sign up log in
Want to go ad-free? Find out how, here.

Friday's Top 10: When focus is a bad thing; By Hukou or by crook; The true cost of smokers; Fonterra and the grim reaper of China; Theo Speirings' Taiwan gaffe; A hoarding problem; Dilbert

Friday's Top 10: When focus is a bad thing; By Hukou or by crook; The true cost of smokers; Fonterra and the grim reaper of China; Theo Speirings' Taiwan gaffe; A hoarding problem; Dilbert
This daily collection of links and comment was previously sponsored by NZ Mint. We'd welcome a new sponsor.

Here's my Top 10 links from around the Internet at 2 pm today.

As always, we welcome your additions in the comments below or via email to bernard.hickey@interest.co.nz.

See all previous Top 10s here.

My must read today is #9 on the Hukou for those who want to understand China better.

1. Concentration risk - David Hargreaves has already pointed to it, but Stephen Toplis' research note on the risk that New Zealand is too exposed to dairy exports to China is well worth a read.

This week's botulism scare was a useful wake up call.

Our government's economic strategy is based on increasing milk powder exports to China and encouraging Chinese tourists to come to New Zealand.

That's fair enough and worth pursuing, but the risk is China becomes our only source of growth.

The BNZ Chief Economist also makes some good points about regional development.

Keep an eye on this topic. The drums are beating down South about the loss of jobs to the North. 

Here's Toplis:

This concentration risk largely revolves around our export mix and the destinations to which we export. However, the argument for excess concentration might also be applied to regional development. While there is a strong body of literature saying that larger cities are more efficient it must also be true that economic dependence on a single city must also bring with it increased vulnerability. The vulnerability of places like Wellington and Christchurch are readily apparent but Auckland is not immune to regional disaster. Excess concentration on a single market or product typically leads to increased export revenue volatility which in turn is strongly linked to growth volatility.

So not only is the economy more vulnerable but also, typically, it records lower growth than a more diverse economy.We are not anti-Chinese and we are not anti-dairy but the last thing New Zealand wants to become is nothing more than a milk powder exporter to China. Economic diversification is as important as investment diversification from a risk profile perspective. The answer is not to kill off existing trading relationships or reduce dairy production but to look to other sectors to play a bigger part.

2. Here's what Shanghai looked like in 1987, courtesy of The Atlantic.

And here's what it looks like now. 

3. The real cost of smoking - The NYTimes reports here on an academic study showing the average extra cost of a US smoker for an employer is US$5,816 a year.

Researchers at The Ohio State University estimated that the largest cost, at $3,077 annually, came from taking smoking breaks. Smokers took, on average, about five breaks a day, compared with the three breaks typically sanctioned for most workers. The second largest cost, at $2,056, was related to excess health care expenses. Smokers typically have more health problems than nonsmokers, including heart and lung disease and various cancers.

The remaining costs came from increased absenteeism — the researchers found that smokers miss about two-and-a-half extra workdays each year — and lost productivity at work, perhaps because of nicotine’s withdrawal effects. The findings appeared online in June in the journal Tobacco Control.

4.  The problem with hoarding - Here's HuffPo with a piece on how the richest 1% in America are saving 37% of their income, rather than spending it.

America's top 1 percent saved their money at a rate of 37 percent last quarter, according to a recent survey from American Express Publishing and the Harrison Group highlighted by CNBC. That means that during that period, wealthy Americans put away about 37 cents for every dollar they earned, which is more than triple their savings rate in 2007. In addition, a Bank of America study cited in the CNBC report found that more than half of millionaires have a "substantial" amount of cash on hand and of that group, about 60 percent said they didn't plan to invest it in the next two years.

As the recovery struggles to gain solid ground, the findings indicate that even while America's wealthiest households are taking home a larger share than ever of the income pie, they're doing little to put that money to productive use in the economy, experts say. One possible solution: raising taxes on the rich.

5. Have Australia's really stopped borrowing - Macrobusiness reports on Professor Rodney Maddock's study of Australian funding needs, and in particular the idea that households there are back to their pre-boom habits of being net savers, having spent about a decade gearing up. The implication is that Australia can't rely on another housing boom to restart its growth and take over from the mining boom.

The high level of household debt in Australia means that households are more sensitive to expected changes in income. And with most of their debt sitting on bank balance sheets, this makes the banking sector more vulnerable to a significant rise in household debt, particularly if it coincides with a major correction to house prices. This scenario is one that is very widely recognized. Indeed, it is the basis for many of the stress tests run by the banks and APRA (Davis 2011). These stress tests typically also assume that there will be a substantial slowing of household credit growth, if not an outright decline.

