What happened Wednesday

Economy / news

A review of things you need to know before you sign off on Wednesday; BNZ ends 5% TD rate, banking complaint scorecard update, mortgage interest paid swells, Aussie CPI modest, swaps & NZD hold, & more

29th Jan 25, 3:59pm by David Chaston

Here are the key things you need to know before you leave work today (or if you work from home, before you shutdown your laptop).

MORTGAGE RATE CHANGES
Bank of Baroda trimmed its home loan rates. All rates are here.

TERM DEPOSIT/SAVINGS RATE CHANGES
BNZ has cut its TD rates today, and no longer offers a 5% six month rate. (H/T to the anonymous phone caller.) Bank of Baroda also trimmed rates. All updated term deposit rates less than 1 year are here, for 1-5 years, they are here.

BIG IS BEST?
The latest quarterly report on complaints to the Banking Ombudsman service shows that the main bank with the highest level of cases at 256 in the quarter was ANZ. In order, they were followed by ASB, Kiwibank, Westpac, and BNZ. Among all banks (including challenger banks), only ANZ, BNZ and Westpac had complaint and dispute levels lower than their market share.

THE INTEREST LOAD SWELLS, BUT THAT ISN'T DISCOURAGING EXTRA PAYMENTS
December quarter data out from the RBNZ shows that home loan borrowers par $22.3 bln in interest on their borrowings in 2024. That is a sharp +26% more than they paid in 2023, and a massive +86% more than they paid in 2022. This series is now ten years long, and since 2014, the amount of interest being paid on home loans has more than doubled since then. (And perhaps you may recall, in 2021 they paid just $9.5 bln in interest across all home loans.) Despite all this extra interest load, we should also note that borrowers are still making heavy 'excess repayments' over an above their scheduled repayments, an extra $4.4 bln in the December quarter alone, and extra $16 mln for all of 2024. So there is actually no sign here or any mortgage stress. (It is not in the lender's interest that borrowers make early repayments, but they are.)

USING THE HOUSE AS AN ATM IS OUT OF FAVOUR
Since the C33 data series began a decade ago, we can observe that mortgage top-ups were the lowest ever in 2024 - and declining during the year. Using the house as an ATM is out of favour and now only 11% of 'new' loans were of that type. In 2019 it was almost 20%.

MARKETS HOPEFUL
In Australia, there were some mixed signals in the Q4 CPI data released there today, along with their Monthly Inflation Indicator for December. The Q4 CPI rate fell to 2.4% from 2.5% in Q3, and slightly better than expected. Underlying inflation fell to 3.2%. But the month inflation indicator rose to 2.5% in December, up from 2.3% in November and 2.1% in October, and actually the highest in four months, so tracking the "wrong way". Markets however focused on the "good" quarterly result, anticipating this will open the door for a RBA rate cut on February 18. But you have to wonder if that is actually how Bullock & Team see it.

SWAP RATES STABLE
Wholesale swap rates could be a little softer today on global forces so keep an eye on our chart below which will record the final positions closer to 5pm. The 90 day bank bill rate was down -2 bps on Monday at 3.96%. The Australian 10 year bond yield is down -5 bps at 4.42%. The China 10 year bond rate has held at 1.64%. The NZ Government 10 year bond rate is up +3 bps at 4.62% while today's RBNZ fix was 4.56% and up +1 bp. The UST 10yr yield is now just on 4.53% and down -2 bps from where we were this time yesterday. Their 2yr is also down -2 bps to just on 4.19%, so that positive curve is now at +34 bps.

EQUITIES MIXED BUT SUBDUED
The NZX50 is up +0.1% from this time yesterday. The ASX200 is up +1% from yesterday at this time on rate cut hopes. Tokyo is up +0.4% in early Wednesday trade. Hong Kong is up a mere +0.1%. Shanghai is down -0.1% at their open. And Singapore is up +0.1%. Wall Street ended its Tuesday session up +0.9% on the S&P500 and a bit more than half the prior day's fall.

