Breakfast briefing: Eyes on Chinese housing markets

Economy / news

Global insurers signal coverage pullback for climate risks; buyers enticed out in China after mortgage rule relaxation; UST 10yr 4.21%; gold slips again and oil holds; NZ$1 = 59.4 USc; TWI-5 = 68.6

5th Sep 23, 7:19am by David Chaston

Here's our summary of key economic events overnight that affect New Zealand, with news it will be worth keeping an eye on Chinese housing sales in September.

But first we should note that the rest of the world has basically had its feet up overnight, and there is little new data, or events to report.

China has nothing to say (because it won't say anything unless it is 'good'), and the US and Canada are making the most of their long weekend holiday. Europe has nothing special to report, and Japan seems out to lunch too.

Probably best you just skim the data updates below and move on to other stuff today!

If you really want to know, we can report that the Swiss GDP grew +0.5% in Q2 from a year ago, unchanged from Q1. But that has no implications for New Zealand of course.

Or we can report that German exports fell -0.9% in July from June to be -1% below of the same month a year ago.

Or we can report that major Chinese retailers are shutting down stores at a faster pace as they are unable to lure back customers who switched to online shopping during pandemic lockdowns.

Or that President Xi is skipping the G20 meeting in India, a break from his habit of attending every G20 leaders’ summit since taking power in 2012. The possible reasons are many, including focusing on economic problems at home, to trying to avoid being held accountable for a growing number of border disputes with its neighbours (and not the least, with host India). Accountability is something Xi doesn't do - he expects it of others, doesn't like it for himself.

In Australia, maybe you are interested that company profits fell -13% in the June quarter from the March quarter? Or are down -12% from year ago levels? (No evidence of 'greedflation' there.) No? Didn't think so.

Maybe you have come across something more interesting overseas that might affect New Zealand? If so, note it in the comment section below.

Actually, here is something that we should really keep an eye on. In the US, a set of major insurers are cutting natural disaster cover, especially in areas that need it most. Warren Buffet's Berkshire Hathaway, which also offers reinsurance, wrote that increased climate disasters mean “it is possible that policy terms and conditions could be updated or revised to reflect changes in such risk.” (It is a significant change of view by Warren Buffett.) The companies pulling back, or saying they will, are large and influential, and their influence will be felt here. Berkshire Hathaway is active in New Zealand and Australia. Further, life insurance companies are reassessing whether they should have as much invested in mortgage portfolios - also due to climate risks embedded in the mortgages of those portfolios. Climate uninsurability is a real thing right now.

And perhaps this is also worth noting. The relaxation of mortgage standards in China has in fact brought out the buyers - in some major cities at least, and in the first weekend of the relaxation. And shares in Chinese property firms have jumped after developer Country Garden reportedly secured an extension to a key debt payment deadline. Major home builders including Country Garden and Evergrande saw their shares rise in Hong Kong yesterday.

The UST 10yr yield will start today up +3 bps at 4.21%. Their key 2-10 yield curve is flatter at -66 bps. And their 1-5 curve inversion is unchanged at -109 bps. Their 3 mth-10yr curve inversion is also flatter at -117 bps. The Australian 10 year bond yield is now at 4.11% and up +7 bps from yesterday. The China 10 year bond rate is up +4 bps at 2.66%. And the NZ Government 10 year bond rate is now at 4.99% and up +10 bps.

Wall Street is still on holiday, so no trading there. Overnight European markets all slipped about -0.2%. Yesterday, Tokyo ended ist Monday session up +0.7%. Hong Kong raced ahead by +2.5% (some of which was catchup from the lost Friday session, some for the property companies). Shanghai rose +1.4%. The ASX200 ended its Monday session up +0.6% but the NZX50 fell -0.1%, hurt by the fall of SkyCity.

The price of gold will start today at just under US$1938/oz and down -US$2 from yesterday.

And oil prices are holding at just on US$85.50/bbl in the US. The international Brent price is firmish at just over US$88.50/bbl.

The Kiwi dollar starts today unchanged from yesterday, still at 59.4 USc. Against the Aussie we are -¼c lower at 91.9 AUc. Against the euro we are also down about the same at 55 euro cents. That all means the TWI-5 has slipped -15 bps to 68.6.

The bitcoin price is up a mere +US$10 today from this time yesterday, and is now at US$25,895. Volatility over the past 24 hours has been low at just on +/- 0.7%.

The easiest place to stay up with event risk today is by following our Economic Calendar here ».

Daily exchange rates

Select chart tabs

Source: RBNZ

Source: CoinDesk

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.

