Here's our summary of key economic events overnight that affect New Zealand with news the bond market has bared its teeth overnight, egged on this time by a hawkish Fed.
But first up today, there was another dairy auction this morning - and another overall dip in prices. There were down nearly -1.0% in USD terms, and down a massive -3.8% in NZD terms. And that is because of the other big economic move overnight - the rise of commodity currencies. We will come to that later, but the dairy price drop is largely due to the -1.5% fall in WMP prices, and in turn that is mostly about Chinese demand. The new difficulty shipping to China as it increasingly locks down is a part of that factor too.
But the auction also delivered higher prices for SMP, BMP, and cheese. These are key to the foodservice and ingredients business, and are benefiting from the return of foodservice industries worldwide. Nothing in this auction is likely change any farmgate milk payout forecast, but it might boost Fonterra's earnings from the upweighted foodservice and ingredients business.
The American retail impulse quickened last week and it was already quite upbeat.
And the US Logistics Managers' Index reached another new high in March. Conditions have been booming in the American logistics sector, and the March result is an all-time record high. Previous highs have featured excessive imbalances and supply-chain problems. They haven't been resolved, but this report suggests things are starting to return to a better balance, just at a high level.
The US reported another high trade deficit for goods and services March, but no more than for February. Not only are services exports rising again, but goods exports are now rising as fast as imports as imports stay in high demand while their local economy stays exhibiting strong demand and elevated consumer spending.
That is all consistent with a fast expanding services sector in the US, aided no doubt by relaxing of pandemic restrictions there. The widely-watched local ISM services PMI retained its high expansion level, while the internationally-benchmarked Markit one rose to match it. Both reported on-going cost pressure.
Canada also reported rising exports, along with rising imports. (Their exports were helped by higher oil prices.) Upbeat domestic conditions there saw their trade surplus dip a little bit in March.
The global bond market rout resumed overnight, with the US yield on the 10-year note, which sets the tone for corporate and household borrowing costs worldwide, surging above 2.56%, its highest level since May 2019. Investors anticipated an aggressive looming policy tightening cycle as major central banks sought to tame inflation, currently running at records levels in Europe and 40-year highs in the US. Market moves were exacerbated by surprisingly hawkish comments from Federal Reserve Governor Lael Brainard, who said they would rapidly reduce the Fed's balance sheet as soon as next month and is prepared for a more aggressive move when it comes to raising interest rates to bring down inflation. Meantime, Germany's 10-year Bund yield, the benchmark for Europe, rose to as high as 0.61%, closing in on its highest level since May 2018.
The BIS has weighed in on the side of raising policy rates sharply and possibly for longer than standard, to kill off the long-term threat of inflation.
Inflation risks were on the mind of the Reserve Bank of Australia yesterday. Although they kept all their policy settings unchanged, their statement was notable in that the reference to 'patience' was dropped, and signals were released that they expect the inflationary conditions will be there mid-year for a change in policy and higher rates. The main thing they want to see is some wage inflation, which has been absent till now.
And staying in Australia, regulator ASIC has commenced civil penalty proceedings in their Federal Court against Macquarie Bank for failing to adequately monitor and control transactions by third parties, such as financial advisers, on their customers’ cash management accounts.
China's credit easing is underway, trying to head off persistent economic headwinds. The local price for iron ore surged yesterday, and on outsized volumes. Markets are betting Chinese regulators are serious stimulus by using their usual playbook.
One of the puzzles we raised a few times now is why Australia and some Asian countries still have low CPI inflation. Well that situation is breaking up now, with South Korea reporting CPI at a 10 year high, and the Philippines also reporting higher CPI inflation, both now over 4%.
In Europe, Poland has vetoed the EU plan to implement a 15% minimum tax rate by the end of 2023, leaving the international overhaul agreed last year in limbo.
The UST 10yr yield opens today at 2.56% and up and unusually high +14 bps from this time yesterday. The UST 2-10 rate curve starts today positive at +5 bps and with its brief and shallow inversion gone. Their 1-5 curve is very much steeper at +96 bps. Their 30 day-10yr curve is also sharply steeper at +238 bps. The Australian ten year bond is up +8 bps at 2.93%. The China Govt ten year bond is unchanged at 2.82%. And the New Zealand Govt ten year is actually down -5 bps at just on 3.27%.