OIL MARGINALLY FIRMER
The oil price is a little firmer from this time yesterday now just under US$74/bbl in the US, and just under US$77.50/bbl for the international Brent price.

CARBON PRICE DIPS AGAIN
The carbon price is still within its tight range, but dipped again today to NZ$63.25/NZU. The next release of units at the official auction is on March 19, 2025. See our new daily chart tracker of the NZU price for carbon, courtesy of emsTradepoint.

GOLD RISES
In early Asian trade, gold is up +US$22 from yesterday, now at US$2764/oz.

NZD ON HOLD
The Kiwi dollar has slipped a minor -10 bps from this time yesterday, now at 56.6 USc. Against the Aussie we are up +40 bps at 90.8 AUc. But against the euro we are unchanged at 54.2 euro cents. This all means the TWI-5 is now just under 67.2 and little-changed from yesterday.

BITCOIN UNCHANGED
The bitcoin price has moved very little today, still at US$101,764 from this time yesterday. Volatility of the past 24 hours has been modest at just over +/- 1.7%.

Daily exchange rates

Select chart tabs

Source: RBNZ

Source: CoinDesk

Daily swap rates

Select chart tabs

Source: NZFMA

This soil moisture chart is animated here.

Keep abreast of upcoming events by following our Economic Calendar here ».

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.

88 Comments

by Yvil | 29th Jan 25, 4:14pm 1738120463

THE INTEREST LOAD SWELLS, BUT THAT ISN'T DISCOURAGING EXTRA PAYMENTS

I find this very interesting and surprising. I thought that all the extra interest cost would suck any excess funds out of most borrowers' reserves. I guess I was wrong.

Does anyone have a plausible explanation, why many borrowers are able to make extra repayments, at a time when interest cost are so much higher ? (24% higher than in 2023 and 86% higher than in 2022)

by Baywatch | 29th Jan 25, 4:13pm 1738120387

Cutting back on smashed avocado and coffees surely?

by Yvil | 29th Jan 25, 4:27pm 1738121255

Despite all this extra interest load ($22,3 bln), borrowers are still making heavy 'excess repayments' over an above their scheduled repayments, an extra $4.4 bln in the December, and extra $16 mln for all of 2024

I suppose it should read $16 bln for 2024 of excess repayment. If this is the case then:

2022 interest cost $12.0

2023 interest cost $17.7 bln

2024 interest cost + extra repayment: $38.3 bln

Where does all this extra money come from ???

by J.C. | 29th Jan 25, 4:33pm 1738121612

Where does all this extra money come from ???

Excess income & profits and / or savings Dr Y.

BTW, there looks to be a typo.

by Yvil | 29th Jan 25, 5:10pm 1738123833

"Excess income & profits and / or savings"

Thanks Sherlock, I can certainly not fault this generalisation, lol. So you're saying that, despite NZ being in recession for a while now, there is still plenty of excess income and profits ?

by Pa1nter | 29th Jan 25, 5:27pm 1738124855

There's good income, because the average mortgage holder has gotten older over time, and incomes rise with age.

There's also probably more motivation to make extra repayments if the interest rates are higher.

All throws water on the 2022 theories that all the borrowers are in debt to the max and will fold as soon as rates rise 4%. The people taking the beatings in this climate are the worse off

by JimboJones | 29th Jan 25, 5:26pm 1738124800

Makes you wonder if houses are undervalued?

by Pa1nter | 29th Jan 25, 5:40pm 1738125621

There's certainly a long way to go till DTIs hit 6 or 7.

by morepork | 29th Jan 25, 4:44pm 1738122241

Repayments are typically principal and interest, when interest rates fell a higher proportion was principal. It would be a different series to look at the total repayments (P&I) over these 3 years

by Yvil | 29th Jan 25, 5:03pm 1738123438

Interest cost were higher in 2024 at 22.3 bln, as per article, they did not fall ! My point is that more principal was repaid despite interest cost rising as well.

by JimboJones | 29th Jan 25, 5:28pm 1738124912

For many people interest rates fell in 2024, probably most of those would have left the repayments the same.

by JimboJones | 29th Jan 25, 4:47pm 1738122455

Many people forget about the big pay rises that came with that 7% inflation.

by Palmtree08 | 29th Jan 25, 6:40pm 1738129256

"Where does all this extra money come from ???"

