injuries will be too much for their society and command to accept, it's just the 'cost of doing business'. One thing my journo friend said was hard to believe is how poorly Russia tends to treat injured troops; most of the time they are just being left to crawl off and bleed to death somewhere, or given the most basic of medical attention e.g. patch up your missing arm with a piece of old bungee cord.
Ukraine's losses will be proportionally higher relative to the fighting age population, and it's clear some of their previous successes in mounting lightning fast counterattacks etc are unlikely to be repeatable as the conflict bogs down, but then they have the defender's advantage and that strong desire to protect their land which cannot be overlooked (any arguments over who it belongs to aside - what matters for this discussion is perception ... the Ukrainian soldier sees the land as his, and he will fight to defend it.).
All in all, a recipe for a protracted conflict unless one side makes a significant breakthrough that cannot be countered and forces a resolution, or somehow common ground can be reached for negotiation.
I still think that the end of the war will come with Putin being overthrown by his own people. When this will happen, is unfortunately very difficult to predict.
it's been well discussed here. Putin has NEVER made sense in justifying the invasion. None of the reasoning he provided to the west has been supported by facts, although there are plenty who fell over themselves accepting whatever rubbish he spouted. In the beginning it was not a proxy war, but it is becoming one. Western, including NATO, hubris meant they overlooked the best opportunity to stop it cold at the start. So now they are committed to having Russia waste its men in a meat grinder that is slowly but inexorably destroying all of Ukraine. Russia cannot win now unless they escalate to nukes, and even that will be a losing strategy.
There are opinions coming out that Putin will be toppled by ultra-nationalists in favour of the war. If this comes about, they will likely escalate. But Europe has realised just how vulnerable they are. And Zelensky is purging pro-Russian people and corruption now too (a little late, but better than never), as they dig in harder. Russia is running out of bodies to throw into the fight, their much vaunted technology has proven to be less than believed.
Putin is likely now trapped by his hubris and rhetoric. He cannot stop because if he tries he'll get toppled (his retirement fund will likely be made of lead if that happens, or he'll have a parachuting lesson from a top floor in one of Moscow's buildings). But if he continues the damage to the country becomes increasingly severe.
I suspect that much of Europes reported fighting ready tanks etc may well not last a month due to lack of maintenance etc. What is clear is that the US supplied high tech weaponry works well on the battlefield. I suspect that their minature drones are also providing a lot of intel. China is on the back foot, they have never tested their systems on the battlefield.
I suspect the Abrams will be a problem for Ukraine, but Germany's leopards are extremely good tanks. I wouldn't sell Ukraine short. I expect their troops will step up to whatever is needed. My concern is that with all the publicity Russia will be trucking all the anti-tank weaponry to Ukraine, if it wasn't already there, and developing the tactics to counter the appearance of modern, heavy armour. Plenty will be lost because of that.
I understand NATO and the US has always been providing Ukraine with recce intel. My biggest concern is that the Ukraine has been restrained in the use of western supplied weapons outside their borders. But Russia is launching attacks from outside their borders. So Ukraine's defence is being hamstrung. They need to be able to strike at sites where the attacks are being launched from, no matter where they are. Ukraine has been pretty clever with their own locally developed weapon systems though. I expect to see more of that too.
Agree with your second paragraph.
The restraint isn't just from Ukraine's Allies though. Attack internationally defined Russian soil and a nuclear response becomes palatable to the Russian people and somewhat internationally justifiable.
Ukraine must play a solely defensive strategy whether they like it or not.
Muz, what is the measure, the early opportunity for the West to stop it cold, that you think was not taken?
I am interested in Muz’s response too.
I assume two options, both with significant problems:
1. The West / NATO went in to Ukraine with its own military forces to repel Russia
2. The West / NATO was much stronger in demanding that Ukraine compromise on its territory
Option 1 Foxy and HM. Yes there were problems. The biggest being that Russia (Putin) rattled the nuke sabre and no one really knew how serious he was. I got it wrong initially and did not realise that NATO maintained stocks of US nukes in Europe, but a repeat of the MAD doctrine if Russia escalated to nukes would have given them pause. The politicians all believed that diplomacy would succeed. But nothing short of unconditional surrender was going to meet Putin's requirements, and NATO/Europe would never have had the legal standing to force Ukraine to surrender any of it's territory. So with plenty of advance warning Russia invaded Ukraine in the belief NATO and Europe would sit on their hands and dither. they were sort of right. What they under estimated was the Ukrainian will to defend their own homeland and refusal to accept a return of a Soviet style jackboot.
I think NATO and Europe completely misread Putin's and the Russian's people's psychology. Putin had made his potion of power on being a strongman, and current generations of Russians were raised on Soviet propaganda about the west, so they liked the strongman. For satisfaction, the west would essentially have to kneel to him, and there would have been no stopping him if they did that. if he wins any way, there will be no stopping him (or whoever replaces him).