98 Comments

by tomjones_04 | 5th Sep 23, 7:25am 1693855556

https://www.youtube.com/live/GpkRpeUPsHI?si=MY8JaKNpXSWeo4Ke

A while lot of talk on here about the property recovery. Please look further than NZ and you may start to build an understanding of what's going on. Hint: it's not good.

by Pa1nter | 5th Sep 23, 7:39am 1693856374

Most of my reading and research is outside of NZs shores, because I don't think our country is as independently managed as many think.

China does seem to be in for some hard times, their growth as world manufacturer looks to be coming to an end. Their property situation also looks tenuous. So there's implications for everyone else if they go tits up.

Then again, this is the CCP, so who knows what methods they might use to kick the can some more.

Good thing there's so much overhead in our OCR.

by tomjones_04 | 5th Sep 23, 7:56am 1693857402

I hate to admit it... but with the economic storm on the horizon. Perhaps Luxons business and P&L experience will lend well. I hate Nationals pro property stance, but I'm more comfortable with a business minded leader instead of a career politician. Thoughts?

by Pa1nter | 5th Sep 23, 8:05am 1693857945

All these parties are fairly short term in outlook, but yeah I'd say National would navigate a global economic crisis better than Labour. What the hangover would be like is another story.

by powerdownkiwi | 5th Sep 23, 8:36am 1693859810

No - because it isn't just an economic crisis; and they are more blind to the bigger picture than Labour. But not by much. This is a 'global peak everything, where to from here?' moment, and I don't think neoliberal economics - or its congregation - have a clue.

Let us pray...

by QuickFox | 5th Sep 23, 8:57am 1693861022

I was hoping for a new direction but TOP don't look like they will get there, so now believe that National is our best option going forward, fiscally conservative but hopefully socially aware and active, especially education and health related.

by malamah | 5th Sep 23, 9:50am 1693864219

The problem with polls, and voting based on their results, is that the election becomes more of a sheepish alignment than a popularity contest than a democracy.

Vote who you think has the best policy, regardless of the polls. Your vote is one in about 3,000,000 so it already makes close to zero difference, so there truly is no such thing as a wasted vote because your individual vote simply does not matter. So we all may as well put our chip onto the number we actually believe in than pretending like voting for a popular party will make any difference to the outcome.

by rolande | 5th Sep 23, 9:51am 1693864276

I was a bit turned off when the TOP website says it has a Christchurch Policy, but none for other regions. Seems a bit like a single interest party.

by JimboJones | 5th Sep 23, 10:19am 1693865986

Quite the opposite I would say. National tend to run the "close the wallet" type economics, which is actually the best thing for the government to do in the good times. In the bad times the government should open the wallet and use all the savings they made in the good times to help support businesses and individuals.

by malamah | 5th Sep 23, 10:46am 1693867564

This is why their policy is trash, they're trying to simultaneously open and close the wallet. Trouble is that we've already spent our bad times money. Whoops.

by KH | 5th Sep 23, 11:01am 1693868517

Yes. Government should "open the wallet"

Put every single person on a benefit. Triple the benefits.

We would all be rich. Magic.

by malamah | 5th Sep 23, 11:17am 1693869474

We all already are rich, we're millionaires don't you know? Our houses are top tier and worth every penny. Definitely absolutely nothing to do with government subsidies and central bank control of money supply. But sure, job seekers are the problem.

I'm 100% with you on cutting benefits and subsidies though, let's start with uhm... government first home buyer contribution. Then we can cut accommodation supplement and income related rents. We could cut super by several billion without making a dent in the wellbeing of our retiring population. While we're at it, we can move property investors from special resi interest rates to business rates, and require at least 12% cash equity for purchase as per bank lending regulations. Why stop there? Outlaw interest deductibility as it promotes lending over owning outright, stop subsidizing capital gains, stop interest only loans... any other benefit or subsidy you'd like to close the wallet on?

by sparrow | 5th Sep 23, 8:07am 1693858040

Well so far he's presented a tax policy with a whole lot of assumptions for extra revenue that are very unlikely to eventuate.

Over-priced housing is one of our biggest problems, and a main reason our best and brightest young people are leaving, so there's plenty of policy to crank those house values back up.

And failing to lower our carbon emissions is forecast by Treasury to cost billions in offshore credits, but they're kicking that can down the road and proposing policies that will raise emissions.