Selling assets?

by redcows1 | 29th Jan 25, 4:42pm 1738122125

The banking industry is one helluva evolved parasite. Always keeping the host alive and growing so they can grow at the same pace. Impressive.

by Palmtree08 | 29th Jan 25, 6:47pm 1738129679

Parasitic indeed. Asset prices are set by ease of credit. In other words tomorrows yet to be earned income, rather than yesterdays savings. One person playing the game forces everyone to play the game.

Keeps everyone on the run, accepting this is the natural order of things.

by Kate | 29th Jan 25, 5:36pm 1738125407

Here's the reason, Yvil: weekly rent/weekly rent increases.

Whereas in the past when rates were low, landlords tended to spend the profits (i.e., the left-over dollars after all running costs were paid) of their rental income on lifestyle upgrades (for example, travel).

Now that interest rates are higher (likely for longer), more of those profits is being put into paying down the debt.

Remember, nearly 1/3rd of all NZers are tenants - so there is a big value in assets/borrowing for that sector of the market (i.e., the non owner-occupier sector of the overall housing stock)..

Also, bear in mind that the tax relief for landlords is also kicking in - again, increasing bottom lines from that sector.

by J.C. | 29th Jan 25, 5:06pm 1738123586

Nicely expressed Kate

by Yvil | 29th Jan 25, 5:15pm 1738124157

I'm not so sure Kate;

Rent increases would be wiped out by the higher interest rates.

Tenants do not repay more principal.

The new tax relief will be felt starting 01/04/25

by JimboJones | 29th Jan 25, 5:15pm 1738124104

Good point. With tax deduction, the last thing you want to do is pay the loan off. So when Labour took the tax deduction away it made sense for landlords to increase their repayments.

by Chaosinflesh | 29th Jan 25, 5:15pm 1738124132

1/2 of all NZ 15+ are tenants. 1.8M non-owners vs 3.7M population, 2023 census.

I think it's 1/3 of households live in rentals, which is slightly different.

by Yvil | 29th Jan 25, 5:17pm 1738124247

And they increase the overall loan repayments……. how ?

by Kate | 29th Jan 25, 5:39pm 1738125592

Yep, they are slightly different.

And gee, 1/2 of all children living in rentals is quite sad, for sure.

by Rhumline | 29th Jan 25, 5:56pm 1738126574

Do that same calculation for the under 15 population, and you'll find that way more than 50% children in this country are growing up in rentals - it doesn't bode well... unless you're rich and sorted.

by Kate | 29th Jan 25, 8:27pm 1738135655

oops - I read it wrong and interpreted as 1/2 of 15 years and younger. If that's 1/2 of all persons above the age of 15, you are likely right - the actual number of children could be higher than 50%. OMG if that is the case.

by KH | 29th Jan 25, 5:38pm 1738125534

Yvil ".....Does anyone have a plausible explanation....." Yes. Folk have worked out that debt is poison. So they are reducing expenditure on many things in a fine effort to reduce it. Quite wise.

by Kate | 29th Jan 25, 5:41pm 1738125710

Wise for sure. And perhaps that is reflected in the world of hurt our cafe/restaurant sector is in.

by Yvil | 29th Jan 25, 5:48pm 1738126100

There is no doubt that repaying principal is wise when interest rates are higher. But it's a different thing to be able to do so, especially when NZ has been in recession for over a year, and that's the bit that surprises me, the capability to repay more than the already increased rate of interest in period of recession.

by Te Kooti | 29th Jan 25, 6:11pm 1738127493

Debt is an amazing tool if you have the minerals, or you can stand in the shade while the real men/women get on with taking risk.

by K.W. | 29th Jan 25, 5:44pm 1738125840

For those that are in the middle or towards the end of a table mortgage, the bulk of a mortgage payment is going towards principal and not the interest portion.

