Good December US retail data; Fed model sees US GDP slip; China new home prices stable; China bank debt eases in December; lending for housing up in Australia; UST 10yr yield under 1.81%; oil and gold unchanged; NZ$1 = 66.4 USc; TWI-5 = 71.5

Good December US retail data; Fed model sees US GDP slip; China new home prices stable; China bank debt eases in December; lending for housing up in Australia; UST 10yr yield under 1.81%; oil and gold unchanged; NZ$1 = 66.4 USc; TWI-5 = 71.5

Here's our summary of key economic events overnight that affect New Zealand, with news markets have had a shot in the arm from good December American data.

The advance estimate of US retail sales in December came in at the levels markets expected. This was stated as a +0.3% rise month-on-month, seasonally adjusted. A modest gain. But if you look at the actual trading data, December 2019 was a full +6.0% higher than December 2018 while November was +2.8% higher on the same basis. For all of 2019, retail sales were up +3.6% from 2018. So you have to say this advance December data is quite positive - the American retail impulse in a key holiday shopping period was strong.

Also strong is the latest regional Fed survey from the Philadelphia region. It was up much more than was expected, a bit of an outlier among most of the other Fed regions.

But none of this was enough to improve the US growth prospects. The latest version of their GDPNow analysis has Q1-2020 growth slowing to +1.8% pa, down from a prior estimate of +2.3% for Q4 2019. And there is doubt about the actual impact of the US-China trade deal.

However today's good retail data has helped the S&P500 rise today, up +0.6% and that means for all of 2020 it is now up a cumulative +1.5%. Overnight European markets weren't as positive, nor were the key Asian markets, although Tokyo is up +3.1% so far for all of 2020. Yesterday both the ASX200 and the NZX50 each rose about +0.6%, cementing in a strong +5.2% gain so far for Aussie equities, but a much less +1.2% for the NZX50 Capital Index.

In China, new home prices in their large tier one cities rose slower in December but that caps a year where rises wre about +5%. In second tier cities the rises were similar, and also slowing at the end.

Also slowing in December was the growth of bank debt. Chinese banks extended fewer new loans in December, but the country's overall credit growth held up after the central bank eased policy to support the slowing economy. December new loans were -18% less than November and -4% less than analysts were expecting. But they were +12% higher than December a year ago. And +12% higher in 2019 than 2018.

And pollution in China seems to be getting worse overall and spreading, despite noticeable gains in Beijing and Shanghai. An uptick in coal and oil consumption coupled with rising industrial output drove pollution increases outside the two main centres.

In Australia, lending for housing rose strongly in November for owner-occupiers. The +6.6% jump from a year earlier was attributed to better access to credit and rising house prices across the eastern states. But for investors, lending commitments fell -5.7% on the same basis.

And investment in large-scale clean energy projects plunged by more than half in Australia last year, dropping to their lowest level since 2016 amid renewed uncertainty over the industry's future. Rooftop solar still made gains however.

The UST 10yr yield is holding at 1.81% after dropping as low as 1.78% earlier. And their 2-10 curve is little-changed at +24 bps. Their 1-5 curve is at +8 bps. And their 3m-10yr curve is still at +29 bps. The Aussie Govt 10yr is at 1.18% and down another -1 bp. The China Govt 10yr is unchanged at 3.15%. And the NZ Govt 10 yr is also unchanged at 1.52%.

Gold will start today unchanged at US$1,551/oz.

US oil prices are firmer today, now just over US$58.50/bbl and the Brent benchmark is now just over US$64.50/bbl.

The Kiwi dollar is up today at 66.4 USc. On the cross rates we are much firmer at 96.3 AUc. Against the euro we up to to 59.6 euro cents. That puts our TWI-5 at 71.5.

Meanwhile, bitcoin has held on to most of its recent gain, but is about -1% lower today from this time yesterday at US$8,646. The bitcoin rate is charted in the exchange rate set below.

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

Our exchange rate chart is here.

We welcome your help to improve our coverage of this issue. Any examples or experiences to relate? Any links to other news, data or research to shed more light on this? Any insight or views on what might happen next or what should happen next? Any errors to correct?

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.


Comment Filter

Highlight new comments in the last hr(s).

Investment in green projects relied on massive government subsidy. From wind farms to roof top solar.