Wall Street equity investors are taken aback at the fast rise and steepening in the bond markets. The S&P500 is down -0.8% in Tuesday afternoon trade. Overnight, European markets mostly fell by a similar amount, although London rose by +0.7% making up for some of the gains it has missed out on in the past week. Yesterday, Tokyo ended up +0.2%. Hong Kong and Shanghai were closed for a holiday, but return today. The ASX200 ended its Tuesday session up +0.2% and the NZX50 ended up +0.6% with a late burst.
The price of gold starts today at US$1922/oz and down -US$8/oz from this time yesterday.
And oil prices are down -US$1.50 to just over US$100.50/bbl in the US. And the international Brent price is now just over US$105.50/bbl.
The Kiwi dollar will open firmer than at this time yesterday at 69.7 USc. Against the Australian dollar we are softer because there rose more against the main currencies and we are now at 91.7 AUc and a -½c fall. Against the euro we are also firmer at 63.8 euro cents and building on yesterday's big gain. That all means our TWI-5 starts today at just under 75.1 which is a new four month high.
The bitcoin price is up +1.5% since this time yesterday to US$45,990. Volatility over the past 24 hours has been moderate at +/- 2.2%.
The easiest place to stay up with event risk today is by following our Economic Calendar here ».
Daily exchange rates
Select chart tabs
98 Comments
One 28th in the EU vetoes a tax implementation throwing all cooperation into disarray. Whole original concept has become a futile tangle of bureaucratic counterproductive squabbles of pure self interest. Then came a light bulb moment. France, Germany, Italy, Belgium, Netherlands, Luxembourg, hey why don’t we form our own community within this lot, let’s call it the EEC.
I have a slightly different take on the EU. It's the EU bureaucratic entanglement that has been successful in bringing a wildly varied set of countries together. It has managed to align them on a number of issues that would normally be impossible based on countries self-interest and managed to keep a continent that has a history of war between nations largely peaceful. Strong civilisations rely on strong institutions and these are normally delivered by strong bureaucracies. Were you see "throwing all cooperation into disarray" I see 27 countries agreeing and a framework for bringing the 28th onboard. Imagine having to try to get 28 countries to agree to a minimum tax rate without the EU bureaucratic infrastructure.
A body that was able to advance courtesy of the enormous generosity of the Marshall Plan. Formed for the purpose of self reliance & sustainability in primary production, industry and manufacturing. Evolved to be dependent on Russian energy, Chinese manufacturing and American military.
The Marshal Plan has no direct relation to the foundation of the EU. The former was economic help to bolster Western union against Russian socialism. Essentially buying Western Europe to align with the Americans.
The EU was based off the ECC, which established a trading bloc for mutual benefits (simplification of tariffs & taxes, common standards).
EU was the next logical step to further increase that integration beyond trade between members and counter the heavy economic weight of America, Russia and China.
Yes, the EU brings a whole lot of bureaucracy but you seem to only see the bad side and fail to recognise how much national bureaucracy has been done away with.
Thanks to EU, its citizens can move freely and work & live where they want to. Businesses can trade within the union without complicated tariffs, currency exchanges and customs procedures.
Businesses and citizens have one stronger body to negotiate with other countries such as China, US and Russia. This gives them so much more leverage and helps member countries be lured into debt traps and be disadvantaged by unilateral tariffs.
The EU is not perfect but there is no better model yet.
Testimony given before Congress by Chairman Joint Chief of Staff General Milley and Secretary of Defence General Austin that EU Nations are hurriedly undertaking to build and facilitate new bases imploring that they be manned and armed permanently by the US Military. So where have all the EU soldiers gone. The EU can’t defend itself, can’t power itself and can’t supply itself. Rather makes a mockery of your third para doesn’t it.