When interest rates were dropped people continued to make the same payments on their mortgage, with the extra amount allocated to paying down the principal faster. By the time their low fixed mortgage rate expired and they rolled over to higher interest rates, the amount owing on the mortgage had been reduced, so less interest was owed even at higher rates.

by Yvil | 29th Jan 25, 5:50pm 1738126242

Thanks, this makes sense if there are fewer new mortgages being taken on, where the majority goes to interest and very little to principal. But are there significantly fewer new mortgage in 2024 ?

by Let me be Frank | 29th Jan 25, 9:54pm 1738140848

The two tier economy....the (remaining) middle class are capable of meeting the required payments, and then some, and are seeking to reduce their liability (as you do, if able)...but those earning less than the median are finding they are increasingly unable to meet their day to day expenses.

A few years ago there was much discussion about a K shaped recovery...it wasnt a recovery but it was K shaped.

As we will discover it is the ability of those on the (declining) lower leg of the K that determine whether the model can continue.

by solardb | 29th Jan 25, 10:54pm 1738144478

when interest rates are high , making extra payments will knock longer off your loan term than when interest is lower .

Conversley, when interest rates were dropping , if people left their repayments as they were , they would show as been ahead of their mortgage payments. But when interest rates went up , they were struggling , even though technically they were still ahead of their mortgages . i was in this situation , and it even took a lot of ph calls to the bank to finally find a support person who understood how this could happen , and allow me to reduce payments back and still be ahead of my payments. the app etc wont allow you to reduce your payments.

by J.C. | 29th Jan 25, 4:20pm 1738120853

Over the ditch, Bill Shorten has golden parachuted into a role as the VC at University of Canberra - very much a mid-sized regional university. Remuneration is higher than that of the Prime Minister. Wonder if Robbo sent his congrats. Like Robbo, no relevant qualifications. They know these gigs are icing on the cake, but higher education needs to be focused on quality education, not places for the ruling elite to feather their nests.

Shorten's salary will be $860,000, including superannuation and other benefits, more than double the $404,000 he had received on the frontbench.

https://www.skynews.com.au/australia-news/politics/bill-shorten-to-rece…

by powerdownkiwi | 29th Jan 25, 5:07pm 1738123646

A society is pre-doomed when its education/knowledge facilities are reduced to trough status for the revolving-dootr crowd.

Joyce comes to mind, this side of the ditch.

by J.C. | 29th Jan 25, 5:19pm 1738124392

Joyce comes to mind, this side of the ditch.

Yes indeed. What he charged Waikato for his consulting was outrageous. Surprised nobody has had the opportunity to dissect all this.

by Yvil | 29th Jan 25, 5:27pm 1738124849

"A society is pre-doomed when its education/knowledge…"

So, the society is doomed… before being really doomed ? Or how does that "pre-dooming" work ? I'm trying to get my head around this. If "doomed" is expecting a fatal outcome in the future, then "pre-doomed", must come before that expectation. 🤔

by Gummy Bear Hero | 29th Jan 25, 7:16pm 1738131378

... remember the British TV sitcom " Dad's Army ? "

They had a bug eyed funeral undertaker Private Fraser , who when things were looking ominous would wander around mouthing off " we're doomed... doomed I tell ye , doomed ! " ...

Well , every time PDK pops up here with his doom laden derangements , I think " ah ... Private Fraser ! " ...

by Yvil | 29th Jan 25, 8:01pm 1738134072

Haha, yes but now PDK is "pre-doomed", so he must know we're all doomed even before the idea of being doomed occurs. Surely that must squarely fit in the "pre-conceived" ideas.

by Gummy Bear Hero | 29th Jan 25, 8:21pm 1738135277

It's his new power ... kind of like a PreCog in the film Minority Report ... PDK can sense doom ... he foresees the doomination of mankind ... he senses it and runs around here swivel eyed and babbling " doomed , I tell ye ... DOOMED ! " in a thick Scottish accent ...

by Pa1nter | 29th Jan 25, 5:36pm 1738125371

A society is pre-doomed when its education/knowledge facilities are reduced to trough status for the revolving-dootr crowd.