Hear, hear! Since when has government ever subsidised power generation? Laissez faire capitalism always sorts that out for us!

No doubt it would, if the state would get out of the way. I don't know about you, but I'm willing to pay for electricity.

Probably Henry, but that might be the only way to get the much needed massive shift away from fossil fuels? I was in Holland in August and noted and was told that every state house had solar panels on the roof. My in-laws, who are in their 80s, say that they are paying 300 euro less a month for their power now. A number of new houses and ones still being built had solar panels up. But once they are all up, I can see that especially during the summer, the reliance on fossil fuelled power will be non-existent. Winter efficiencies will likely be something that needs to be worked on as most if not all places have central heating. The ones i have seen there seem to be gas powered.

Northern Europe is a terrible place for PV - frequently only about 30-40% output of southern Europe. Would be far better to spend the same money installing in Spain and send the power north.

Rooftop PV in NZ will be cheaper than the grid once we have cheap batteries to provide a few days of backup and EV's for emergency reserves. That will happen in next 5-10 years.

Yea. The only reason it exists is due to a unique housing (non)ownership regime and the feed in tariff guarantees.
Those solar panels ya see on vast swathes of Western European housing stock aren't supplying power to the houses on which they are constructed.

Disappointed I suppose Foyle? - The Spanish Council of Ministers have approved a new royal decree on self-consumption that officially eliminates the so-called sun tax as well as administrative barriers imposed on self-consumption projects. The solar tax on distributed solar generation ( “impuesto al sol”), was introduced in 2015 by the former Rajoy government.

I am happy to see anything that hastens the transition to cheaper power - and away from fossil fuels in an economic way. Best way to achieve that is spending money on R&D, with factory manufactured modular nuclear and improved battery tech being the fields with the highest payback. Developing cheaper systems for domestic roof-top installation would also be high payoff.

Foyle, have you watched Bill Gates' recent interviews on the nuclear stuff he's investing in? Looks interesting.

I am a big fan of his post-microsoft work, and his efforts to get nuclear power re-started, his company Terrapower has a couple of good approaches they are working on - I like their chloride salt fast reactor most (super simple and about 1% waste of conventional). Nuscale and Thorcon are probably current leaders - built in factories, only 5-10 years from market. Key to making nuclear dominant is factory production.

Funny that NZ lies largely at the same distance from the equator as Spain.

Si si , senor ... but ... Spain has a hotter , sunnier climate than us ... due to the continental effect ...

... and that may moderate the effects of global warming on NZ ... but exaggerate it in the northern hemisphere , where 67 % of the land lies ...

It still won't have a lower carbon footprint than hydro or wind however - offsetting cleaner forms of energy generation at times of lowest demand is a waste. The money would be better spent actually offsetting actual fossil fuel consumption...

... if the government is subsidising it , then the taxpayer is funding it ...

Your Gold Card?

... a few years away from that ...

Must be Friday...ironic coming from you. Any royal news you want to update us with? (Nice late edit to your comment)

...I thought it best to remain polite , regardless the tone or factual inaccuracies of others posts ...

Yes, even rakish characters think so too!

My Gold card is a govt subsidy to all under 65s who drive cars in Auckland. I own a car but do you really want me driving it slowly in front of you making all congestion a little worse?

By that logic everyone should get a gold card.

Well, we probably should try making public transport free for everyone to reduce road congestion. As is being tried elsewhere.

.. that helps decongest city CBD's ... but at a cost to ratepayers or taxpayers ...

I'm a fan of E.scooters .... they're a game changer on inner city travel ...

Can you answer this one then GBH. If cyclists & motor cyclists by law are required to wear crash helmets or whatever. For whatever the requisite reasons are, and we assume they are sensible and good ones! Why do these same laws then not apply to E Scooter riders. What exactly are they doing that does not have the danger of the other two vehicles. Intriguing. It couldn’t be revenue driven could it?

... only 2 countries in the whole world mandate compulsory bicycle helmet usage : NZ & OZ ...

Some have partial rules, kids rules , or no legal enforcement ...

... I noted the freedom of cyclists in Europe to barrel around their cities free of helmets ... awesome !