Summary: We believe that the most likely course is that household demand for debt will broadly grow in line with income growth. The recent volatility in global economies and declining asset price growth is likely to have had a long-lasting and moderating impact upon household demand for credit.

6. The grim reaper - Danwei brings together the various front pages from Wednesday in China. It's not pretty. 

The vast majority of Chinese daily newspapers yesterday featured the massive New Zealand milk powder product recall as a front page story, most as either the leading headline or as a large and prominent graphic feature. The imagery is very much that of a scare campaign, with dozens of papers using evocative images of microscopic bacteria.

The cover of the Xiamen-based West Strait Morning Post even showed the grim reaper lurking behind the recalled products. The New Zealand flag was also prominent on some front pages.

7. Woops - In his haste for contrition on his flying visit to Beijing, it seems Theo Speirings accidently apologised to the People of the Republic of China, which is Taiwan, rather than the People's Republic of China, which is China BeyondBrics at FT.com reports. 

Luckily no harm was done, it seems.

China’s domestic media largely ignored Spierings’ faux pas. Perhaps they were impressed by the sight of a Dutch head of a New Zealand dairy company racing to their capital to apologise for a quality control lapse that has not resulted in any sicknesses, let alone fatalities. Many Chinese company bosses have declined to apologise for far more grievous mistakes.

8. Deflation in Chna? - Here's George Magnus at FT.com warning that a China slowdown is more dangerous than a US 'taper' of money printing. 

One way or another, the model is going to change. The role of physical capital formation will fade as the economy rebalances. Physical labour input has been more or less exploited, and the credit intensity of GDP growth has to be brought down. China’s top leaders understand this, but changing the model to one based on efficiency, innovation and a greater role for markets at the expense of the state, is easier said than politically done.

Even if they succeeded, making the change could only be done in the context of slower, sustainable growth, and policies designed to absorb or address overcapacity in heavy and commodity-intensive industries, and a rise in debt service problems, defaults, and non-performing loans.

This comprises an unequivocally deflationary risk for global markets, which is likely to challenge risk appetite again and push up the US dollar, especially against emerging market currencies, including even the renminbi.

In China, the GDP deflator (a measure of the level of prices of all new, domestically produced, goods and services in an economy) has already slumped to a reported annual rate of 0.5 per cent in the June quarter, from around 7 per cent just two years ago. The combination of overcapacity in several industries and weaker growth could generate further downward pressure on Chinese goods prices at home and abroad.

9. Reforming the Hukou - The system of people registriation in China known as the 'Hukou' is crucial to how the country operates and has to be understood when thinking about China. It means migrants from the countryside don't have the same rights to education or healthcare or property as those who were born in the cities. It's a festering sore, if I can use that phrase in relation to China...

Caixin reports that reform is imminent.

Come autumn, the government will consider a series of major reforms, one of which is household registration reform. The reform, which is closely linked to urbanization, involves people's land, welfare and a host of other issues, and progress has been slow.

In the face of China's declining growth potential, a shrinking demographic dividend and growing social tensions, changing the dual rural-urban social structure is the effective way to move human resources to areas and regions where production is more efficient. At the same time, it accelerates the country's switch to a new pattern of economic growth so as to prevent falling into the "middle-income trap."

Therefore, household registration reform is a major step the country must take.

Household registration, or hukou, is embedded in the social system. Established in 1958, the system was intended not only to be a community management tool, but also intertwines with many social welfare issues unique to cities.

10. Totally Clarke and Dawe - Tony Abbott makes his case, where it's safe to do so...

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.

34 Comments

On Number 4, and high income people hoarding their money (and so not driving an economy), I made the same point to Matt Nolan a few days ago in his series on tax.; in challenging his implication that flat taxes (so lower taxes than otherwise for high income people, and higher for low income people) were better for an economy. 

... raising taxes on lower income people will disproportionately reduce consumption, especially of NZ made and sourced goods and services, given that lower income people spend nearly all their money, and do so locally. Higher income people will save more, and spend more offshore.
So if an economy is struggling, cutting taxes for the lower paid is likely to cause it to hum far more quickly.

 

Up
0

That is correct....also there is some data/history that taxing the "rich" up to even 60~70% has no impact on the economy.  Certainly when you look at the Bush tax cuts for the "rich" we see no evidence the US etc boomed...

regards

Up
0

# 4 Well that’s the type of article you would expect from a left wing outfit like the Huffington Post

Great solution tax the hell out of the rich and have the government pee it down the drain.