So no, I don't believe so. He's a bean counter with no vision for the future.

by Blackbeard | 5th Sep 23, 8:22am 1693858928

Apart from a vision to flick off his property portfolio. Again, conflict of interest is astounding.

by rastus1 | 5th Sep 23, 8:46am 1693860404

He's highly religious - so believes a god will save us all, no climate plan required. Religion can be a very dangerous thing.

by TronMVP | 5th Sep 23, 10:28am 1693866481

I've seen no evidence that he is highly religious nor that he thinks we will be saved from a climate crisis.

by Yvil | 5th Sep 23, 8:26am 1693859218

Spot on Tom!

by Richardfromauckland | 5th Sep 23, 8:44am 1693860282

Buy low, sell high. Go forward. Add value. Drill down.

Nah, I don't think Luxon will be a strong PM due to his business background. I'm with pdk on this one.

by Albert2020 | 5th Sep 23, 8:52am 1693860727

You really think luxon is in charge of National? Look to their board members and donors to see who’s in charge

by nigelh | 5th Sep 23, 6:21pm 1693894905

Probably not much different from Chippy and labour. They are only front men with others pulling the strings in the background

by morphyoss | 5th Sep 23, 8:31am 1693859513

It's no wonder why the talk of a property recovery is so loud... when the likes of NZME's revenues are so heavily dependant on property listings and advertising. There is no way now that NZ Media is impartial on this topic, having sold their souls long ago.

by dbbr | 5th Sep 23, 9:06am 1693861618

Thanks for sharing this. Was watching this guy yesterday on Kitco in YT, was a good interview there also.

by Averageman | 5th Sep 23, 7:42am 1693856524

If China catches an economic cold, NZ is on life support. Logs, dairy, tourism, and housing speculation all heavily vested in receiving Chinese money.

But let the specubulls leverage up and go long. Betting they will be recycled as burger mince.

Learning how to spell yield again will be no bad thing.

by Pa1nter | 5th Sep 23, 7:43am 1693856607

Well yeah, we have a decently sized export economy, so feel the effects when our trading partners get sick.

Maybe yields will return. More likely, money printer will go burr again. You should get the blood you seek in the interim.

by Averageman | 5th Sep 23, 11:21am 1693869710

Perhaps. That just boosts the inflationary s#$t storm which has a direct impact with interest rates if the RB actually does its job vs putting bank profit ahead of the country.

Snr doctors go on strike for the first time ever. They just want to keep up with the inflationary mess this Govt has precided over. They are all sick of training jnr specialists just to export them to Aussie.

This is a much bigger issue than many realise, as many of the Snr doctors approach retirement. Who will be left....?

by Pa1nter | 5th Sep 23, 7:57am 1693857431

That same argument goes for literally every skills based vocation we have who's members are hitting retirement age.

Repair an old carburettor

Build something that doesn't come in pre-done framing

Etc etc

by FCM | 5th Sep 23, 8:35am 1693859752

Well the young won't have a problem as they flock to Aussie. Hipkins did them a massive favour earlier this year, but no so good for the long term economy and elderly left behind. I was over there three weeks ago and speaking to a few employers and they said there are a lot of Kiwis applying for jobs and moving there.

by powerdownkiwi | 5th Sep 23, 8:40am 1693860027

Long term economy?

An oxymoron.

Where are the resource and energy inputs coming from, in what quantities?

The only question in town.

by Averageman | 5th Sep 23, 7:55am 1693857330

Your bias is showing. Try thinking "reality" instead of "blood".

by Pa1nter | 5th Sep 23, 7:58am 1693857526

The one you're longing for seems to focus on misfortune. I'm not sure what your Tommee Tippie book of pathology says about that. Probably not "warm cuddly type"

by Averageman | 5th Sep 23, 8:01am 1693857676

Again your specu bias is showing. It's just way past time for the Jenga players to wake up to the fact that the last block is being slid out.

by Pa1nter | 5th Sep 23, 8:08am 1693858116

Sorry what's my bias pointing towards?

I've been fairly pessimistic about the long term prospects for our setup since the GFC. But that it'll wax and wane for decades, with diminishing efficacy.

If I'm speculating on anything, it's doubling down on a simple life and good relations with those around me.

by Averageman | 5th Sep 23, 8:17am 1693858669

Black....

by Yvil | 5th Sep 23, 8:33am 1693859586

Very ironic Avergeman, you accusing Pa1nter of bias when you obviously can't see your own. Your wish for other's misfortune is very obvious in your posts, well obvious to others but clearly not to yourself. That's the definition of bias!

by Averageman | 5th Sep 23, 9:00am 1693861259

Mine is well on my sleeve.

by HouseMouse | 5th Sep 23, 8:42am 1693860159

I am so with you on that last paragraph.