Aye, fair enough for the rest of the world then. But the NZ law is the law, good or bad. How then can one vehicle’s use be exempted. You see I am sick to death of our bureaucracy that grew wings under the Clark Cullen lot, we know, we say, you do, and this lot here much the same whenever they can. So if this prissy self-righteous lot are so caring about our health & safety, why are they not enforcing it across the board. Bureaucratic double standards! Bloody awful nightmare for all of us, and fast growing.

Minimal cost to taxpayers / ratepayers - in 6 years of use I've only once used my goldcard on a crowded bus. To be of use buses run to schedules and are often full during the rush hour(s) when Goldcards are inoperative but semi-empty otherwise.

Roads also cost taxpayers and ratepayers. A lot. The reason other countries are trying it is to balance costs.

Agreed. All buses in Dunkirk are free. Making them free also makes them much faster and that increases usage and reduces congestion in the city centres.

Given that you can't use your gold card till after 9am on weekdays, it really make 3/5ths of SFA difference to me. So no, it's not a subsidy to me.
Its a subsidy to you, but given that those bus and train services outside of peak hours are subsidised to all heck anyway, it really makes no difference financially.

Murray, what's the problem, we use hydro mostly for electricity generation. Wind and solar really screw the grid and muck up dispatch/supply. Incapable of satisfying baseload at present.

I was referring to Holland Henry. Having said that though many of our dams are getting old and won't last forever and there is a huge movement against more dams. We still have coal fired power stations either in use or held in reserve. With a growing population and most of our power generation in the South Island there is a need to address some infrastructural issues for power. Our power companies, because of the way they were structured by the National Party Government rake off significant profits ( a significant portion of which is paid in dividend to the Government) but have failed to adequately invest in resilience. Power is already expensive for most people in NZ, but the imperative for dividends is still getting in the road of creating resilience in our power generation and distribution networks. A viable future of electricity is still not being adequately addressed.

Hear Hear!

What's the movement against damns?

The make some of the most majestic nature photos tourists take in South Island. Truly magnificent.

Your movement against damns, how much of the movement is climate change based?

I think you are meaning don’t damn the dam?

Some is from white water enthusiasts wanting to keep rivers natural and fun for kayaking etc, some is from trampers and other nature fans who aren't keen on their old playground, or large habitats being flooded, some is from Maori wanting to preserve sites (apparently there's some fantastic cave art under Lake Benmore). Personally I struggle to decide - great power supply option, and quite impressive and beautiful, but at what cost?

What's your preference further maintenance of the hydro fleet or the exciting new Gen4 or even Gen3 nuclear. Plenty of power. Good base load too.

Given the existing fleet, marginal cost wise it seems a winner to further these assets, rather than see them then marooned in ? tape.

Personally i don't have an issue with the latest technology nuke plants. I think they offer a lot of promise and can be located within close proximity of the need. I still have an issue with nuke waste, but then the new technology is addressing that to a degree.

To your earlier question - it is the greenies who don't like more dams, but as many point out, they don't have a better answer, and they really don't like nukes! Everybody is afraid of Chernobyl and Fukushima Daiichi, but i believe technology can address the issues they have highlighted.

Then again, fossil fuel projects are massive receivers of government subsidies:

The International Monetary Fund periodically assesses global subsidies for fossil fuels as part of its work on climate, and it found in a recent working paper that the fossil fuel industry got a whopping $5.2 trillion in subsidies in 2017. This amounts to 6.4 percent of the global gross domestic product.

Air pollution China. Grave. Not just the air either undoubtedly. Might not the rest of the world cease selling them coal? Just asking.

... China has reserves of over 100 billion tonnes of coal ... enough to last them 30 years ... only Russia and the US has greater reserves than China ....

What's interesting is the death toll from Chinese coal mines .... 333 killed last year .... down from 10 times that ten years previously .... 5000 or more killed annually around year 2000 and previously ....

yes, tks for that . But,but,but all the holier than thou proclaimers would be able to say our hands are clean and that means everything.

... wouldnt we look foolish if we completely hamstrung our economy by cowering to the demands from the climate change hystericals , only to find that the climate kept changing .... 'cos that's just what it does ....

Whats a bit of rising pollution between friends?

Huge ‘hot blob’ in Pacific Ocean killed nearly a million seabirds

That is the definition of climate change, a change in the weather.