""a continent that has a history of war between nations ""? The big wars were between Empires; so Spain & the Spanish Netherlands fought as one and the Swedes and their territories and the Poles and Lithuanians with theirs and the Ottomans and the Austro-Hungarians and the Holy Roman Empire. Even the English at war had Irish and Scots troops. Wars were common on all continents - the Incas, Chinese and various Indian rulers had armies that were not just for show.
That's a quibble - generally I agree with you so long as 'strong bureaucracy' doesn't mean bloated, insensitive, out of touch - Wat Tyler's peasant's Rebellion (1381) was against the lawyers not the king.
The BIS has weighed in on the side of raising policy rates sharply and possibly for longer than standard, to kill off the long-term threat of inflation.
Agustín Carstens challenges Bank of England’s outlook, which estimates inflation will fall next year
Agustín Carstens, head of the Basel-based Bank for International Settlements – which is known as the central bank of central banks – said there was a strong risk that prices would rise uncontrollably without a sharp rise in interest rates above existing plans. Link
Phew, the end of interest rate repression? - governments may have to pay up beyond the cost of inflation to fund state spending.
Christopher Luxon on RNZ this morning refused to support NZ's pledge to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 50% by 2030, instead saying National plans to get to net zero by 2050.
So kicking the can for someone else to deal with after he is long gone. There is no depth to the guy.
to be fair to the guy though, and this is something none of the others mentions, if NZ got to zero, or even managed to consume CO2 and go negative, unless the major countries in the world dramatically change their GHG production, there will be essentially no impact or effect. We are just too small. I would prefer our Government ot be looking at a staged plan where we develop better technologies and work towards an affordable for all transformation. Currently the cost of what is planned will fall mostly on the lower socio-economic classes.
But he really sounded to me like it was a case of we'll push it out as far as possible and make it net. Then ignore the issue. Personally disappointed that the current govt failed to take the opportunity to us the great fat COVID spend to reshape the economy. Instead opting for the wealth effect .
There is no scenario where our lifestyles do not take a hit, whether we get to zero or try to continue to kick the can down the road. The only difference is that if we go down the carbon zero route we will be much better off than if we did nothing. Carbon zero measures will put us in a better position even if the rest of the world does nothing and the planet burns. We should be getting on to it asap not hoping climate change is all a bad dream.
The denial is incredible. People are desperate to be living in fear. "Brian O’Neill, the director of the Joint Global Change Research Institute, a partnership between the U.S. Department of Energy and the University of Maryland at College Park, has a clearer view of this question than most of us. He was one of the lead architects of the five different futures—called “shared socioeconomic pathways,” or SSPs
...The path we seem to be on, at least for now, looks closer to SSP 2, which the authors call “Middle of the Road.” This is a world in which “social, economic, and technological trends do not shift markedly from historical patterns.” A world, in other words, in which we do not heroically rise to the occasion to fix things, but in which we also don’t get much worse than we already are.
So what does this SSP 2 world feel like? It depends, O’Neill told me, on who you are. One thing he wants to make very clear is that all the paths, even the hottest ones, show improvements in human well-being on average. IPCC scientists expect that average life expectancy will continue to rise, that poverty and hunger rates will continue to decline, and that average incomes will go up in every single plausible future, simply because they always have."
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2021/11/how-bad-will-climat…
Do we still operate our societies on a religious basis? The bible, and Koran both state that God directs Adam and Eve to "go forth and multiply". There is no implied or stated limits to that directive.
One can have fun debating exactly what it means, but it remains a very simple statement when it comes to limitations.
More proof really that religion is just another form of politics and the Bible and Koran political manifestos which ultimately do a lot of harm.
There is a strong link between moving away from religion and fertility rates falling. One could argue that defeating religion is a way to combat climate change...
https://unchartedterritories.tomaspueyo.com/p/the-twin-revolutions-of-p…
My point is we are going to affected either way. Either
1- the world collectively takes the measures required to limit the effects of climate change which will require us to change our lifestyles or
2 - they don't and we suffer alongside everyone else the worse effects, if this is the case we will be better off having adopted the carbon zero measures anyway.
