Here's our summary of key economic events overnight that affect New Zealand with news American economic data continues to impress.
But first up today there was a full dairy auction, one that brought slightly lower prices overall in USD terms (-1.4%), and slightly higher results in NZD terms (+0.6%). The milk powders slipped -2.2% while the milk fats (cheese and butter) were firmer. Demand was lighter despite lower production reports in both the US and China. Although analysts will have noted these softer results, it seems unlikely the high farmgate payout forecasts will be altered by this result alone. But prices today are on the downside from recent highs.
In the US, their Redbook monitoring of retail sales continued its very elevated rise from a year ago, up +6.8% and off a positive base. So this metric is still quite impressive.
US exports continued their rise, up +5.2% in November from a year ago for goods, up +9.3% for services. Imports were up too, but probably distorted by a pre-tariff surge, a surge that will continue into December.
US ISM services PMI was very expansionary, and more so that the internationally benchmarked S&P/Markit one. New order growth was strong, but it was current business activity levels that drove this rise.
And that is reflected in the November JOLTS report. Analysts had expected a slip back, but in fact a surge in job openings was found in this survey, and quits were lower than expected. We are just three days away from getting the December non-farm payrolls report and today's release suggests there may be upside coming to the +154,000 gain expected.
So it will be no surprise to know that their logistics sector is expanded fast in December. But an effort by firms to keep inventories under control meant that the latest fast expansion was less than in November.
Today's UST 10yr bond auction brought a median yield of 4.62% at the well supported event, although less so than last time. But that was much higher than the 4.19% at the prior equivalent event a month ago.
(And we should probably note too that Facebook and Instagram are ditching their fact-checking efforts in a nod to Trump. It will now no doubt become the sewer that Twitter/X has become. They have also appointed the UFC boss as a board member.)
The Canadian Ivey PMI came in strong too with a solid expansion reported and its best in six months, although not quite up to the expansion analysts had expected.
Canadian exports rose too in November.
In China, an update by major developer Country Garden shows just how damaged the property sector is. In December it sold only 50% of the level it sold in the same month a year ago, itself a very weak benchmark. Beijing's stimulus efforts haven't helped this developer yet.
And lower Chinese activity is seeing quite sharpish dips for both coal and rebar steel prices now.
And staying in China, their foreign exchange reserves fell in December but their gold reserves rose for a second straight month. However, year on year those reserves are only -0.2% lower, and unchanged for the gold holdings.
In Europe, their CPI inflation rate has been rising since October, and is now up to 2.4%, largely driven by the German inflation rise we reported yesterday. Europe-wide it is the rise in the cost of services that are the driver here; energy costs are the restrainer.
Australian building consents came in less than expected in November. Year-on-year consents for new housebuilding rose +3.8% but multi-unit dwellings fell -6.4%. Month-on-month both fell more than expected. They may still be in an overall recent rising trend, but it that trend is weakening faster now.
The UST 10yr yield is now at just on 4.69%, and up +6 bps from yesterday. The key 2-10 yield curve is more positive, now by +39 bps. Their 1-5 curve inversion is a bit more positive too, now by +28 bps. And their 3 mth-10yr curve is also more positive, now by +37 bps. The Australian 10 year bond yield starts today at 4.55% and up another +2 bps. The China 10 year bond rate is now at 1.61% and up +1 bp. The NZ Government 10 year bond rate is now at 4.58% and up +2 bps.
Wall Street is down -0.6% on the S&P500 in Tuesday trade. Overnight, European markets closed mixed in their Tuesday trade with London down -0.1% while Frankfurt and Paris were up +0.6%. However, Tokyo recovered +2.0% yesterday, Hong Kong was down -1.2% and Shanghai rose +0.7%. Singapore was up +0.2%. The ASX200 closed its Tuesday trade up +0.3% while the NZX50 was down -0.2%.
The price of gold will start today at US$2651/oz and up +US$12 from this time yesterday.
Oil prices are also little-changed from this time yesterday at just on US$74/bbl in the US while the international Brent price is up +50 USc at just under US$77.
The Kiwi dollar starts today still at 56.5 USc and unchanged from this time yesterday. Against the Aussie we are up +10 bps to 90.4 AUc. Against the euro we are down -10 bps at 54.2 euro cents. That all means our TWI-5 starts today at just on 67.1 and up +10 bps from this time yesterday.