Interesting that Russia and China and USA government (Asia, middle east, Africa, South America, Central America) are not marking a change in the weather, climate change as numero uno, top of the list (elephant in the room stuff).

Anyone know why?

... the cynical side of me suggests the UN/IPCC changed deliberately from " global warming " to " climate change " because some bitterly cold northern hemisphere winters made people sceptical of global warming ...

" Climate change " is always happening ... no refutable facts surround it .... Perfect !!!

Climate change, all you need do is show the weather is different to the mean (can someone check this is the right link, thanks).

Climate change

Climate change refers to a change in the state of the climate that can be identified (e.g., by using statistical tests) by changes in the mean and/or the variability of its properties and that persists for an extended period, typically decades or longer. Climate change may be due to natural internal processes or external forcings such as modulations of the solar cycles, volcanic eruptions and persistent anthropogenic changes in the composition of the atmosphere or in land use. Note that the Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), in its Article 1, defines climate change as: ‘a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and which is in addition to natural climate variability observed over comparable time periods.’ The UNFCCC thus makes a distinction between climate change attributable to human activities altering the atmospheric composition and climate variability attributable to natural causes. See also Climate variability, Global warming, Ocean acidification (OA) and Detection and attribution.

The NZ syllabus steps a little ahead.....

Climate change is a bit like what happened in the hut. Put simply, it is the process of our
planet gradually heating up. It may not seem to be warming up noticeably - at least not
in the short term. In fact, since 1900, the whole planet has warmed up by an average
of 1°C. This might not seem like a lot when you think about everyday temperatures,
but even small changes in the average global temperatures will have big effects on the
Earth’s climate system.
By the end of the 21st century, however, global warming is likely to cause an increase
in Earth’s temperature of around 2 - 5°C. This increase may lead to some of the major
natural processes on Earth slowing down or even stopping. This is known as a tipping
point and it’s something that humans may not be able to reverse once it is reached.
Climate change describes how the average weather patterns and their extremes over the
world - including New Zealand - will change from their current state. As temperatures rise,
some areas will have more extreme weather more often, some will get wetter, some drier,
and lots of animal species - including humans - could find they’re not able to adapt to
their changing climate.
The change in climate is caused by the release of greenhouse gases.

You're missing a letter - its ACC, not CC. The A is the important part.

The cynical side or the talkback radio side?

The 10 years to the end of 2019 have been confirmed as the warmest decade on record by three global agencies.

According to Nasa, Noaa and the UK Met Office, last year was the second warmest in a record dating back to 1850.

The past five years were the hottest in the 170-year series, with the average of each one more than 1C warmer than pre-industrial.


Furthermore from our fellow: James Shaw.

On whether global heating can be curbed, he says: “I think the chances are slim.” But there’s no reason for not trying, he adds. “In fact, that’s all the more reason to try.”

Difficult to debate a position like that. (Only a fool looks for logic in the chambers of the human heart - Oh Brother.... )

Shaw, 46, is – unlike Ardern – an unknown on the world stage, but he is he is the architect behind some of the most ambitious climate policies that anyone in the world is trying to enact.

Now he’s at the centre of New Zealand’s zero-carbon push as a key coalition partner in Jacinda Ardern’s government.

It’s no coincidence that Ardern’s opening speech at the United Nations climate summit in September, closely echoed his views. The world faces a “stark” situation she said, urging those listening that with the necessary changes, progress was “within our grasp.”

“I wrote a lot of it,” Shaw says.

None of these points are key indicators of success.
Why should we be policy crash test dummies?

5 trillion dollars is a lot of spending power to be starved out of health, education, pensions...
Not top of the list.

I know right, imagine if we cleaned up after ourselves and stopped polluting the environment...

How much of what you describe is climate change?

depends whether you believe Chinese govt stats - they lie about a lot of stuff, so not sure this will be different.

... agreed ... but , they are playing the long game ... better to buy up and burn Australias coal than use all their own ...

Looks like Trump impeachment trial is going ahead with overwhelming evidence, that's going to shake things up quite a bit: BBC White House 'broke law' by withholding Ukraine aid, says watchdog


Prepare for a senate acquittal and the accompanying wailing and gnashing of teeth.

Democrats are going to pay for this partisan sham in November.

Yes it is an extraordinary clumsy own goal. Equally desperate, don’t seem to be able to find a candidate either that might have even, a sporting chance.