Industrial era education is about creating an army of capable and compliant workers.

Turn up at 8:30

Morning tea at 10

Lunch at 12:30

Etc etc.

In theory making us into human ant colonies is pretty efficient. We just made the ants too affluent.

by Te Kooti | 29th Jan 25, 6:14pm 1738127646

Australian Universities are incredible cashflow generating monsters - foreign (Chinese) students and watered down liberal degree's are the levers.

Why a politician and why $860k, because greenlighting 1 million students is a political decision every day of the week.

by HouseMouse | 29th Jan 25, 10:39pm 1738143578

Hint; many of the so-called ‘left’ are fakes, they are just in it for their egos and the $$$$

by J.C. | 29th Jan 25, 4:30pm 1738121433

Russia is outproducing NATO 4-to-1, for much less money, according to NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte.

When you look what Russia is producing now in three months, it's what all of NATO is producing from Los Angeles up to Ankara in a full year, and then Russia is not bigger than the Netherlands and Belgium combined as an economy, the two of you together is the Russian economy, and they're producing in three months what the whole of NATO is producing in the year. And don't forget, when you compare Russian numbers, that what you can buy in Russia for the same money is, of course, much more because they do not have our high salaries. They don't have our bureaucracy. They can move at a higher speed, and they have basically created a war economy, and the whole industry is now on a war footing.

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/opinions_232125.htm

by redcows1 | 29th Jan 25, 4:33pm 1738121612

Obvious reason for the disparity.

NATO casualties. 0

Russian casualties 500,000?

by J.C. | 29th Jan 25, 4:39pm 1738121955

And the relevance of this?

by redcows1 | 29th Jan 25, 4:43pm 1738122183

Russia is at war having invaded another country. NATO is not at war.

by J.C. | 29th Jan 25, 4:53pm 1738122812

Russia is at war having invaded another country. NATO is not at war.

Right. Rutte states that Russia has a 'wartime economy'. Please read carefully.

by Pa1nter | 29th Jan 25, 5:39pm 1738125569

Yeah, so it's pointless comparing a wartime economy with ones that are living peacefully (relatively).

In a time of war, the bureaucracy the author mentions gets thrown out the window. America's military was pretty under resourced in the late 1930s. Within a few years they were capable of equipping themselves, Russia, England, and the rest of Europe.

by J.C. | 29th Jan 25, 6:12pm 1738127578

Tell that to Mark Rutte P. Perhaps NATO should first consult with the Council of Aotearoa Suburbanites so they can frame things properly. Somehow I think this may not happen.

by Pa1nter | 29th Jan 25, 6:23pm 1738128208

Breaking News: Head of military alliance wants more resources and less red tape, makes whatever case they can.

by morepork | 29th Jan 25, 4:40pm 1738122041

Russia needs to replace all the equipment that is being used and destroyed in the field. NATO only really needs to replace old equipment, that used for training, and what's given away to Ukraine, etc. It's no wonder that Russia is outproducing NATO at the moment.

by J.C. | 29th Jan 25, 4:45pm 1738122328

Rutte is also pointing out that Russia is producing more efficiently at lower cost. Similarities with China and DeepSeek.

by KH | 29th Jan 25, 5:44pm 1738125877

Interesting JC.

Recall the old anecdote where the Americans spent zillions in developing a pen that would work in zero gravity. Russians? - they took a pencil.

by E46 | 29th Jan 25, 6:36pm 1738128988

A common misconception states that, faced with the fact that ball-point pens would not write in zero-gravity, the Fisher Space Pen was devised as the result of millions of dollars of unnecessary spending on NASA's part when the Soviet Union took the simpler and cheaper route of just using pencils, making the pen an example of overengineering.^[1]

In reality, the space pen was independently developed by Paul C. Fisher, founder of the Fisher Pen Company, with $1 million of his own funds.^[2]^[3]^[4] NASA tested and approved the pen for space use, especially since they were less flammable than pencils,^[1] then purchased 400 pens at $2.95 apiece (equivalent to $27 each in 2023).^[5] The Soviet Union subsequently also purchased the space pen for its Soyuz spaceflights.