The bitcoin price starts today at US$97,785 and down -4.2% from this time on yesterday. Volatility over the past 24 hours has been moderate at +/- 2.8%.
Daily exchange rates
Select chart tabs
The easiest place to stay up with event risk is by following our Economic Calendar here ».
125 Comments
(And we should probably note too that Facebook and Instagram are ditching their fact-checking efforts in a nod to Trump. It will now no doubt become the sewer that Twitter/X has become. They have also appointed the UFC boss as a board member.)
It's feeling increasingly like the world's former high school bullies are still intimidating the geeks into handing over their lunches. I note Zuckerberg donated $1M to Trump's inauguration committee to try to mend bridges.
We had a period of fossil energy injection, which the repressed workers fought for a share of. They go that, partly because by the 1920s, production needed more consumers than just the elite.
That period peaked in the 70s, and there has been a throwing of what were workers, under the bus - poorest first (in the West - exacerbated by offshoring production to slave-wage countries. Throw in a reducing EROEI globally, reducing resource quality and increasing maintenance demands, and the process gets magnified (local rates go up, government services go down, the poor hurt first).
So a valid question is - What format will we morph to, when the system (based on ever-more energy and resources, but now increasingly short-changed) collapses. Which it will. I suspect we will get very local, very fast. Maybe there will be some enlightened local leaders - and there will be psychopaths who rise to the surface in others. But colonialism tells us that those who pack the most energy, win the fights. Meaning that even the enlightened leaders may have to resort to violence.
But the demand for local labour will be insatiable. Energy displacement by some orders of magnitude.
Sorry, PDK. You are becoming part of the problem.
Why? You offer no solutions.
Why can't you offer solutions?
Like all religious zealots, you can't. Why? Mainly because your ability to communicate the solutions is compromised by your own ability to understand them. ... Thus, like all religious zealots, you preach the 'the Rapture' and Armageddon.
And like all religious zealots ... when confronted by you lack of ability ... You go on the attack.
Hardly a grown up response, ay?
But hey. What do I know. It works for Tr-usk. May be it'll work for you?
Foolish comment.
Your 'solutions' - as I've already posted here, sigh - presumably involve continuing the uncontinuable.
I have gone ahead in many ways, realising that draw-down of finite resources is uncontinuable.
Don't blame the messenger, and try to lift your cranial game eh?
This will be an interesting year, but better seen through truth-coloured glasses.
The US has 5% of the global population, using 25% of global resources. In other words, a hegemony. And it has had to invade, destabilise, overthrow, undermine, multiple times to maintain access to that 25%.
That required military spending - but of recent decades the corporatocracy has skewed that spend, and the result may not be good value for money (bangs for bucks?). Always, hegemonies fail when the energy required to defend/repress, exceeds the energy return.
They are past the crest of that process. Dead State walking. Notice that this is not on the radar of those who laud it 'growing'...
Better get Greta to China. "China alone consumes nearly 30 percent more coal than the rest of the world together. That is not ending anytime soon."
https://www.taipeitimes.com/News/editorials/archives/2024/12/20/2003828…
She is correct.
I apologised to my two offspring, nearly 20 years ago.
Some folk, of course, hide from the truth. Self-justification becomes fact, but fact doesn't square with the truth.
Me, even if the truths are somewhat inconvenient, I'd rather deal with them that believe a fairy-tale. And economic growth forever on a finite planet is a fairy-tale.
I repeat - she is correct. Forget the messenger - think about the message.
What did you apologise for, roads, schools, hospitals, shopping malls, internet, being able to visit Europe in 24 hours?
What was the alternative, subsistence living? We could give it a go, but someone would be along in due course to rape muder and pillage. You see, there are bad people out there. Read up on Genghis Khan. You are able to live off-grid because fossil fuels are used to protect you.
Without fossil fuels we we'd be dead or enslaved. We rely on the millitary might of the US and Australia to a lesser extent to keep us free. We would struggle to defend ourselves if a couple of destroyers and an aircraft carrier turned into the Waitemata Harbour. We can't even survey a reef fgs.