Polls are supporting Trumps impeachment and his removal from office. Politico article:

Two questions : 1 , how accurate are those polls ... and 2 , would the Republican dominated Senate really bring down their own man .... Democrats have been trumped ...

You would be surprised just how many American's realize that they're on a road to eventual poverty under Trump, they're not all that stupid. And the Republican's know they'll be branded forever as being a highly corrupt political party if they don't play by their countries league rules regarding his impeachment trial. I'm sure they're grooming someone in the background to take over Trump's role and its not going to be Pence.

The road to poverty?
Isn't that paved with the goo(l)d intentions of socialism?
Trump may be a moron. And yes, he is leaving people behind. But I think if there is one sure fire way to drive all people to poverty, it lies squarely in the radical policies of the front running democrats..

Actually it's facts not lies nymad. Nearly two-thirds of Americans say they are not better off financially than they were when Donald Trump was elected, casting doubt on whether economic expansion and a record bull market will boost the president’s re-election campaign in 2020. Persistently slow wage growth appeared to be a main driver of discontent, with 36 per cent of those who said they were worse off blaming their income levels
Financial Times article: Nearly two-thirds of US voters say Trump has not made them better off.

I think you need to reread the definition of 'fact'. A poll does not assume fact at all. It may provide a basis for hypothesis testing in a general sense, but it should never be considered as 'fact'.

You know what would be great if they gave a bit more about the methodology. One look at the descriptive stats - namely the opinions along party lines - suggests that it may not be as robustly representative as they would like.
But hey, if it helps you sleep at night.

Thankfully I'm not an American so I don't need to worry. ;)

You don't need to worry about what facts are?
Seems like a weird thing to be indifferent about, regardless of whether you are American.

No I'm simply saying I don't need to worry, because I'm not in a corrupt country like America with a very corrupt and as you point out a "Moron president, who is leaving his people behind".
And yes our political system is far from perfect but at least we don't have Trump! :)

CJ, heartland seem happy

You may be disappointed.

Some people are taking a tumble.

Blimey! CJ, get to know the history! The GOP has been wearing that corruption label quite successfully ever since Rutherford (Rutherfraud to the opposition) Hayes. Hasn’t stopped them at all, Bush junior got there in exactly the same manner. That is the USA, like it or lump it! Hamilton once opined that corruption was sewn into the fabric of USA politics on day one. An old quote, the only difference between a Republican and Democrat administration, is that during that of the Democrats, the poor are allowed to be corrupt too.

You used the plural there, I think you meant "poll".

Here's the aggregate - it's not pretty reading for the shamsters:

Prepare to see how the partisan senate, that prevent any conviction, use this show trial to inconvenience and embarrass Democrats, much as the partisan congress used the show to inconvenience and embarrass Trump. Democratic frontrunner Biden has a huge target painted on his back over the Ukranian corruption where he had Bursima pay his druggie son for a non-job.

But...If you believe this is going to do anything but solidify his support base and polarise undecided and democrat voters, you are a fool.

As I always have to preface this comment with - I'm no supporter of Trump.

... me too ... I'm no supporter of Trump


... who is the alternative ?

On the Republican side there's no one because Trump got rid of any competition to his rule, that's what dictators do. Thankfully there are other candidates on the other side of the fence.

Agree Trump’s ascension thru the Republican ranks to the presidency was extraordinary. Just one of his many unsavoury escapades would have sunk any other candidate. Think Gary Hart, John Edwards. But you see the circumstances that allowed this still exist and will carry this year’s election too. The impeachment will fail in the Senate in exactly the same manner as that of Clinton and similarly it will backfire. Rightly or wrongly Obama was labelled with the socialism tag, a red flag to the majority of Americans, and the Democrats still wear that particularly as both Sanders & Warren really earn it. Biden has no show.

Warren and Sanders are far more extreme than Trump. He's a centrist compared to them.

Biden is corrupt to the core and senile.

So who are you relying on here?

Calling Trump a dictator is laughable - it's exactly why this impeachment is such a sham. He's the next coming of Hitler according to the hysterical left for the last 4 years - and all they've got to come after him is that he tried to have an obviously corrupt democrat investigated for his corruption. What a dictator.