Planet burns was a metaphor that tries to capture the magnitude of the unfolding catastrophe. This article does a better job than I could
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/feb/02/the-devastation-of-…
It is extract from a book someone is trying to peddle. Click bait. Completely at odds with IPCC lead authors - "So what does this SSP 2 world feel like? It depends, O’Neill told me, on who you are. One thing he wants to make very clear is that all the paths, even the hottest ones, show improvements in human well-being on average. IPCC scientists expect that average life expectancy will continue to rise, that poverty and hunger rates will continue to decline, and that average incomes will go up in every single plausible future"
Germany and California (and NZ Indo coal addiction) demonstrate chasing intermittent energy is a poor strategy - "As a result of their renewables-only policies, California and Germany are climate laggards compared to nuclear-heavy places like France, whose electricity is 12 times less carbon intensive than Germany’s.
Thanks to its deployment of nuclear power, the Canadian province of Ontario’s electricity is nearly 90% cleaner than California’s, according to a recent analysis by Scott Luft, an energy analyst who tracks decarbonization and the power sector.
California’s power sector emissions are over twice as high today as they would have been had the state kept open and built planned nuclear plants."
Each state of the US could say the same. Doing nothing just because we are a small country doesn't work I am afraid.
And why wouldn't we do something regardless? Why do people think that a lower polluting country with less cars, less noise, kids able to walk to school, less imported crap, more trees, less unnecessary consumption, etc, is a bad thing? Some people are just allergic to change IMO.
Yes each state could say the same, but they are part of a large country with a federal Government which can mandate action.
I agree we need to do something, but banning ICE cars in favour of expensive EVs won't do it. A part of that report mentioned methane and the harm it does (worse than CO2), so what is NZ doing to dial back farming? Authorities are too afraid to dial back the money, so the end result is less than nothing.
Meanwhile the Ardern strips mines Kalimantan and is hanging out for $2.2 billion for her airline. Far better for Luxon to use tech to virtue signal to the world, rather than squander our export income. Meltdown proof pebble bed reactors are going online now so the future is here - if people seriously think there is a climate emergency.
"Here are the two main findings from EP's analysis:
-
- Had Germany spent $580 billion on nuclear instead of renewables, and the fossil plant upgrades and grid expansions they require, it would have had enough energy to both replace all fossil fuels and biomass in its electricity sector and replace all of the petroleum it uses for cars and light trucks.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshellenberger/2018/09/11/had-they-b…
SMRs have the potential to revolutionise nuclear power as a safer, more affordable (up to 40% cheaper than a traditional plant scaled to same energy output) alternative that can be built and deployed without the significant upfront costs and complexities.
Some newer designs require no electrical supplies or pumps to cool the reactor, as this is achieved by natural convection and gravity coolant feed.
NuScale Power already been approved to build and deploy a network of test reactors in Idaho, in 2029 and 2030.
A second ago you said they were "going online now" , suggesting Arden should have built one last year instead of relying on imported coal for a few months of a dry year?
Now you say they are only testing them and even that is not till the end of the century.
EDIT: appologies that was profile making the earlier comments.
If she can't be bothered to build new dam or explore for gas she should have a better option than strip mining orang utan country.
"According to WNN, construction began in 2012, and consists of two 250 MWt reactors which will drive a 210 MWe turbine. The system is known as HTR-PM and uses a pebble bed module.
The first reactor was connected to the grid on 20 December and will be gradually increased to full power. WNN reported that the two reactors are due to be fully operational by mid-2022."
I thought nuclear was the most expensive way to produce power? That's why the only nuclear plants being built are done with huge state subsidies.
https://www.iisd.org/story/the-united-kingdom-is-to-subsidize-nuclear-p….
Putting a realistic price on carbon might change the equation a little.
It's an old debunked myth that nuclear energy is cheaper than renewables.
All caclulations that come to the conclusion are heavily flawed as they don't take into account nuclear waste disposal (which is a HUGE and costly problem, just ask Germany how many millions they spent on finding a suitable site over the last 20 odd years, with no results), use doctored cost figures (include subsidies that lower the price), retirement and safe disposal of old reactors and potentially enormous economic and societal costs from a nuclear fallout.