PDK is free and posting because he is protected by fossil fuels and nuclear fission. End of.
If you mean - and I presume you do - front up with ways to keep this consume-the-planet-as-fast-as-possible regime going, then no. I won't, because nobody can.
If you mean solutions to living sustainably - meaning long-term maintainably - then I'm well ahead of you, and of most of the pack. Yes. I am part of a society dependent on fossil fuels. But I'm not stupid enough to think they're infinite, I'm well aware of growth and doubling-times, and I understand entropy.
The rate of consumption which can be maintained, is easily ascertainable. The per-head consumption-rate should be divided into that, and discussed - because 8 billion is not a maintainable number ex fossil energy. At 2 billion, long term, we average good peasant consumption-levels. At 1 billion, closer to our current ones. That's a hard choice.
Just because someone has a high opinion of themselves, doesn't mean they're immortal, or cannot starve. You - and TK - are arguing from your own POVs, backwards. Self-justification, therefore... That's flawed.
Read up on Genghis Khan.
I explained at the BBQ to people how the Mongols established control through a system known as the Golden Horde, which governed much of southern Russia from its capital in Sarai. While Genghis Khan himself did not rule Moscow, his legacy continued through his descendants who imposed tribute and political oversight over Russian princes. The Russian princes were required to pay tribute to the khans and often sought their approval for rulership.
The jaws of the the lefties at the BBQ all dropped when I explained the Mongols owned the Russkies for about 200 years ending in the 14th Century.
The same lefties were horrified when I let it drop that the Mongols terrorized and conquered Kiev as well. Their impression of Mongolian people as proud indigenous people living in harmony with nature unpolluted by Western Civilization.
It's a funny world.
A good irony there isn’t there. If Putin, on historical grounds amongst others, strives to reclaim the Russian Empire secured by Peter the Great, then does not that then in turn provide China with sufficient precedent to reclaim the earlier empire of the Khans, all the way to a swathe of current Ukrainian territory. Perhaps in a nod to that dynasty and its reach, that is why China has its currency as the Yuan.
, then does not that then in turn provide China with sufficient precedent to reclaim the earlier empire of the Khans
The Mongols sacked China. The Mongol conquest of China under Genghis Khan in the early 13th century. His campaigns against the Jin dynasty (1115–1234) and the Western Xia (Xi Xia) state resulted in widespread devastation. The Mongols employed brutal tactics, including massacres and systematic destruction of cities. For instance, during the siege of Beijing (then Zhongdu) in 1215, the city was captured after a long siege, leading to mass killings of its inhabitants as retribution for their resistance.
Greta is indeed correct.
But you?
Some folk, of course, hide from the truth. Self-justification becomes fact, but fact doesn't square with the truth.
Me, even if the truths are somewhat inconvenient, I'd rather deal with them that believe a fairy-tale.
Your virtue signaling knows no bounds. None at all. And the arrogance and pomposity are beyond measure.
Front up with solutions. How must we change? What must we do?
Or are we - as you so constantly conclude - completely fucked?
Friggin' climate doom merchants. They make me sick. They've given up while the battle rages. Worse than useless.
I think you forgot your meds.
Firstly, facts. I DO NOT say we're fucked.
I say this temporary rate of consumption is, though. This first-world living-off-others and living-off draw-down while telling ourselves a prettier story - it's doomed, near-term.
And therefore we have to live a lesser-consuming way. Which I've done more than most, for longer than most.
Grow up. Which has nothing to do with age.
And therefore we have to live a lesser-consuming way. Which I've done more than most, for longer than most.
I hear you Power. However, I will say you shy away from the hard stuff, like population control. This was previously managed by tribal conquest, war, etc. All the bearded folk don't want to talk about popn control. At least the Chinese did something. Not here in Aotearoa though. And it's the bearded folk again who want to preach to the choir but don't really make any sacrifices themselves. They feel superior to the great unwashed because they understand the issues better.
That doesnt help. They simply sail to Australia, who parks them in an offshore refugee camp for years, and then waits for someone like Jacinda Ardern to come along and say "NZ will take them all". Jacinda Ardern was even prepared to sacrifice NZers rights to live and work in Australia in order to get the refugees in to NZ. Once more demonstrating that her ideology and personal image was more important to her than safeguarding the rights of New Zealand citizens.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/dec/05/jacinda-ardern-t…
Yes, very poor judgment on her part. I thought at the time that this was either personal virtue signal on her part or strategic ineptitude.