Writing in space. The main issue from my understanding was pencils release contaminates which interfere with equipment when in a closed system like a space station or Apollo capsule.

by youngdumbandfullofit | 29th Jan 25, 6:45pm 1738129558

Writing in a spacecraft with graphite presents many problems and risks to the electronics from filings.

Thats more of a cost cutting initiative vs risk assessment. Although don't both Russia and US use Fisher space pens on their flights these days?

by Pa1nter | 29th Jan 25, 5:58pm 1738126713

Rutte is also pointing out that Russia is producing more efficiently at lower cost. Similarities with China and DeepSeek.

Some 75% of Russian gear being "manufactured", is the refurbishment of Soviet-era stock. It's significantly cheaper and quicker to drag a 60 year old tank out of a paddock, slap some paint on it and do some mechanicals than it is to manufacture a brand new, 2024-era technology tank.

And the attrition rate of Russian hardware is terrible. It is poor value for money, but it's also all the Russians can manage. If the war gets into 2026 they are going to be very short on gear as that Soviet era surplus is almost exhausted.

It's a really ill informed opinion, designed to fuel a sentiment that the West is ineffective. Not that it's amazing, but Russia is an absolute cot case.

by J.C. | 29th Jan 25, 6:19pm 1738127990

Where you read this P? The Economist? Last summer, just before Russia's offensive accelerated, The Economist claimed (again) that Russia was on the verge of running out of armor.

After selling endless war and "victory-around-the-corner", it seems the esteemed publication has thrown in the towel and switching their narrative.

https://www.economist.com/europe/2025/01/27/amid-talk-of-a-ceasefire-uk…

by Pa1nter | 29th Jan 25, 6:39pm 1738129158

I don't read the Economist. Actually, I don't read much MSM at all, outside of domestic news (and even that's small). I don't need to be an MSM shill to highlight flaws in some of the propaganda you'll gladly take as verboten, usually for self serving reasons.

There's fairly extensive, satellite verified timelapses of Russian storage facilities, and equipment loss stats that verify most of the gear Russia is sending into the field is refurbished and very old. Very little is newly minted.

Perhaps a starting point is the YT channel Covert Cabal.

by Palmtree08 | 29th Jan 25, 6:56pm 1738130200

By "produced", does he mean 60 year old tanks with a splash of new paint a new gun sight and dodgy ammo from Un?

by Pa1nter | 29th Jan 25, 6:59pm 1738130398

Ayup.

Russia's latest tank is the T-14. No record of them setting treads in Ukraine.

Plenty of 1960s and 70s era tanks spotted.

Plenty of Soviet storage yards emptying.

by J.C. | 29th Jan 25, 7:40pm 1738132827

Does it matter P if they're achieving their objectives? And perhaps you should think about what Rutte is saying instead of focusing on your own armchair narrative. Similar to Afghanistan, the Taliban got what they want based on limited resources against the military might and expertise of the Anglosphere.

by Pa1nter | 29th Jan 25, 8:17pm 1738135055

Their main objective was to annex Ukraine. At this rate they will take hundreds of years, and they don't have that long. If their secondary objective is to kamikaze their economy, whilst killing and wounding hundreds of thousands of their population and wiping out their Soviet era stockpile, against a numerically inferior foe, they have made great success.

I'm not following a narrative. This is a shitty conflict of attrition. The fog of war is often hard to see through, and propaganda aplenty, so I take a wide range of sources to try and form the best understanding of what's happening in Eastern Europe. Russia isn't a credible threat to NATO so they don't need to engage a war economy.