Focus on what is within our sphere of influence, and is personally most important to us. The health and wellbeing of ourselves and our loved ones.

Because our ability to influence beyond that is close to zilch, and it’s futile worrying about it.

That’s why I am not going to let the depressing state of our political parties and their policies get me down!

by rastus1 | 5th Sep 23, 8:54am 1693860883

Really? French nuclear testing, Springbok Rugby, South Island Beech forests. All examples of people who acted outside their immediate sphere to influence better outcomes.

Yesterday I nearly got my head kicked in for confronting a drag bike ripping up the park - he wont come back.

Lack of action and focusing just on 'me' is a big part of the problem.

by HouseMouse | 5th Sep 23, 9:00am 1693861201

I have spent much of the last 10 years focussed on consistent advocacy etc (btw I have been in two not for profit groups). It’s come to almost nothing. For me at least, it’s time for a refocus.

It’s great that there’s others still willing to take up the fight. Good luck!

by rastus1 | 5th Sep 23, 9:51am 1693864264

I hope others do HM. But despondency and/or ranting on social media seems to be the outlet of today.

by HouseMouse | 5th Sep 23, 10:10am 1693865405

Despondency is totally understandable, especially when we have had a Labour government that promised to do so much but has completely failed on most of its promises.

Political hope has been sucked out of many people.

by JimboJones | 5th Sep 23, 12:22pm 1693873321

So we instead vote for a government that promises so little and delivered so little in their last term. But with the perk of a $25 tax cut (advertised as $250)

by Yvil | 5th Sep 23, 8:28am 1693859311

Great post Painter!

by nktokyo | 5th Sep 23, 7:44am 1693856697

Evergrande share price is down approximately 99% over 5 years. Doh.

by Averageman | 5th Sep 23, 7:58am 1693857509

Suddenly crypto dosent look that bad.

by Baywatch | 5th Sep 23, 10:46am 1693867603

Half of the People in Turkey Now Own Crypto: Report

KuCoin says crypto adoption is high in Turkey, as observed in other nations struggling with rapid inflation.

by King of the whiners | 5th Sep 23, 7:51am 1693857103

The retreat of US insurers in the face of climate change disasters is turning into a rout: https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2023/09/03/natural-disaster-cli…

by King of the whiners | 5th Sep 23, 8:27am 1693859225

It's so deeply, deeply ironic. Your average climate change denier tends to be a right wing zealot who believes that 'the market' is all powerful and all encompassing' and that governments should be minimized to make way for the 'free' market, which is never wrong. Well you don't get more market orientated (or fundamental to the capitalist economy) than the mighty insurance industry - one of the very pillars of the FIRE economy. And here is that same industry in the process of being overwhelmed by climate change, and slashing it's own markets in the hope of survival in a much reduced form. I believe it's called a 'market signal'?

by morphyoss | 5th Sep 23, 8:38am 1693859919

As someone who myself is inherently sceptical of markets behaving in ways that look after the public good. It is encouraging to me to see the market essentially doing the good work here where politicians have failed us.

Regardless of what politicians believe, the insurance market will likely force the change that is required. Its just a shame it will be years later and much more expensive than had we started taking it seriously years ago.

Here in NZ, Hipkins and Luxon can kick the can down the road as long as they like, but if insurers say no, they are essentially powerless to do anything about it.

That being said a little more competition in the insurance market here wouldn't go amiss.

by murray86 | 5th Sep 23, 8:49am 1693860598

I'm afraid I'm somewhat more sceptical. I would suggest the 'public good' is an unintended consequence, not a desired outcome.

"Regardless of what politicians believe, the insurance market will likely force the change that is required. Its just a shame it will be years later and much more expensive than had we started taking it seriously years ago I assume you're referring to property values here? Again, not what they're trying to achieve, but will definitely be impacted. This a pure and simple greed move.

But they will lobby Government to ensure that for anyone to qualify for EQC cover, then they must carry private insurance cover. But that cover will be as I indicate below, expensive and not worth anything because of exclusion clauses. I like the other comment where EQC sets itself up to take premiums directly for home owners. That makes a large degree of sense, and would keep profits in the country too.

by morphyoss | 5th Sep 23, 9:02am 1693861365

Yeah good point. I do agree with you especially about a greed move for the industry. But it just goes to show you how far things have come that they are taking this seriously well before our leaders and public agencies have been.