Ardern, Trudeau, Macron and the rest of the "liberal progressive left" are done, reputations shredded. Their legacy is going to take years to fix. State sanctioned rape gangs in the UK, what monstrosity is that?
I don't see why the person who points out a problem is also responsible for finding the solution. Would you rather ignore a house fire because you're not a firefighter or raise the alarm.
I think PDK has hit a nerve as his analysis backed by science and facts, undermines the current discipline of economics (which is predicated on theory and does not account for a whole bunch or externalities in it's analysis). From the outside it seems like PDK gets a lot of flak for pointing out things people don't want to hear.
Yes that’s true enough. Have said so myself before on here. The fact is illegals are used everywhere. Not far from us Trump had developed a disused ski field into a golf course. Local knowledge was that during construction and then, the maintenance, workers numbered a fair proportion of illegals. That was up until the first presidential run, whereupon they all disappeared.
It's feeling increasingly like the world's former high school bullies are still intimidating the geeks into handing over their lunches.
Remember that these platforms were very much intimidated into censoring content in the first place, by cabals of advertisers who threatened to pull funding if they didn't.
Of course it was all done under the guise of a benevolent crusade against misinformation, and any suggestion that there were ideological motives involved got you labelled as a conspiracy theorist. But it will be interesting to see whether they still think their moral convictions are as important now, or if they do a Neil Young and realise that the world is quite happy to carry on without you if you decide to pack up your toys and go home.
Zuckerberg has admitted that it was wrong and he regrets having allowed it in the first place. https://www.reuters.com/technology/zuckerberg-says-biden-administration…
Same with Bezos who is now trying to return The Washington Post to some form of balanced reporting.
The Left shouldnt assume that these people share their convictions, its just that they were as hoodwinked, pressured, and coerced the same as all the rest of us. Now sunlight is disinfecting that particular corner of the Internet.
Good comments. These tycoons can sense the winds of change. It should be obvious that a Trump victory and possibly even a future Farage victory is a direct result of the descent into the ridiculous and heavy handed censorship. They left the people with no recourse other than the vote.
More just the legal ramifications of breaching COPPA with CSAM content, as well as large amounts of fraud, physical threats and defamation content which would have been a massive legal minefield should anyone of financial means and value have issue with it. In that you can sue facebook for promoting obvious fraud, threats and defamation material with their coded algorithms. However most people & companies are just too poor to do so. Hence only those with significant financial means to pay legal rates can afford justice in regards to threats, defamation, fraud etc yet due to this the legal costs to facebook to combat it work out to be more expensive, as the cases that do crop up represent a greater legal cost then any fines. Except for the COPPA law & CSAM material which in itself they are not protected from legally by passing of that someone else was a source when their software disseminates it and promotes it to others. Then lets get into the privacy breaches for child material...
aka it is not a left conspiracy for paranoid conspiracy nuts it is literally just a company trying to protect itself from massive financial legal fees from bad code, fraud, defamation, advertisers being turned off by poor algorithm placements alongside other content & privacy management.
However most people & companies are just too poor to do so. Hence only those with significant financial means to pay legal rates can afford justice in regards to threats, defamation, fraud etc ....
And this is great - for the big companies.
They get their competition taken out by uncontrolled social media (which is owned by billionaires that own the same big companies).
Back in the 'old days' we had referees - in the form government funded watchdogs - to ensure every play was playing on a level playing field.
Now? The voting public worldwide has been convinced (by the lobbyists of those same billionaires) that we need less 'regulation'.
Will this end well? I have every reason to expect it will not.
aka it is not a left conspiracy for paranoid conspiracy nuts it is literally just a company trying to protect itself from massive financial legal fees from bad code, fraud, defamation, advertisers being turned off by poor algorithm placements alongside other such content & privacy management. E.G. the twitter self harming and self destructive blow up of revenue & skill coders that led to very public epic application failures and legal cases (even twitter's own lawyers started cases against twitter).
There must be quite a lot of geek differentiation. I work in a scientific field and am surrounded by geeks, the vast majority of them vote left-wing and despise Trump/Musk.