The biggest issue, cost of nuclear is going up not down like renewables:
Over the past decade, the WNISR estimates levelized costs - which compare the total lifetime cost of building and running a plant to lifetime output - for utility-scale solar have dropped by 88% and for wind by 69%.
For nuclear, they have increased by 23%, it said.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-energy-nuclearpower-idUSKBN1W909J
Lets get real here, nobody gives a shit. The kids these days will not even walk to school, they have to be dropped off in a giant SUV. Renewables will be self driven and its all driven by cost. Unless renewables continue to get cheaper while fossil fuels get more expensive, nothing will change. Climate change is already killing people, its only going to get worse.
Amen.
On the wider point, discussions about what NZ does with regards to carbon zero is futile, as others have said we are not material to the outcome.
If however, using our smaller scale we are able to innovate energy-tech solutions quickly we could provide value via those solutions. Unfortunately our Electricity Industry is needlessly complex, full of value-chain monopolies with a clearly conflicted government.
It's not the kids that are choosing to be dropped off by giant SUVs. Plenty of surveys say they would prefer to walk/cycle with their friends. It's the people who choose to live out in the car dependent suburbs, who buy their massive SUVs and then say it's too dangerous for their kids to walk/cycle to school due to all the massive SUVs on the roads. Basically those who oppose denser housing closer to schools, town centres and recreational facilities and who continue to oppose any form of transport system change that does not involve providing more road capacity and parking for cars are the ones that have chosen for kids to have to be dropped off.
its way more than simply walking to school -- or having a huge SUV that is way worse for the environment overall given the tiny number of kMs and short journeys it makes --
45 yrs ago -- the electric milk float came pst my door -- and put full recycled glass bottles back on my doorstep -- when i was old enough to smoke i bought a zippo and simply replaced the flint and added petrol -- there was no such thing as disposable plates cutlery etc - we did not need 50 power points to run and charge every device, yes we walked and biked everywhere - a lift to school yeah right - and we did not get rid of things that still worked - simply because we wanted a new one - we darned socks patched trousers ( not buy them ripped) adn simply had less of everything - after all who really needs 60 shirts! (and teh massive amount of clean water needed to make them)
We used that renewable energy called sun and wind to dry clothes -- thats huge in itself - takeaways were fish n chips in old newspaper that nobody died from ever -
Greta and here army of millennials would be better off looking at life 50 yrs ago -- to see how easy it is not to damage the planet - and stop buying shit - especially mobile phones every year that require some of the most limited precious metals on teh planet! -- wotn be long before we start digging up landfills to recycle these - be economic to do so a lot sooner than people think
I personally don't worry about climate change - and if it has concious thought -- the planet wont either -- the change is only wrecking the HUMAN environment -- not the planet -- the planet has seen it all temperatures way way higher -- temperatures way way cooler - and long after thee human species has dissappeared the Planet will still be here
You are quite right, over the last few decades we've moved backwards on so many issues towards a disposable mindset. It's a tough job to undo the 'convenience at all costs' thinking. Who wants to spend an extra 20 minutes a day sorting their recycling, hanging out clothes, fixing their things etc when that's a whole episode on Netflix?
Many of these things are still options - if I drank milk, there are glass bottle refill options near to me, I bike virtually everywhere, we've used the dryer once this year (it came with the house), we try to minimise our waste and buy many things 2nd hand. We've all got to keep working to actually value our materials and reduce consumption.
You're also right at the end - we're only doing this for our benefit. The planet will shrug off our excesses and no doubt have an evolutionary burst after the human-induced extinction. But, perhaps survival of the species is enough of an incentive to grab the bike to head to the shops rather than the car?
Another thing that has changed though is the amount of hours a couple has to collectively spend in full time work to keep a family afloat, which has essentially doubled since the time being discussed. It's a hell of a lot easier to find time to recycle, hang out clothes, fix things etc when someone is home most of the day (and the collective working hours of that couple are 40 rather than 80). Also, many people buying their first homes now simply cannot afford to buy a house within walking/cycling distance of work (particularly when there are two separate workplaces to take into account, that may be far from each other). My Nana used to walk down the shops once a day to get her groceries, and then walk home. She wouldn't have been able to do that had she also had to go to work, not to mention the fact that the shopping centre she used which used to have a butcher and a fruit and veg place now has a fried chicken shop and a $2 shop instead. It's not just laziness that has caused change in habits - it's a bunch of structural things.