Well at least Warren and Sanders are hard working and not corrupt that will get most peoples votes! And what's extreme about them are you scared of free public healthcare that most of the Western world has?
Also don't forget that Trump is also corrupt to the core and senile.

I wish we had America's healthcare system.

Ours is atrocious. The standard response from an underpaid NZ doctor is "on your way, it'll fix itself".

In the US you get the highest quality care in the world. There's a reason Canadians flee across the border for their healthcare.

Long may the world benefit from the surgical practices and drugs that can only be developed in a competitive environment.


In my specialism, whenever we see American practices we feel sorry for them. Treatments are decided based on gaining the maximum payment, rather than doing the best thing for the patient. As a simple example, we treat a particular case over 15 days when an American clinic would likely treat over 25 to maximise compensation. An extra 10 days the patient has to show up at hospital (in-patient appointments). In other cases, we use techniques which can deliver a treatment in a 10 minute slot, American clinics tend to use equivalent techniques that take 30 minutes - because they can charge more. Our treatment is just as good, we just consider the patient rather than our funding.

The major technological advances in my field have most recently come from Japan, Netherlands, Germany, the UK and Canada. The US is involved but certainly not the sole driver.

This is not even to mention the fact that anyone in this country (and most developed countries) who needs our treatment will get it, those without decent insurance in the US may not be able to afford it.

Yes totally agree with you Mfd, There's ample research that shows how much the American health industry is governed by greed at the expense of patients care. And it's not just the pharmaceuticals, it's medical devices too. There's a fascinating recent documentary on this; 'The Bleeding Edge' which shows how even medical device products that are actually causing patients harm are still being promoted and used in the US, even when they've been with drawn from global health markets. Here's the trailer:

Specialists actually get compensated somewhat properly in this country. General Practitioners and nurses however are paupers compared to their American counterparts. The system here is about getting people in and out the door as fast as possible - something you alluded to - rather than actually treating the patient. Again, I prefer to look at what people do rather than what ideology people hold. The fact is Canadians don't want to wait 18 months for sub quality care when they can just pop across the border.

Speaking purely from my direct experience, I disagree. Our mandate is to treat the patients and this is measured and targets set. Obviously we want to do this as efficiently as possible to reduce patient inconvenience and keep costs in check, but this is not done at the cost of treatment quality. Patients get the best treatment we can offer, following clinical evidence. In my specific examples above, we shortened treatment courses or times based on randomised controlled trials showing equivalent treatment with reduced resources (and less patient inconvenience). This clinical evidence is not followed in the US as it would mean less income for clinics.

George Bernard Shaw made the point that with capitalism it makes economic sense to amputate two legs rather than one. I prefer NZ health service to the UK. Only problem NZ has is too little money - we simply cannot afford the drugs and expensive procedures that countries with higher GDP per capita have. Pity we are about 35th on that ladder when we used to be top. On the positive side both my wife and her sister developed the same cancer. My wife is alive cancer-free and her sister in a 3rd wrold country was buried two decades ago.

I am not sure that everyone who needs medical help with get it, or will get it in time. NZ health system is a series of barriers designed to stop access to more expensive options (which actually makes the treatment more expensive as health conditions can significantly deteriorated by the time the patient is finally given the treatment they needed from the get go).

It really is only good for conditions that will go away without any medical intervention and for truly acute conditions. See a GP who will do nothing for a few months, then will refer you to a specialist in the hospital, you will need to wait for another few months (if lucky), then the doctors will run diagnostic tests (wait another few months) etc.
Also while it is great that medical practitioners individual decisions are not driven by how much money can be extracted from the patient (which is truly fantastic), these decision nonetheless are hugely impacted by cost considerations and resource limitations (not what is best for a patient). The difference is so very obvious when you go through private route VS public health route.

USA pay almost three times what we do for healthcare per-capita, and get 1.5 years less life expectancy than us for it.

I think you forgot the /sarcasm tag.

"The standard response from an underpaid NZ doctor is "on your way, it'll fix itself".

Maybe you're an annoying hypochondriac?

The US system is more expensive, less efficient and creates huge inequality. We, under no circumstances, want to go down that path.

Also, "on your way, it'll fix itself", is often the correct response. Many conditions are self-limiting and will go away with or without treatment. Here there is no incentive to treat if it's not necessary - in America over-treatment is a very real problem leading to far more side-effects and incidents than necessary.