You on the other hand, flock to anything even remotely anti-Western like a moth to a lamp, incapable of determining anywhere else could be an even shittier mess.

by agnostium | 29th Jan 25, 8:38pm 1738136283

Russia isn't a credible threat to NATO so they don't need to engage a war economy.

Spot on.

by J.C. | 29th Jan 25, 9:06pm 1738137983

Their main objective was to annex Ukraine.

You made that up based on what media you've consumed. But if we look at the opinions of Jeffrey Sachs - who you should agree is far more informed that you would be - Russia's stated goals in Ukraine are not as simplistic you would like to think and what you believe from Western media and YouTube. Sachs argues that Russia's actions are primarily a response to what it perceives as provocations by the US and NATO. Based on Sachs' perspective, Russia's main objectives are:

Ensuring Ukraine's neutrality and preventing NATO expansion: Preventing Ukraine from joining NATO
Implementing the Minsk II agreement: Russia wants to see the fulfillment of this agreement, which was meant to resolve the conflict in eastern Ukraine but was not fully implemented.
Protecting what Russia views as its vital security interests in the region: Sachs suggests that Russia sees the conflict as essential to its national security, rather than a simple act of aggression

by Pa1nter | 29th Jan 25, 9:38pm 1738139921

Jeffrey Sachs makes an effort to be controversial at the expense of being an accurate analyst. He should not be ones only (or primary) source of information.

Russia thought they could roll the Ukrainian government in a few days, and failed abysmally. This is the 5th time they've invaded a neighbour since the fall of the Soviet Union - during which time most of it's prior significant former members have tried to get as far from the Russian sphere of influence as possible.

So you know little to nothing about the situation, then seek tidbits to align with your preconceptions.

by J.C. | 29th Jan 25, 9:58pm 1738141135

Jeffrey Sachs makes an effort to be controversial at the expense of being an accurate analyst.

Jeffrey Sachs is an American economist and public policy analyst. Not an internet troll.

Sachs served as an economic advisor to Gorbachev and Yeltsin during Russia's transition from a planned to a market economy. This followed his successful advisory role in Poland's economic transformation. Sachs held the position of economic adviser to the Russian government while also serving as a professor of international trade at Harvard University.

I think he understands Russia better than people sitting at computers in Aotearoa.

by Pa1nter | 29th Jan 25, 10:05pm 1738141548

He aligns with Russia better than most, for sure. The champion you are holding up is as far from impartial as you could get, except maybe Putin himself. Totally accepting his views without any other form of inquiry, is the exact same behaviour as the sorts of people you like to lambast for swallowing MSM narratives.

If Russia's primary concern is keeping NATO from their borders, helping nudge Finland into NATO is a total failure.

Having Ukraine hold Russian territory as a result of Russia's invasion, also a total failure. Russia is now a far less safe place than before it's invasion of Ukraine.

You don't invade another sovereign country if those are your top 3 aims.

by J.C. | 29th Jan 25, 10:46pm 1738143985

OK P. You think you're more informed than Mark Rutte and Jeffrey Sachs about Russia.

I accept that could be true.

But "I reckon" is not a solid way to deconstruct what either person has said.

by Pa1nter | 29th Jan 25, 11:02pm 1738144955

It's not a reckon.

You formed a conclusion first (West bad, Russia good), then sought out two dissenting voices from officialdom to confirm your bias. Your approach to many subjects lacks objectivity. I'll happily change any view in light of good information.

It is still crazy you haven't emigrated.

by J.C. | 29th Jan 25, 11:17pm 1738145851

You formed a conclusion first (West bad, Russia good),

No. I directly quoted Mark Rutte talking about Russia outproducing NATO for much less money who explained why he thinks that way.

by Pa1nter | 29th Jan 25, 11:33pm 1738146783

You formed that conclusion a while ago, it's a pretty common theme in your posts. We can evidence this by the almost complete absence of any criticism of a non Western (or perhaps non-anglo) entity in your comments.

He's making a case for funding. He conveniently ignores that most Russian production is the refurbishment of equipment that's already built. And that much of that equipment is obsolete.