In 2019, Biological Conservation reported that 40% of all insects species are declining globally and that a third of them are endangered.
Definitely not just the human environment. Whilst I agree with the idea that life will come back after we've had our way with the planet, it's wrong to say we're only wrecking it for humans.
Renewables are getting cheaper, and fossil fuels are getting more expensive. Wind is currently the most economical new power plant to build in NZ, although solar and geothermal are both going in too.
I strongly suggest hopping on your bike, changing your diet, growing your own food, and doing your bit. Perhaps you will be less defeatist, as well as living a healthier, happier life.
Perfect is the enemy of good. Better to use some fossil fuels to make a wind turbine than to just rely on burning more and more coal to generate our electricity.
Even better to reduce our usage altogether - encouraging active and public transport, and high quality insulation in all buildings (where feasible) are no-brainers.
Obviously it went right over your head. Its an ATTITUDE that runs across the board not just that single point. It all starts with running your lazy darlings to school in a 2 ton SUV. Interesting that ad on TV where the "poor kids" get to walk to school in the rain, shit back in my day when I was 6 I used to walk to school for miles no matter what the weather was in the UK, it was a totally different attitude. The bike racks at college in NZ used to be full, hundreds of bikes if you got their late you couldn't find a spot to rack it, now the same college has double the students and half a dozen ride to school. The whole point is we have moved in the wrong direction and continue to move in the wrong direction in what is now a throw away world. The carbon footprint of every individual has doubled since the 1970's.
I accidentally got caught up biking in the post-school rush out of cashmere high yesterday. An absolute river of bikes, hundreds of kids making their way home. It was great to see the Christchurch cycling investments start to pay off, and there's lots more on the way.
We struggle to get any significant movement from Auckland Transport on cycle ways and public transport, like they're dinosaur-burning dinosaurs who have to be dragged kicking and screaming to any concessions. In fairness, when they do come to the party, NIMBYs remain a massive problem by trying to prevent any progress toward sustainability.
If he refused to make a pledge that he is not certain he can keep then that's preferable to say Auckland Council's climate emergency that actually plans for more waste and vehicle emissions.
Carbon zero in 2050 solves nothing - those 200 years of fossil fuel emissions remain so our climate will continue to warm up; the only difference is the rate of warming will not be exponential.
Emission reductions must be 'per capita'. What if NZ takes say 10% of the Bengalis who will soon be underwater - that may double our population. Emission targets without a population plan are pointless.
Glad to see all the rhetoric on genocide turned down today. Civilians made an example is a war crime, but I have yet to see evidence the Russians went door to door killing every last Ukrainian. So reluctant to call it genocide when the victims are poor and black with no strategic resources, but so quick when the aggressor is Russia.
Not sure when the world changed but in WWII it was just standard practice to bomb civilians. England fire bombed Dresden and burned it to the ground some 20,000+ people died. War is war, everyone is a target. Not much sympathy coming from me for Ukraine, they could have stopped all this before it started .All you need is one deluded person at the top looking after his own self interest who likes grandstanding and people die.
Please use the word Genocide correctly. It requires a deliberate officially planned murder of a specific population. So the European Jews and the Tutsi were victims of Genocide. The killing fields of Cambodia were not since despite the deliberate intent they had no intention of killing all Cambodians.
What has apparently happened to civilians in the Ukraine is terrible. It is unlikely to have been carefully planned by Putin's war cabinet. It is the result of poor training and indiscipline. Similar to Abu Ghraib. Counter-productive. Not Genocide but still evil. What bothers me most is not the intent of the leader but the way such crimes are committed with the perpetrators unaware that they have even committed a crime. Abu Ghraid became public when the troops involved had some of the photographs they had taken published.
Yes, good explanation of the different types of crime in this interview with lawyer
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/law/2022/mar/30/vladim…
The Khumer Rouge specifically targeted the Cham and Vietnamese minority populations, which is why it's generally classed as a genocide despite the widespread killing across the wider population.