I do like the idea of direct EQC cover (especially being based in CHCH). But we would also have to be weary of it becoming a tool just for just doing nothing about the climate crisis. It would become incredibly expensive if it just became a fund to essentially keep rebuilding houses in the danger zone...

We actually need to have a plan to actually move out of the way, otherwise a incresingly larger amount of money every year will go on trying to rebuild our sandcastles, despite the incoming tide. If threatening peoples property values is the way to get our leaders to take it seriously, then at this point I am all or it.

by murray86 | 5th Sep 23, 9:19am 1693862351

Your last paragraph; I recall some people celebrating when 'Climate emergencies' were declared by a few councils (and possibly the government?). I noted that having done that bit of virtue signalling, the move didn't seem to result in a particular direction of action (other than possibly creating a new levy to raise more money from the council). This seemed to indicate that no one seemed to know what to do or how to deal with it. But i suggest that it really is quite simple, start pulling back from vulnerable areas. Stop or severely restrict any protection work. For people who insist on staying where they are, serve them notice that they do so at their own risk and that in the event of the expected natural disaster, councils will not be undertaking work to fully remediate existing infrastructure. (I struggle to understand the attitude that has led to the digging out of silt after Gabriel on the East Coast)

There are big questions of course, such as should councils be prepared to buy out vulnerable land (forget about any buildings or improvements), and at what rate? But in the long term savings will be made.

by profile | 5th Sep 23, 9:41am 1693863678

Meanwhile, what does the science - AKA The Science say?

IPCC AR6 WG1 Chapter 12 Table 12.12

"evidence is lacking or the signal is not present" for:

River floods
Heavy precipitation and pluvial floods
Landslides
Drought (all types)
Severe wind storms
Tropical cyclones
Sand and dust storms
Heavy snowfall and ice storms
Hail
Snow avalanche
Coastal flooding
Marine heat waves

https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGI_Chapte…

by murray86 | 5th Sep 23, 10:04am 1693865065

And of course that is why the Insurers are pulling back from covering the damage from natural disasters? They must be wrong because the IPCC report says they're "not signalled"!

by profile | 5th Sep 23, 10:17am 1693865877

Yeah.

“...2023 to date has proven to be a much better year for both investors and issuing companies.”

Pennay went on to explain, “Investors have benefited from catastrophe bond returns greater than anything experienced in over 20 years. Secondary spreads tightened as the principal losses associated with Hurricane Ian failed to materialize in a significant way, resulting in mark-to-market gains.

“Wider issuance spreads and a material increase in collateral returns, which in some cases are now yielding a per annum return of greater than 5%, have further increased catastrophe bond returns this year.”

Pennay said that some investors had already generated double-digit returns from catastrophe bond investments just in the first-half of 2023.

...“To date in 2023, the ILS market has executed over $10 billion of new issuance, with the market well on track to be the largest issuance year on record."

https://www.artemis.bm/news/aon-higher-cat-bond-returns-fuel-investor-a…

by King of the whiners | 5th Sep 23, 10:18am 1693865925

Don't be too hard on him Murray. It must be hard waking up every morning knowing events are rendering you an irrelevancy.

by Beanie | 5th Sep 23, 1:15pm 1693876537

Whether you agree with him or not, Profile puts forward his argument and backs it up with references.

I don't recall him limiting his comments to ad hominem attacks on someone not in his echo chamber.

by blobbles | 5th Sep 23, 2:29pm 1693880981

profile puts forward half an argument missing almost all context and cherry picking quotes to suit his narrative. He hopes that nobody will actually look at the sources he posts, cos when you do, you will notice more often than not, the opposite of what he suggests is actually written. Much like his above post, he has removed every shred of anything in the report that goes against his narrative (i.e. he removes 95% of that report) and concentrates on the 5%, pretending that is what the entire report said.

And you fell for it.

by SimonP | 5th Sep 23, 11:52am 1693871559

The 95% confidence interval is a high hurdle that requires many (probably > 30) years to discern a trend. Just because there is insufficient data, doesn't mean it's not happening. It is concerning that so many climate impact drivers have already emerged in the historical period.

by blobbles | 5th Sep 23, 11:54am 1693871692

Ahhh profile, the great cherry picker. How about you list all of the things where there were obvious changes on page 1856? Oh, you want to portray that everything is fine so conveniently ignore that there is high confidence and obvious signals that the following have changed for the worse:

Mean air temperature
Extreme heat
Cold spell
Mean precipitation
Snow, glacier and ice sheet
Permafrost Lake, river and sea ice
Relative sea level
Mean ocean temperature
Ocean acidity
Ocean salinity
Dissolved oxygen
Atmospheric CO2 at surface

Conveniently left out from your list, yet again huh? I guess you "forgot" right?

by profile | 5th Sep 23, 8:12pm 1693901522

All of these things would be expected to increase in a period of inter glacial warming. So really boring and predictable. As for your listed:

Mean precipitation
Snow, glacier and ice sheet
Relative sea level
Ocean acidity

No evidence exist that these parameters have changed. Read table closely.