Did you know those two latter facts before you posted? Did investigating his claim and motivations before you copy pasted it enter your mind?

by Here.for.the.c… | 30th Jan 25, 9:32am 1738182775

Their main objective was to annex Ukraine.

You made that up based on what media you've consumed.

Was the media consumed Putin's interview where he makes the case that Ukraine doesn't have a right to exist and they are actually all Russians?

by rastus1 | 30th Jan 25, 9:38am 1738183107

1. NATO doesn’t expand as such - a country applies to become a member. Subtle difference.

by HouseMouse | 29th Jan 25, 10:41pm 1738143712

That’s one of your best posts, great

by J.C. | 29th Jan 25, 5:20pm 1738124454

In early Asian trade, gold is up +US$22 from yesterday, now at US$2764/oz.

Gold very much at its all-time high - now up +35% in 12 months. Prices are surging toward $2,800/oz with YTD gains nearly 2x the S&P 500's return. Even as USD hit a new 52-week high and the 10-year note yield broke 4.8%, gold surged. Historically speaking, gold should be down sharply, but the opposite is happening.

In the past 12 months, it's been good for both the 10-year note yield and USD. However, gold has gained 5x the return of DXY. Gold is a zero-yield asset which historically falls in high rate environments.

And a stronger USD makes gold more expensive for foreign investors. Even with inverse indicators rising, gold continues to make highs so it is pricing uncertainty.

by Yvil | 29th Jan 25, 5:31pm 1738125083

I wanted to add to my pot of gold when it drops below $2,500, but it very much looks like I missed out :-(

by J.C. | 29th Jan 25, 6:46pm 1738129610

Stick to what you know and understand P.

by Yvil | 29th Jan 25, 8:04pm 1738134289

and what is that Jesus Christ ?

Although buying gold under $1,950 in June 2023 wasn't a bad call.

by J.C. | 29th Jan 25, 8:14pm 1738134899

Sure. If you're just a speculator, you'd have been better off with Microstrategy and the ol' rat poison, unless you're a trader, which I suspect you're not.

by KH | 29th Jan 25, 5:35pm 1738125350

".....The interest load swells, but that isn't discouraging extra payments..."

Yep. Less debt is a superpower.

by Poission51 | 29th Jan 25, 7:25pm 1738131901

Fonterra rolled out its initial electrification of NI boilers and exit from Gas today,with another 3 electrode boilers and 2 resistive boilers across 3 sites along with its initial pilot of 6 EV tankers.Statement enforced the narrative of future proofing its inputs on the energy side.

These projects will reduce the need for imported gas.

https://www.fonterra.com/nz/en/our-stories/media/fonterra-announces-ele…

by Kate | 29th Jan 25, 8:30pm 1738135824

Good on them. Impressive.

by ChrisOfNoFame | 29th Jan 25, 9:10pm 1738138236

Fonterra gets $90 million from the [Labour] Government's decarbonisation fund to lower its carbon emissions by the equivalent of 120,000 cars

by Poission51 | 29th Jan 25, 9:29pm 1738139380

Government gets it back in GST,and it reduces the free allocation of Carbon credits.

by solardb | 29th Jan 25, 10:58pm 1738144699

this money came form carbon credit sales , not the general fund.

by solardb | 29th Jan 25, 11:04pm 1738145048

Though Nicola has since swiped it to pay for tax cuts. Some one cleverer than me could calculate what that will cost us in future carbon obligations , but i would bet my boots it will cost us more .

by Poission51 | 29th Jan 25, 9:23pm 1738139030

Harmony energy UK just announced it reached FID on the Tauhei solar farm (202MW) This is a JV with Clarus.this brings Solar farms in build for 2025 or completion to 16 and over 520MW in total.

by powerdownkiwi | 29th Jan 25, 10:16pm 1738142180

Thanks for the info - good stuff.

But

How much fossil energy use was displaced? Fonterra will only go net-reduction when the build energy is recouped.

https://dothemath.ucsd.edu/2011/10/18/