Up
0

Oh like Huffington post, posts the truth, yes consistantly, funny that.

regards

 

Up
0

a FX news letter just sent me a email saying the rbnz had been buying large amounts of kiwi.

Can this be right?

 

Up
0

Interesting - what time frame do they claim?

 

The RBNZ confirmed a small purchase a while back, this afternoon

Up
0

Absolutely....they bought to stop the slide and send a market message of (no worries)....P.S. Stephen ...who bought the milk powder at the last auction, that too would be worth knowing.

I watched Joyce lying through his teeth about transparency tonight in regard to the big F, smug bastards the lot of them......and why should'nt they be , got the Wheeler in the pocket on call. 

Up
0

It be right alright Morely.....and just who would make such a directive...?

just goes to show how piss weak N.Z. media has become...just tell what we sell ya ...it's all good ask Rio Tinto.

Up
0

#3-They should factor in savings from health care and pensions from earlier death and relatively rapid decline in contradistinction to the slow, expensive care for the aged with the usual chronic diseases (just speaking from the brutal economic viewpoint of the Right).

Up
0

As Robt Jones said last week "if you want an active economy, you need a Labour Govt."  

They get $$$$ into the hands of people  that actually SPEND it.  

Spending is a good thing.

If you want a active economy..... 

Up
0

But not - unless you keep it within parameters we're a mile outside at present - if you want a human-life-supporting planet.

Ah, choices, choices

Up
0

Well, that,s the other strength of Labour  -- they will tell you which lowflow shower head you must have, how to discipline your kids, force you to plant sombre natives not flamboyant exotics, give $$$ to struggling families on $80k effectively subsidising employers etc ....

Up
0

... and they'll mass medicate the population by decree , forcing the country's bakers to add massive quantities of folate to bread ------- every loaf , not just a few specially marked ones , whilst blithely ignoring overseas research which highlights the danger of high folate levels , in causing prostate cancer ...

 

Oh yeah , and they still want to decrimminalise sex amongst consenting children as young as 12 ---- that's Phil Goff's pet project !

 

You gotta laugh .... really you do .... or cry ..... either / or .....

Up
0

#4.  The rich are saving and not spending.  Bad people.  The apparent wisdom is this is not good for the economy.  Thats convential wisdom apparently.  But maybe that they are investing instead, and I can't see that is bad for the economy.

Apparently even when poor people save instead of bumping up the mortgage.  Thats bad for the economy too apparently.

But it seems to me, investment leads to wealth in the long run, which means a ridher population, which is better for the economy.  Is it not ?

Up
0

Perhaps the jury still out on this one. If all the QE is going into investment, surely at some point in the supplychain you need consumers buying? 

What is an economy, people actively buying & selling to eac other. 

Trouble with National atm, they are tightening spending , which is depressing the regions, universities, schools, hospitals, polytechnics, etc etc which spirals smes down as well. On top of Joe Consumer still prety cautious ... 

Up
0

KH- if you're not taking the Mickey there, then rest assured you and I are not on the same wavelength - not by a long chalk.

 

MortgageB - QE won't work because there's not enough planet left to underwrite any significant growth for any significant period of time.

 

Labour were half-right. They understood scarcity, but not how to address it. No point in mandating more efficient shower-heads (which do indeed cut down the use of an in-contention resource - same reason Amy Adams needs to keep democracy out of Ecan) if you don't limit the number of showers in existence, or the cumulative time spent under them.

 

In other words, it's mental dyslexia. Cognitive dissonance, they call it. I'm going to a 'sustainability' thing called by Street, Curran, Clark and the DCC's Bidrose are presenting something Wednesday - I'll be there, and I won't be being silent......  They are wasted spaces (Labour, not the DCC which is doing better than I thought possible) and I've told Curran that, word for word.

 

Forest and Bird are looking more and more like they're in the same boat; 'we need to just save this, and this, and do a little less of this, but we can continue what we're doing' (which, of course, is the real problem).

 

Not that it makes you any more correct. You and Labour both miss the main event, as I've perhaps mentioned......

 

Up
0

Yep PDK.  It's your wavelength.  

Up
0

Labour, yes they have made a rod for their own back promising growth for 70 odd years.  The Green's with no history and the right outlook didnt have to go down that path but seem to have wilingly.  So are rapidly becoming wasted space, just like the party they hope/plan to be in Govn with.  I guess as you say its going to have to come from the bottom, it certainly isnt coming from the top.