Are you making stuff up or do you just have trouble reading a table? Thanks though, I'll add them to my list of non events. Given the bullshit rammed down our throats on a daily basis by the for MSM, it is incredible evidence is lacking regarding relative level.

by blobbles | 6th Sep 23, 8:05am 1693944349

The table explicitly lists, and you used it as a reference, things that have/will change by 2050 or will change after 2050. I see you just want to present even less of the table now, as you decide to cherry pick specific columns and specific rows. What a fun exercise you must have taking parts of a report and taking them completely out of context and presenting them as the whole story.

Similar to me quoting you above:

"profile... so really boring and predictable":

"profile has No evidence, making stuff up, trouble reading a table"

"profile rams bullshit down our throats"

See how fun it is to cherry pick individual items from text and contort them to mean something completely different? Here's a section of the executive summary of the report you linked to:

"Several impact-relevant changes have not yet emerged from the natural variability but will emerge sooner or later in this century depending on the emissions scenario (high confidence). Increasing precipitation is projected to emerge before the middle of the century in the high latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere (high confidence). Decreasing precipitation will emerge in a very few regions (Mediterranean, Southern Africa, south-western Australia) (medium confidence) by mid-century (medium confidence). The anthropogenic forced signal in near-coast relative sea level rise will emerge by mid-century RCP8.5 in all regions with coasts, except in the West Antarctic region where emergence is projected to occur before 2100 (medium confidence). The signal of ocean acidification in the surface ocean is projected to emerge before 2050 in every ocean basin (high confidence). However, there is limited evidence of drought"

I wonder who has trouble reading the report?

by profile | 6th Sep 23, 8:53am 1693947183

Poor old blobbles hasn't heard the RCP8.5 is implausible so that pathway can be completely disregarded. Do keep up.

"accounting for this bias indicates RCP8.5 and other ‘business-as-usual scenarios’ consistent with high CO₂ forcing from vast future coal combustion are exceptionally unlikely. Therefore, SSP5-RCP8.5 should not be a priority for future scientific research or a benchmark for policy studies."

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0360544217314597

by blobbles | 7th Sep 23, 8:59pm 1694077188

Hilarious, you use a source, then when someone else uses it, you abuse them for using it wrong. I didn't write the report that you referenced, telling me its wrong and trying to make me look bad for it, is the height of misrepresentation. But again, profile misrepresenting things, its to be expected.

by profile | 5th Sep 23, 9:48am 1693864122

Make sure we don't take out eye off the ball in NZ.

"Since 1968, earthquakes account for 79% of the normalised losses with the 2010–2011 Canterbury Earthquake Sequence (CES) at NZD20.1 billion the single most expensive event.

...More frequent losses due to extreme weather, notably storms of tropical, sub-tropical and extra-tropical origin, when combined and after adjusting for changing societal factors, show no trend over the record length."

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17477891.2021.1905595

by morphyoss | 5th Sep 23, 1:54pm 1693878856

Yeah i agree, the "Climate Emergency" declarations were nothing more than PR Virtue Signalling. Its a shame really, but not all the surprising given the modern politician who is all about looking good, rather than doing good. Here in CHCH even the council staff add that the declaration has no legal standing. I mean obviously 'Emergency' must mean different things to different people.

by JimboJones | 5th Sep 23, 11:04am 1693868698

I would say your average climate change denier in the US votes for Trump and wants him to bypass the free market to make America great again!

The only thing that will save us from climate change is pollution pricing, not a whole lot of tinkering around the edges that the governments are currently doing. The free markets aren't working because destroying the climate is not being priced correctly by the government - businesses and individuals are getting it for free. Its really no different to governments making all land free, water free, human death free, etc.

