Category: Countries & Regions

Posted on

Privatisation has damaged the economy, says ACCC chief

In a blistering attack on decades of common government practice, Australian Competition and Consumer Commission chairman Rod Sims said the sale of ports and electricity infrastructure and the opening of vocational education to private companies had caused him and the public to lose faith in privatisation and deregulation.

“I’ve been a very strong advocate of privatisation for probably 30 years; I believe it enhances economic efficiency,” Mr Sims told the Melbourne Economic Forum on Tuesday. “I’m now almost at the point of opposing privatisation because it’s been done to boost proceeds, it’s been done to boost asset sales and I think it’s severely damaging our economy.”

Mr Sims said privatising ports, including Port Botany and Port Kembla in NSW, which were privatised together, and the Port of Melbourne, which came with conditions restricting competition from other ports, were examples where monopolies had been created without suitable regulation to control how much they could then charge users……

Deregulating the electricity market and selling poles and wires in Queensland and NSW, meanwhile, had seen power prices almost double there over five years, he said.

I have also been a strong advocate of privatising state assets, but Rod Sims raises some important concerns that need to be addressed.

There is a strong trend in capitalist economies away from free enterprise and towards privatised “monopolies”. Investors place a great deal of emphasis when evaluating stocks on a company’s “economic moat” or competitive advantage. Both of which imply the ability to restrict competition. While this may maximize revenue for the individual economic unit, it is harmful for the economy as a whole.

Which brings me back to Mr Sims’ point. Higher prices paid for infrastructure services destroy the competitiveness of the economy as a whole, with profound implications for exports and productivity.

Source: Privatisation has damaged the economy, says ACCC chief

Posted on

Alex White on BREXIT

Alex White, Head of Country Analysis at The Economist Intelligence Unit: “We see an EEA- deal as highly likely…..we are reasonably optimistic about the breakup.”

Posted on

Michael Pettis: Brexit could speed breakup of the Euro

On secular stagnation: “I don’t see growth picking up until you either redistribute income downwards — which is politically quite difficult and slow — or developed countries which are credible borrowers engage in massive infrastructure spending — which would be a great idea but politically difficult — so I’m afraid secular stagnation is going to last several more years.”

On BREXIT: “I’m not to optimistic that the Euro will be around in 10 years…BREXIT could speed up the process if England does well.”

On future crises: “It’s always the same thing: a huge switch from New York to Washington (in American terms) where policy begins to dominate the whole process…because the solutions to the problems are political solutions, not really economic or financial solutions…”

Posted on

Major banks’ credit rating outlook cut to ‘negative’

From Clancy Yeates:

Australia’s banks face the threat of higher funding costs, after Standard & Poor’s downgraded the big four’s credit rating outlook to “negative”, a direct result of its action on the government’s top-notch rating.

….the banks’ credit ratings are automatically raised by two notches because S&P assumes they would receive government support in times of financial stress. Action on the government’s rating therefore tends to flow directly into the banks’ ratings.

“The negative outlooks on these banks reflect our view that the ratings benefit from government support and that we would expect to downgrade these entities if we lower the long-term local currency sovereign credit rating on Australia,” Standard & Poor’s said.

While the warning does not reflect changes in the banks’ financial performance, analysts say that if it leads to a downgrade in the actual credit rating of banks, it could push up bank funding costs all the same.

….”While Australian banks enjoy relatively high credit ratings and are deemed to be in the top quartile of global capital requirements, the frequent use of offshore wholesale funding markets is likely to result in higher funding costs.”

The big four raise about 30 per cent of their funding by issuing bonds in wholesale funding markets, so the cost of this debt can have a significant influence on the sector…..

To avoid moral hazard, with banks taking unnecessary risk at the taxpayer’s expense — a case of heads I win, tails you lose — Treasury and the RBA should commit themselves to the Swedish example. Banks that require rescue should forfeit control of their assets by issue of a controlling equity stake to the government. That would significantly curtail management and shareholders’ willingness to take unnecessary risks. And create a strong incentive to increase capital buffers. Not just to comply with APRA rules, but to make their businesses as bullet-proof as possible. Conservatively-run banks would be a major asset to the economy.

What APRA needs to focus on is instilling the right culture in banks. Rather than management focused on incentives to grow the business, there should be more emphasis on protecting the business and ensuring its long-term survival.

Source: Major banks’ credit rating outlook cut to ‘negative’

Posted on

ASX 200: Banks weigh on the index

The ASX 200 encountered resistance at 5300 and is likely to test support at 4900/5000, with breach of the lower trend channel and declining 13-week Money Flow warning of selling pressure. Breach of support at the recent low of 5050 would confirm.

ASX 200

The Banks are weighing on the index, with APRA warning of further capital increases and concerns over a slowing housing market, particularly apartments. The ASX 300 Banks Index is testing primary support at 7200. Breach would offer a target of 6400*. Weakness in this sector is likely to affect the entire market.

ASX 300 Banks

* Target calculation: 7200 – ( 8000 – 7200 ) = 6400

Posted on

S&P 500: Expect strong resistance

The S&P 500 is testing resistance at 2100, while declining 13-week Twiggs Money Flow warns of medium-term selling pressure. Expect strong resistance between 2100 and 2130 but reversal below 2000 is now unlikely.

S&P 500 Index

CBOE Volatility Index (VIX) at 15 indicates calm is restored after the last two turbulent weeks.