I find it interesting whenever the conversation turns to "un-pleasent" areas everyone shys away...."oh there is nothing but bad news in the papers these days and has been for 5 years"  "yep and its going to get worse, think 30 years+"  "no I dont believe that".   "if we need to control and reduce population"   "Oh you are a hitler" Not to much hope of rational and logical discusion....

regards

 

 

 

 

 

 

Up
0

Maybe the socialist/left wing parties of the world should give up the growth mantra. It seems being ideologically tied to growth just leads to smoke and mirrors types changes that can be labeled as growth but is more likely to be a transferance of resources to the top 1%.

 

What they should be focusing on, is a good life is possible. That they can provide a free and fair society, where through hard work you can gain a good education, a home, a job or a business and a stable environment for your family. But to expect everyone to have an easier life with more things than their parents or grandparents is not possible.

 

But this is the reality already, this generation will not be materially better off than the past. This is a massive change in expectations that older people think is just bunkum.

 

But I think the young at some level understand this.

 

Ask a 25 year old when they expect to buy a house and when they will be mortgage free compared to their parents? What they expect from government superannuation? The answers will be significantly worse than their parents.

 

I am expecting in my later years to be doing a lot less international travel compared to my parents.

 

Perhaps if the left was more realistic they would serve the bottom 99% of society better.

Up
0

steven@8;24 - good comment. I note one commenter this thread, who twice did nothing but shoot the inconvenient messenger, while professing some kind of environmental leanings (if I remember correctly).

 

 It's the riddle of our times, that dissonance. Have a look at this for a cracker example of a reasonable intellect failing completely to understand:

 

http://www.odt.co.nz/opinion/opinion/268026/sourcing-energy-our-own-backyard

 

Hard to know where to start!

Up
0

They are just bidding up asset prices. That s all KH

Sorry but that is not a solution to anything

 

 

Up
0

I guess you still believe in the bunkum of the trickle down theory. Add another, "rich" ppl invest in hedge funds etc that expect 20%+ per annum....I suggest you start to think of the rich more as blood suckers we dont need.

regards

 

Up
0

KH. This is the problem. That money is not being invested by the private sector. It's being put into government bonds. If that's what the very rich want to do, then it's up to governments to invest that money in infrastructure that returns more than the cost.

cheers

Bernard

Up
0

That money is not being invested by the private sector. It's being put into government bonds.

 

The consequences are starting to dawn upon the trading community - the system is becoming increasingly fragile due to liquidity issues and as a result the Fed will have no choice but to taper - primary dealers apparently will have it no other way, if recent pointed attacks in official forums such as the quarterly TBAC report are to be believed. Read more

Up
0

Thank you Bernard and Yes.  

Up
0

Thank you Bernard and Yes.

Up
0

Regarding No. 6 Despite the best efforts of the state run media to boost their own industry I don't think the chinese consumers are that much different to western consumers. Given that no babies have died, or even been sick,  and the problem was self reported by Fonterra. Which baby formula would you buy for your little darling, NZ or Chinese 

Up
0

Its all propaganda....

Money is being lost by the chinese companies to the likes of fonterra...so the opportunity will be made to destroy fonterras rep

regards

Up
0

And another thing the second photo of shanghai is not what it looks like now. At least not most of the time The sky is blue in that photo not grey.

Up
0

Quite good thinking in the link.  IMHO

http://www.odt.co.nz/opinion/opinion/268026/sourcing-energy-our-own-backyard

It's very strange.  The student protestors on the street in Dunedin, in disposable white overalls, who next month will be off to the airport an back here to Auckalnd  and mum and dad.  Truely not getting it.

Rachel Elder unpicks that one well.

Up
0

As a Saudi King said on opening up new (small) fields, leave it in the ground our grandchildren will need it.

She's mostly right of course, we have no options but to use fossil fuel until we cant afford it....Dunedin will prove to be a very cold place indeed in the future.

regards

 

Up
0

Bernard, I know you're a Wellingtonianista these days, but I think John FruitLupo's Auckalnd campaign for a Living Wage for the Awkland CC has, as they say, 'legs'.

 

According to Granny, this would see the mayor limited to 4x lowest-paid loo-sanitiser or around $150K, and the CEO at 5x the aforementioned, would drag in a whopping $200K.  Ish.

 

Shurely this spread of Egalitarianism, Iconoclasticity, and general  hair-shirt Puritanism should receive a nudge in your hallowed pages?

Up
0

Waymad

Cheers. Hadn't heard of that. Good tip. 

Would go down well among the socialists here in Wellington too!

cheers

Bernard

Up
0

I think it would go down well with rate payers.  The CEO in Chch Council is going bye bye? didnt perform very well by the sounds of it. 

regards

Up
0