Sure, the crypto geeks are on board through the aligned interest in getting rich in opaque ways and Musk used to have the respect of many of the science/engineering nerds, but I think that group has largely turned on him. The young incel geeks are probably on board from a simple desire to have an unfair world burned to the ground, or make them rich enough that women pay attention to them.
I wonder how many of those meme soldiers also fall into the crypto or incel groups?
I guess like any other demographic, geeks are not a monolith. I'm in a profession with high female representation for a scientific field, that tends to attract people who want to do good, so I suspect we're not representative.
Zachary Smith: "Nearly all geeks support Trump and Musk."
Say what? .... In fact, say WTF!!!!!
I'm quite well connected to many 'geeks' globally and IMO, you're talking unadulterated nonsense!
Front up. Where's your source to this b.s.?
The only people who think X is a sewer are (a) people who are not on it and (b) people who refuse to accept that other people have different opinions to them
The rest of us get immense value from X. All the sad loonies can go hang out at BlueSky, Threads, or whatever other echo chamber has been created as a "safe space" to protect them from "hurty words".
And then stay there. That way the Left will be surprised again in 2028 when they lose once more. Its far easier to win political campaigns when the nutters are segregated away from everyone else, and have no idea what's going on.
On another note, it will be interesting to watch this site become such an echo chamber once they block public comments in March.
Yes they are. Only private subscribers will be able to post comments, public readers will not be able to post comments.
You'll be left talking to yourself. Won't that be fun? The site will become a circle jerk of a small cabal of people all engaged in group think. Then it will lose readers (and subscribers) altogether. Macrobusiness in Australia used to be a great site until they paywalled it, with hundreds of people commenting on posts, now they would be lucky if they have a 2-3 subscribers commenting daily.
On Macrobusiness they had so few people commenting that those who did so started talking about their weekend plumbing activities just for something to say - it turned into an online Mens Shed. Which of course just made the site even more unreadable and not worth paying for. I already see Interest heading down that path, as people start discussing personal topics unrelated to the articles, or screeds of posts just slinging personal insults at each other.
I do understand. But I come here for the entertainment value of the comments, so when the comments disappear so will I (probably). The actual news that is relevant to me is available on other sites - and there is no substantial intellectual analysis of the news that would be worth paying for, its just reporting of it. I think Interest would be better off expanding their advertising and sponsorship base, by increasing the site traffic rather than reducing it.
Or maybe reducing their headcount - I notice that the number of contributors has expanded substantially, and ventured into areas that really add no value and which is not core to the Interest business. The increasing partisanship of the site is also not motivating me to subscribe, if I'm going to be stuck in an echo chamber where I'm stalked by a couple of rabid commenters who clearly have an agenda to push (you guys know who I'm talking about).
I think he makes valid points.
Interest is not a charity. I would subscribe if I thought the service it offered deserved it. Overall I don’t. Dan writes very good articles, but many on the site are mediocre, and sometimes quite ill informed. Many of the better articles are from elsewhere. The editorial bias and stubbornness is also a big turn off for me, as were the responses I got when I had issues with my former subscription.
I mainly come for the comments.
I'm the reverse.
The comments are almost always repetitive crap. Sure, some are funny, but also a waste of time.
There are few that make me think - whilst confirming that most are not that bright as these good comments get no recognition, or way too much.
Just here for articles to be honest. The morning and evening briefs mainly.
(And good god - please bring the Comment box into the modern day, e.g spellchecker, bug free, etc.)
Except X had even greater levels of targeted content blocking and free speech blocking placed on it after the rebranding to X. aka it is not a left conspiracy for paranoid conspiracy nuts most filters are literally companies trying to protect themselves from massive financial legal fees from bad code, fraud, defamation, advertisers being turned off by poor algorithm placements alongside other such content & privacy management. Yet twitter placed targeted content blockers on free speech conversations and words that had no legal reasoning to do so. No defamation risks or legal ramification on those words or conversations and a targeted AI profiling which comments to "promote" not on the basis of interest but on self serving direction for certain individuals based on nepotistic means. Aka rules for don't hurt Eion's tender fragile ego behind them.