I think you're right. If many patients got 'what they wanted' rather than 'what was best for them' half a days patient's would be demanding needless blood tests, CT scans or MRI scans for otherwise trivial conditions. In America, obviously there's financial incentive to pander to all of these cases. It's still amazing that despite OP's assertions, NZ actually gets better health outcomes vs the US and also spends much less than they do.

This doesn't feed in to his 'private is the best system' narrative though. Having free medical care is too socialist, much better to let people go bankrupt (or die) if they can't afford what should otherwise be cheap and readily available medications like insulin.

Andrew Yang !


Warren and Sanders appeal to left wing ideologues in the Democratic Party but are way too far left to win popular vote. Buttigeig is probably capable of beating Trump - though his sexuality hurts his chances with religious. Yang is my favorite, open minded and working to avoid partisan positioning and appeal to all. Has some radical ideas that won't fly but at least trying to come up with answers to the seismic challenges facing our societies.

You are thinking of President Eleven more.

The aid was paid.
It was also his job to ask, are you going to ham string a guy when an action is his job and in his interest?

I have to say guys, your website behaves atrociously on mobile, iOS currently but I noticed the same on Android. I think a script is crashing and reloading, forcing me to the top of the page.

I actually canceled my Herald Premium subscription over the state of their mobile app. Don't neglect your IT infrastructure!

... oh ... thanks for that ... I thought it was just my Silly Samsung playing up ....

serves you technocrats right. far better the luddite n the desk top.

Still pretty poor performance on desktop too.. just have a shiteload more processor available to chug thru it to make it bearable.

I second that. It mostly happens to me with the 9 at 9 and what happened today articles. Higher usage causing crashes?

> I have to say guys, your website behaves atrociously on mobile, iOS currently but I noticed the same on Android. I think a script is crashing and reloading, forcing me to the top of the page.

I've noticed this as well, I get crashes frequently on Android, Chrome browser, especially on Breakfast Briefing and the 4pm wrap. Please fix.

Agreed, it went bad about a year ago and Ive never really accessed Interest from a mobile since. At least have an option to switch to desktop view from a mobile.

New Zealand's waiting list for state housing hits record high

List has more than doubled in size to 14,500 in two years since Jacinda Ardern promised to fix crisis

“There’s a hell of a lot of money going into motels and transitional housing, but very little going into building homes.” Link

Debacle. But my wife tells me I need to give up caring. She's probably right. 'Yes, darling'

... the forgotten ugly side of a housing price boom ... the battlers on Struggle Street fall further behind ....

Debacle indeed - but corrective policy could be enabled.

A decade of RBNZ policy .Thankfully there is no correlation , otherwise the RBNZ would be stuck.
January 2010 -2 year fixed mortgage / National median house price
7.25 350000
6.65 340000
5.94 354000
5.46 370000
5.83 400000
5.90 425000
4.57 445000
4.69 485000
4.61 520000
4.32 550000
3.54 ( 630000)

> Thankfully there is no correlation

Dunno, it's got an R-squared value of around 0.8. Seems like a law of nature to me.

Gotta throw the pensioners and young generations under the bus to protect folks' portfolios!

Are house prices rising due to lower rates or are rates lowering due to higher prices?

“The reason we’re in this mess today is because KiwiBuild tanked, Labour’s new rental standards scared off landlords at the affordable end of the market, and its decision to end tenancy reviews increased pressure on social housing supply."

Things Simon O'Connor forgot to list:
- Continued unsustainable population growth by those who cannot afford to procreate without govt. assistance
- Failure to introduce CGT (in part due to his own party's scaremongering)
- Empty houses sitting untaxed
- Migration continuing at unchecked levels, squeezing the availability of existing rental stock

And perhaps the most overlooked one - houses and units which have been rentals for the past 10-20 years, are now FHB territory. Most of those FHBs want to start families, so where they've come from sharing a rental with 3 or 4 others, they now share a rental-home with just one other.

> And investment in large-scale clean energy projects plunged by more than half in Australia last year, dropping to their lowest level since 2016 amid renewed uncertainty over the industry's future. Rooftop solar still made gains however.

The link just sends me to
Is there a better link to the article containing this info?