We the people collectively own our environment, and all we need is for the government to price it correctly on our behalf. Giving it away for free is not free market, its crony capitalism.

by Whatwillhappen | 5th Sep 23, 11:23am 1693869834

The free markets aren't working because

Precisely because they aren't actually free. A free market doesn't have politicians' grubby paws tinkering with it. The theory of a free market is spot on. What isn't spot on is that a market will never be truly free, just as our "free trade agreements" are actually the opposite of free.

by murray86 | 5th Sep 23, 7:52am 1693857175

"Climate uninsurability is a real thing right now." The only surprise here is how long it took. Frankly I am surprised the insurance scammers took so long to start protecting themselves from the costs of storms. Those impacts have been evident for a while now.

by Averageman | 5th Sep 23, 7:57am 1693857457

Interesting. If reinsurance dissapears how will the Whangamata and similar fair if they become uninsurable....

by murray86 | 5th Sep 23, 8:13am 1693858400

Thinking this through, it is entirely possible that the policy terms could be written in such a way that there will be absolutely no point in taking out insurance. Think about it, they will no longer cover your property for natural disasters such as storms, floods, earthquakes (because they are just becoming too common), damage from wars is already not covered. So just about all that will remain is fire, but then based on past track records they will decide the fire was caused by unidentified and un-rectified damage from the last earthquake or storm. Or that fire was caused by lightening from that storm that passed over, and suddenly you have no cover despite exceedingly exorbitant premium fees. The insurer scammers might just write themselves out of business. Banks should take note, no mortgages will be able to be issued!

by Averageman | 5th Sep 23, 10:43am 1693867387

Exactly. No insurance, no mortgage. The FIRE industry has the potential to knock over its own Jenga tower.

by Scottnlp1 | 5th Sep 23, 8:29am 1693859340

It may encourage people to consider dropping their house insurance and just taking out EQC cover directly with EQC.

by JustAnOpinion | 5th Sep 23, 8:17am 1693858662

Yes we are about to head into interesting times. I think it will take a few years but perhaps the sunny horizon will be that rise of credit unions into insurance providers?

by powerdownkiwi | 5th Sep 23, 8:48am 1693860514

In a permanent state of powerdown, insurance is probably not do-able. More and more won't be able to 'afford' it, and the criteria will tighten until nothing is covered. We're seeing that unwind now; it'll have an interesting impact on house-prices, via bank refusal of mortgages, which will burst the bubble which will fail the banks which will....

Looked at with the right kind of eyes (HT Hunter Thompson) all things are connected, and you cannot retain spending-power in a powering-down scenario. Insurance is just one mechanism whereby folk try to maintain spending power; make that: tried.

by rastus1 | 5th Sep 23, 9:00am 1693861227

This is NZ....the govt and councils will become the insurer (i.e us). Its already happened..see buyouts from last floods/storms.

by Yvil | 5th Sep 23, 8:14am 1693858471

I just want to say thanks to David Chaston for the daily podcast, it's so useful being able to listen to it, when not in a situation to be able to read it!

by Baywatch | 5th Sep 23, 8:21am 1693858905

Hopefully Interest.co can use AI soon and put their feet up?

by Yvil | 5th Sep 23, 8:36am 1693859789

I prefer to listen to DC's voice and his occasional opinionated intonations.

by WinHonourHelp | 5th Sep 23, 12:05pm 1693872320

And the odd raised eyebrow for context!

by Nzdan | 5th Sep 23, 8:42am 1693860173

I agree. I just noticed it last week, didn't realize it was a verbatim of the article. It's great for those mornings when the caffeine is slow to hit.

by Jonny.Foe | 5th Sep 23, 8:35am 1693859724

In Australia, maybe you are interested that company profits fell -13% in the June quarter from the March quarter? Or are down -12% from year ago levels? (No evidence of 'greedflation' there.) No? Didn't think so.

That's a selective use of a baseline date, David.

Year to June 2023 Aussie company profits were $417 billion compared to $270 billion in the year to June 2019. That's a 54% increase. Wages and salaries increase over the same period was 24%. So, which has contributed most to higher prices, do you think?

by Audaxes | 5th Sep 23, 8:50am 1693860610

Xi Jinping avoids Biden meeting. BRICS more important than G20

G20: Last waltz in a world torn apart

by Final Account | 5th Sep 23, 12:06pm 1693872371

by kiwikidsnz | 5th Sep 23, 8:42am 1693860161

https://www.roymorgan.com/findings/9332-nz-national-voting-intention-au…

"New Zealand: National/Act NZ up 1.5% to 49% in August and on course for victory at next month’s election"

Labour down to 24%

by morphyoss | 5th Sep 23, 8:44am 1693860271

lol. No one actually takes roy morgan seriously. The next TV polls will be interesting tho.

by kiwikidsnz | 5th Sep 23, 8:50am 1693860600

ACT at 18%...the trend is your friend

IIRC Roy Morgan was the closest poll last election

by dumbthoughts | 5th Sep 23, 9:05am 1693861542

I believe you're right (in that RM was the most accurate for last election).