Given that there were now greater blocks to free speech on the platform then before many in tech have opted to other platforms even going so far as to Truth and also back to older tech versions e.g. Reddit. Twitter self harming and self destructive blow up of revenue & skill coders that led to very public epic application failures and legal cases (even twitter's own lawyers started cases against twitter) serve as a cautionary tail of how to blow up a company publicly and burn billions in investor cash. And if you think the brand X will stick then obviously recent tech history and news has passed by you. Which is not a surprise this site is as far from tech news and tech company developments as women's day. The ironic part of your comment was it was actually those on the "right" side of politics, if you consider people to be only right or left, who were leaving twitter in droves. lol humans are not easily divided in right and left, one side or the other to begin with and The Butter Battle book for toddlers should have brought you up to speed on that. In that there are are greater number of greys across all levels and issues that anyone who defines themselves as right or left is just lying to themselves.
It is actually funny to watch the site failures first hand and many key tech people on twitter often provide very good updates on the critical faults with the services which are comedy gold (comedy if you were not invested in twitter financially/socially etc or dependent on it for marketing).
K.W. : "The only people who think X is a sewer are (a) people who are not on it and (b) people who refuse to accept that other people have different opinions to them"
Facts matter, K.W. .
Please tell us where this fact - i.e. "only people who think X is a sewer" - came from.
I expect you can't. Most bigots support their opinions with unsubstantiated bullshit.
You're no different.
You think that's 'funny' PDK?
In your book - There is no need for any reply of any substance? So we're to understand your and jbman's, infantile reply as the end of the subject?
Sorry. That's just bullying.
Why? Because BOTH OF YOU .... just like "X" ... offer no reply. No fact. No substance. Nothing.
Only ad hominems ... I.e. you offer no wisdom, no insights and no fact.
Hope you sleep well. Being bullying pricks must be great, ay?
EDIT: Probably why I have no intent to take up a subscription. i.e. the quality of discussion and debate is - generally speaking - poor. And some posters are out right bullying pricks.
I put up a lot of links to read.
Some specifically for you, as I recall.
Settle down, have a good look in the mirror, and set out to learn.
Start with Tom Murphy's textbook https://open.umn.edu/opentextbooks/textbooks/980
Then download http://www.withouthotair.com/
Then https://www.thegreatsimplification.com/episode/53-william-rees
Then come back and have a less-rant conversation, eh?
Here's a thought for you PDK (Oh Great Savior of Our Planet - We All Bow Before You) ...
Perhaps you should summarize why we should read the links before you post them? (You never do. I do watch them ... Only to hear the same sh!t you're already ranting. And with few, if any, practical solutions. And none in NZ's context.)
Perhaps you should post links with "Here's a solution..." ... But you seldom do that either.
Methinks you want a religious following? .... I've no doubt you'll get one on other social media. And that's really what you want? Right?
Trumps got the Cheque book out for Greenland again....lol
https://www.reuters.com/world/can-trump-buy-greenland-2025-01-07/
Secretary of State Seward in the 1860s after purchasing Alaska from Russia was on the brink of purchasing both Greenland and Iceland from Denmark. Not much record of why that didn’t proceed but perhaps as at the time the Alaska purchase was ridiculed largely as “Sewards Folly” and the president Andrew Johnson was considered as loathsome, the political vibes were not conducive. Had it happened though, the USA would have gained significant geographical strategic strength for WW1, and more so for WW2 , the Cold War and today. The Monroe doctrine inhibiting expansion in the Americas was another factor. The USA, apart from Hawaii, didn’t really start into imperialism until the early 20th century when it, under a very blatant false flag, made war on Spain and started picking up prizes such as Cuba and the Philippines.
What's wrong with the world now is that things seem stagnant and there's a general feeling of ennui. I'd be up for the USA expanding to incorporate Canada, Greenland and perhaps Australia and New Zealand into a new empire as well as securing key shipping routes. That could shake things up a bit.
For all the complaints, criticism and condemnation of the West would wager that in answer to the question - would you sooner live under the regimes of London, Washington or Moscow,Beijing the majority on here would select the former. Of course those i. favour of the latter are free to do so anytime they might like.
The question for Greenlanders is being ruled by Washington or Copenhagen - I'm not sure I'd want to swap in their position. I'd expect to see environmental regulations removed, increase in natural resource extraction and the obvious healthcare provision changes. Plus an influx of management with silly accents.