S&P 500 VIX

Posted on

Gold surges as the Pound and Yuan fall

The Yuan is sliding against the Dollar, with USDCNY breaking through resistance at 6.60. Expect further capital flight, both from residents and offshore investors. Borrowers will also seek to repay Dollar-denominated loans and replace them with facilities in the local currency, adding further pressure on the Yuan.

USDCNY

The PBOC has been encouraged by fading prospects of further rate rises from the Fed, with 10-year Treasury Yields falling to a new all-time low of 1.37 percent, compared to 1.40 percent in 2012.

10-Year Treasury Yields

….And the Pound falling to a 30-year low.

GBPUSD

Falling currencies and lower long-term interest rates are both good news for gold bugs, with spot gold surging to $1370/ounce. Expect retracement to test the new support level at $1300/ounce. Respect of the band of support at $1280/$1300 is likely and would signal another advance, with a target of $1400/ounce*.

Spot Gold

* Target calculation: 1300 + ( 1300 – 1200 ) = 1400

Posted on

How Hanson should frame the immigration debate | MacroBusiness

From Leith van Onselen:

Senator-elect One Nation’s Pauline Hanson dominated news headlines yesterday after she warned of “terrorism on our streets” and suburbs “swamped by Asians”, prompting righteous indignation from all manner of MSM commentators.

The below extract from The Canberra Times captures some of the shenanigans: At a fiery press conference in Brisbane on Monday, Ms Hanson claimed the major parties should respect the large number of votes One Nation pulled, and urged a return to an Australia “where we as a nation had a right to have an opinion and have a say”…… “We are a Christian country and that’s what I’m saying … [former Liberal prime minister] John Howard said we have a right to say who comes into our country and I’m saying exactly the same.”

My simple advice to Ms Hanson is that if she wants to be taken seriously in the immigration debate, then she must dump the racial overture and instead focus on the level of immigration and why it is too high.

The fact that many of us in major cities are stuck in traffic, cannot get a seat on the train, are experiencing crowded hospitals and schools, and cannot afford a home has little to do with race, but rather a high immigration intake that has overwhelmed our cities’ ability to cope with the influx.

….Ms Hanson should also highlight that the system surrounding so-called skilled and student visas has been corrupted, with widespread rorting and fraud revealed by the recent joint ABC-Fairfax investigation (see Australia’s hidden people smuggling scandal). Again, rather than focusing on race, Ms Hanson should argue to restore integrity to Australia’s visa system so that it is not overtaken by “crooks and criminals”.

…More broadly, Ms Hanson should highlight that for a major commodity exporter like Australia, which pays its way in the world by selling-off its fixed endowment of resources, ongoing high immigration can be self-defeating from an economic standpoint. That is, continually adding more people to the population year after year means less resources per capita. It also means that Australia must sell-off its fixed assets quicker just to maintain a constant standard of living (other things equal).

Again, none of this has anything to do with race – i.e. where the migrants come from – but rather that the overall immigration intake is too high and has overwhelmed the capacity of the economy and infrastructure to absorb them, eroding individuals’ living standards in the process.

There has also been no proper debate within the community about the appropriate level of immigration and no political mandate for pursuing a “Big Australia”.

…..We should not forget that an Essential Research opinion poll published in May revealed that the overwhelming majority of Australians (59%) believed “the level of immigration into Australia over the last ten years has been too high”, more than double the 28% of Australians that disagreed with that statement.

….under current policy, Australia is on track to double its population by 2050 to more than 40 million people – something most Australians oppose. Again, this comes amid virtually no discussion nor mandate for this dramatic change, nor any plan on how to cope with this growth.

As long as Ms Hanson plays the “race card”, she will be rightly ridiculed and has already lost the debate. Population policy is far too important an issue to be segregated into pro- and anti-immigration corners based upon views about race and cultural supremacy. Instead, the issue needs to be debated rationally and based upon whether or not immigration is benefiting the living standards of the existing population.

I agree. This has nothing to do with race or religion. Pauline Hanson is barking up the wrong tree. This is about numbers. I suspect the same is true of the Brexit vote. I am all in favor of skilled migration (being a migrant myself) but any newcomer should ask themselves how they can contribute to existing Australian values and culture….rather than preserve their own.

Source: How Hanson should frame the immigration debate – MacroBusiness

Posted on

Don’t blame demographics, blame the government

Niels Jensen’s Absolute Return monthly newsletter raises one of the major structural impediments to growth in Europe:

As [economist Woody Brock] pointed out when in London, ageing has only had a modest impact on GDP growth and inflation so far. Governments have ruined economic growth in Europe; demographics haven’t. If employment laws are such that employment is virtually for life, companies stop hiring. If you can’t fire, you don’t hire, as Woody pointed out….

Similar impediments are evident in Australia. If developed economies want to compete in global markets, they need to get their house in order. Raising barriers to free trade is not a sustainable alternative but will instead destroy any remaining semblance of competitiveness. Trade barriers result in a limited choice of products, forcing customers to pay higher prices and accept inferior quality. Lack of competition leads to the death of innovation. Quality deteriorates and we soon face another zombie industry dependent on government support. A prime example would be the motor industry — in Europe, North America, even Australia — over the last half-century.

Powered by WordPress / WordPress Maintenance Service By Website Helper