I don't think this poll is accurate, nor did I think it was accurate when they had TPM at 8% or whatever it was a few weeks ago.

That being said it would be entertaining, to say the least, if ACT does wind up within 5% or so of Labour.

by profile | 5th Sep 23, 9:27am 1693862837

New Zealand General Election - Sworn In Government

National 1.12

Labour 4.00

https://www.betfair.com.au/sport/politics/new-zealand-politics/12272966…

by morphyoss | 5th Sep 23, 2:05pm 1693879517

Yeah i agree.

It makes you wonder about the future of the National Party too. Even if they 'win' the election. It will actually be ACT that wins it, it certainly is not National.

I do wonder (lets assume ACT is actually on 18%). National has tied its wagon to the boomer vote, as this drops away, they really dont appeal to many other groups. ACT has also been running rings around them for months now and its clear as day that ACT wants to take the reigns on the right and it's probably only a matter of time. Could we see in the next few years ACT becoming the majority party on the right? If National / ACT win this election, it might delay it a little, but its only a matter of time on current trajectory imho.

I'm not a fan of ACT, but when all National does is serve up the bland same old menu they have for 30 years, its no wonder why people are looking for major change on the right.

The next National Govrnment could potentially be the weaekest National have ever been in govt, with maybe up to half of the cabinet ACT. Grab the popcorn, it will be interesting! As we know from 1996, National dont like to share!

by Silvi | 5th Sep 23, 10:46am 1693867577

I was thinking if we saw Act get 20% that hopefully National will have to consider the real need for change.

My fear has been with the National policies is the clear and undisputable picture they would leave most of what Labour legislated over the last six years.

by powerdownkiwi | 5th Sep 23, 9:13am 1693862038

kknz - I haven't voted Labour since '84, but I can spot a skew at 50 paces.

Either remove Act, or add Green.

Pshaw...

by Whatwillhappen | 5th Sep 23, 9:32am 1693863177

James P Shaw in fact

by HouseMouse | 5th Sep 23, 9:11am 1693861902

Labour governments globally have totally dropped the ball over the past 20 years. Because they have forgotten who they were supposed to represent - low to mid income households. Instead they have become beholden, simultaneously, to woke minority interests AND big business - a most curious mix.

They only have themselves to blame for the resurgence of the centre-right and right.

I am not David Parker’s biggest fan but I really admired his recent stance on tax.

Chris Hipkins sums up everything that is wrong with Labour, both in this country and internationally.

by Whatwillhappen | 5th Sep 23, 9:38am 1693863512

Are you referring to his tenure as Police Minister, Health Minister, Covid-19 Minister or Education Minister? OR perhaps as Leader of the House in 2017 (LOL to that one)

The correlation is stunning.

by Silvi | 5th Sep 23, 10:49am 1693867757

David Parker's legacy will be his finagling of New Zealand tax policy when he's in the grave if National sits on its hands as I expect. Speaking to a National person I heard the excuse it will have to be prioritised what they can achive in parliament.

by Audaxes | 5th Sep 23, 9:44am 1693863890

Or we can report that German exports fell -0.9% in July from June to be -1% below of the same month a year ago.

Good Morning from #Germany where trade surplus plunged 15% MoM in July to €15.9bn as exports fell 0.9% MoM while imports rose 1.5% MoM. Value of exports to China is weak & fell 16.7% to €57.7bn YTD. Export growth still stems from US BUT Inflation Reduction Act or US Chip Act could become a threat to German exports. A lot of capacities will exit Germany & move to US exporting goods to the former homeland, Ruland Research says. Link

by Audaxes | 5th Sep 23, 9:47am 1693864046

Mind the gap: The valuation of S&P 500 has become cheaper but attractiveness vs interest rates has decreased massively as US 10y real yields now at almost 2%. (Chart via Goldman) Link

by Audaxes | 5th Sep 23, 9:56am 1693864577

Shell silently abandoned its once-ambitious plans for carbon offsets, raising new questions about a popular -- and controversial -- tool of corporate climate policy. https://bloomberg.com/news/features/2023-08-31/shell-silently-abandoned-its-100-million-a-year-plan-to-offset-co2-emissions?utm_source=website&utm_medium=share&utm_campaign=twitter via @climate Link