I'm sure others would be keen at the prospect of the associated jobs - definitely a matter of opinion.
The domino effect from one country invading another one (Russia invading Ukraine) is insane. Hezbolllah entering Israel and Israel retaliating into Lebanon, Iran, Syria, China renewing its interests in Taiwan and proclaiming "we will be reunited, we are one country", and now… Trump joining the expansionist bandwagon by looking at Greenland, talking crazy about Canada and Panama...
It feels like a class of 5 year olds, where one bully got something, so all the other bullies want something too...
This is getting nonsensical. It is like our civilization is heading back in time. Lets face it USA verses Greenland, come on. Trump sure knows how to pick a hard fight. Denmark is in NATO ahh what does that all mean. That's right, not a lot according to the Trump. So much for standing up for the free world.
USA already have military bases in Greenland and the Danish government are supportive of cooperation with USA within NATO. What's the problem?
Going to be interesting to see if the US 10 year breaks through this 4.7% resistance level. It appears to me that it is signalling that we’re now moving on from the post GFC ultra low interest rate environment (an opinion not a forecast as I like anyone else doesn’t know for certain what is going to unfold).
Then again the yield curves have just uninverted and the sharemarket appears to be at crazy highs against any fundamental analysis so could easily fall and fall significantly - so who knows what that could do to confidence and then inflation and economic strength.
Fascinating times if you’re a finance/econ nerd. I personally wouldn’t bet significantly in either direction in terms of whether rates are going higher or lower from here - not whether the sharemarket has peaked.
"But first up today there was a full dairy auction, one that brought slightly lower prices overall in USD terms (-1.4%), and slightly higher results in NZD terms (+0.6%). "
Thanks primarily to the tanking of the NZD.
Meanwhile, the stuff we import will slowly ratchet up in price and the downsides of more expensive imports will become the new talk. (I've recently bought a lot of new whiteware, kitchen appliances, etc. to replace older existing items that'll be sold on TM.)
You could shorten that last sentence to nine words (stop at 'planning').
On reflection, down to six words (stop at 'government').
The danger is that we are heading down the US track, and not far behind. Increasing erraticism seems to follow massed disbelief in a patently false narrative.
And bad landlord of the year 2024 award goes to ....?
https://www.waikatotimes.co.nz/business/360513899/tales-tenancy-tribuna…
Preliminary data from EMI show NZ electricity generation around 846 GWh down on 2023.This would be the lowest generation since 2013 as demand destruction from large industrial users ( and irrigation demand reduction due to rain) sees demand setting record lows into 2025.
Analysts had expected a slip back, but in fact a surge in job openings was found in this survey, and quits were lower than expected. We are just three days away from getting the December non-farm payrolls report and today's release suggests there may be upside coming...
A lower proportion of the workforce is in employment every year, having workers is increasingly a competitive advantage.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2025/jan/07/consumers-price-rises-…
The price of household staples including food and drink could climb by as much as 20% in 2025 if challenges with sourcing and transporting goods continue, an industry body has warned.
The cost of electronics, machinery, chemicals and petroleum products could also rise, said the Chartered Institute of Procurement and Supply (CIPS), as a result of geopolitical instability, including tensions in the Middle East, supply chain disruption and cybersecurity issues.
It's an interesting read.
But like all these articles, it doesn't predict how economies can change - and very quickly change - when import/export prices change.
What I mean is, there are established supply chains for food that are based on input costs that could very quickly, in the face of 'transport' or 'input' cost increases.
That mean people and economies grow far more in their climates, and their soil conditions (and with fewer non-natural fertilizers) for local consumption, than foods they grow for export.
(PDK doesn't get this. But them's the facts. The rort of our food industries on the 3rd world isn't something that PDK has any knowledge of. Not his fault. Very few do.)
CONF, appalling display of comment today by you. I have noticed over the past couple of weeks your commentary has become abrasive, bullying, out of touch with the item being discussed, arrogant and dismissive. Perhaps you are the problem and are unable to address your own place in the order. Continuous personal attacks do not sit well if you wish to debate the issues.
I agree with PDK - withdraw and apologise.
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.