"Pol Pot ultimately ordered the full-scale mass killing of the Cham people. American professor Samuel Totten and Australian professor Paul R. Bartrop estimate that these efforts would have completely wiped out the Cham population were it not for the overthrow of the Khmer Rouge in 1979"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambodian_genocide#Cham_Muslims
Christopher Luxon on RNZ this morning refused to support NZ's pledge to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 50% by 2030, instead saying National plans to get to net zero by 2050.
Smart as prices will go to the moon (sorry already at the moon) but you get my drift that 50percent less carbon 2030 is a dream unless we are prepared to pay alot more for everyday prices i.e $8 petrol/higher electricity food cars everything to reduce output as technolgy is not yet ready or cheap enough at moment to reduce 50% unless of course by doing so send 50% of kiwis overseas.
Watch out Australia Kiwi invasion starting soon problem solved not.
Sounds great to me if all the polluters and baby boomers move to Aus and NZ becomes a country with walking, cycling, public transport, electric cars and buses, quieter roads, nicer neighbourhoods. Why people want to continue the car dominance which means kids can't even walk to school any more is beyond me.
My kids still walk to school on the footpath which is perfectly safe but like many have said above most kids can barely make it to the letterbox let alone 1-2km to school how sad for the kids that the parents are so weak minded and lazy.
The main problem I see is how much is the real cost going to be to rush into being carbonless.
The current mob will just keep borrowing to pay for all this now and our kids will be broke paying it all back.
We have 100 years approx being oil based so 10 years to reduce usage is not going to work unless of course you think 50percent of your neigbours in your average street can buy an electric car plus install pv and farmers will upgrade tractors to hydrogen/electric in next 8 years.
I think we are rushing it.
Who knows over next 5 years hydrogen may well take of and eclectric cars will be old tech that we all rushed out to buy and pay top dollar.
Also if the boomers take all the wealth to Australia how are we going to pay for anything?? unless RB turns on the printers 24/7 to gloss over everything
"The main problem I see is how much is the real cost going to be to rush into being carbonless.
The current mob will just keep borrowing to pay for all this now and our kids will be broke paying it all back."
No, you have this completely wrong. We're borrowing now to maintain our current lifestyle. Going carbon neutral means less for future generations to pay off.
You are lucky, our kids have to cross a main road which does have a pedestrian crossing but that often people don't stop at. And I definitely wouldn't let them ride a bike to school even though I did in my day, I barely remember seeing a car on the way to school, these days they would probably see hundreds, most of which are driving aggressively at 60km/hr and in a rush. Even when I walk the kids to school it doesn't feel that safe, and it isn't the nicest experience with all the noise and fumes.
We just put up with this crap because we think it is a requirement and it has always been this way, but the truth is that cars are ruining NZ much more than they did 40 years ago, and much more than almost every other country except the likes of Aus and US.
Good points on the cars not stopping I sold my house and moved to another part of town to ensure that they could walk to primary school and the High shcool has a bike path bike but for most now the roads are unsafe due to increasing population but not infrastructure.
It is crazy the reduction in kids bikes at school i am picking 95% or more drop in kids biking compared to pre2000
It's interesting to see New Zealand government ten year is down -5bps while US government ten year is up +14 bps. I am wondering whether it's something to do with this:
One of the puzzles we raised a few times now is why Australia and some Asian countries still have low CPI inflation.
Quick look suggests Australia have also taken a beating on tradable inflation, like New Zealand, but in non-tradable inflation lower rental prices have moderated overall CPI whereas there is now a chronic rental shortage in New Zealand driving rents and inflation upwards.
Here is the latest ABS release, next one is due on 27th: https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/economy/price-indexes-and-inflation/c…
Can you do an article on the fair pay agreements bill?
We're going back to unionised work forces... and union reps looking like bald bouncers wearing black suits + sunglasses rocking up to work sites uninvited similar to what has happened in Australia
Flashing back to the 1970-1980's all over again.... when we had stagflation for 10years and high interest rates
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.