Now this war could continue until Russia literally runs out of bodies to throw into it (some reports suggest that is already happening, but I doubt them as their casualties are too light for that yet). How long until the people turn on their own leadership? One report i read about the prisoners recruited to fight indicated an 80% casualty rate, with Wagner group bayonets at their back!
Curled up in that too, in terms of diplomacy, is rather an awkward precedent, for want of a better word. Bush junior & Blairunder a completely false flag, invaded Iraq a distant sovereign state that Bush senior & Major and others had deliberately left under Hussein’s dictatorship. A bit of a rod for a few backs thats turned out to be hasn’t it.
Yes a totally unjust war, and does make it hard for the West to claim higher moral ground.
They were idiots. To be fair Sadam needed to go, but there was no justification to do what they did. Helen Clark did well to step back from supporting it.
I suspect Option 1 would have had a very strong likelihood of escalation to WWIII hence it was off the table. Of course, we will never know. But we are talking about Putin here, although claims of irrationality are possibly exaggerated.
WW3 was a possibility no matter the option. It still is.
As to Putin's rationality? Did he believe what he was saying or just posturing to the media while he tried to rewake Imperial Russia? Who really knows. There are plenty of crims who think they are good at justifying why they do what they do. In the end though, nothing he said to the world to justify what he did stood up to scrutiny.
Yes, but I think it was far more likely if NATO had gone in all guns blazing. Hence the (correct) decision not to.
It’s all about ‘less bad options’.
They didn't have to go in "all guns blazing". All they had to do was match Russia's build up sufficiently to make them take pause. To many assume and/or take an extremist position in these situations. Putin's rhetoric did. But a graduated response to indicate to them they could not win, no matter what would have prevented the war even beginning. Ukraine, the US, the EU and NATO all knew Putin's plans months before they invaded. They had plenty of time to back all the talk up.
If they'd called Putin's bluff, and NATO immediately established a no fly zone over Ukraine at the very beginning that might have worked, too late now??
Don't think Putin would have actually started WW111 over it.
Would NATO have the authority to do that, given Ukraine is not part of NATO?
I suspect they could, given the physical ability was actually there, but Western inertia and the time taken to assess Putin's threats were against them; as well as politics.Playing into his hands as he predicted, not too much of a risk (despite the stakes) to count on the inertia and fait accompli.
Putin"s problem is he hasn't accomplished that much, despite circa 100000 dead and massive property and environmental destruction; has a tiger by the tail..
Sure wish India and China would boycott Russia; that would definitely shrink their economy and stop the war; but they don't even decry it.
The issue is the UN. They are hamstrung by the Veto.
The UN could have applied a no-fly zone with no concerns re NATO. Technically they could have put peacekeepers on the ground to stop land based invasion as well.
This conflict has highlighted just how pointless the UN is.
I believe Putin would start WW3 as long as the internal narrative was good. Modern media has meant that level of control in Russia is compromised though, so he is more cautious in his approach.
Putin has NEVER made sense in justifying the invasion.
Setting the Record Straight; Stuff You Should Know About Ukraine
Honestly, what a pile of total bullshit, Audaxes.
Adx, if you can, do me a favour and dig out & repost that article Kissinger wrote about why Ukraine must stay out of NATO. Thought I had printed a copy, but if I did I have lost it, which is not an unusual habit unfortunately.
Ukraine never joining NATO is implicit agreement that they are not sovereign, rather they are defacto part of Russia.
Perhaps Kissinger should have consulted with the populace on the ground before making his recommendations.
It is ironic isn't it? A US statesman discussing the right of some other country's right to it's own sovereignty? What about the people, and what they think?
Geo politics are about politicians and we discuss their merits regularly here!
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/henry-kissinger-to-settle-the-u…
As NATO is basically US led, it is well within the purview of US foreign policy advisors.
Putin has NEVER made sense in justifying the invasion.
Fundamentally he's grossly over estimated how weak the West is. I.e, he believed too much of his own administration's propaganda.
Rumor has it Russia is running out of "single use soldiers" . I think Putin believes if he can just out wait the West he will win. He might be waiting longer than he expected.
Your sources TDS is still showing. When Trumpie left office, US was not yet in post Covid recovery.
Overlay with presidential terms, he is right, Trumps deficits were seriously growing pre COVID.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_budget#/media/File:…
Evidence from US Labour clearly says high interest rate lead high employment and much better economy.So now aggressive high interest rate needed. Worldwide Fed bank must increase their OCR to 20%pa or higher. Next time no farm payroll will go up 2Million new jobs. New Zealand Reserve bank must increase OCR at least 30%.pa Minimum home loan rate is 50% pa and bussiness lending must be 80%pa. New Zealand will be much new economy shape.
It didn’t work for Turkey and Venezuela
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newsroom.co.nz/citizens-advice-bureau-…
Auckland Major's finger to struggling residents.
Awful awful idea. Such a valuable service.
Increase rates and/or sell assets, if necessary.
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.