The RBA seems to be running monetary policy on a hunch

Wed, 27 Jun 2018  |  

This article first appeared on the Business Insider web site at this link: https://www.businessinsider.com.au/the-rba-seems-to-be-running-monetary-policy-on-a-hunch-2018-6 

--------------------------------------------------------

The RBA seems to be running monetary policy on a hunch

RBA Governor Philip Lowe made a few quite sensational comments when he spoke at the European Central Bank’s forum in Portugal last week.

Sensational, because it shows the RBA under his stewardship is targeting higher than necessary unemployment as the tool for containing household debt and he has all but abandoned the RBA’s inflation target which has been in place for over 25 years.

Recent data shows Australia failing to make meaningful inroads into reducing unemployment, as Australian interest rates have remained well above those in the rest of the industrialised world.

Lowe acknowledged he and his RBA were the odd ones out in a room of central bankers, noting that others had reacted to high unemployment and extremely low inflation by cutting interest rates to near or below zero and many implemented quantitative easing as a means to kick-start their economies, while the RBA has stopped cutting interest rates at 1.5 per cent, despite low inflation and persistently high unemployment.

The RBA is the odd one out too, because Australia’s unemployment has been hovering around 5.5 per cent for the past year, little changed from where it was 4 or 5 years ago, when in the US, Japan and Eurozone, unemployment rates have cascaded lower and have started to underpin a noticeable pick-up in wages.

Explaining this maintenance of relatively high interest rates in Australia, Lowe said that high debt levels were the “number one domestic risk”, and implied interest rate policy would be kept tighter than implied by the inflation, wage and unemployment dynamics in an effort to reduce that risk.

It’s a sensational choice.

To be sure, household debt in Australia is high, but a risk?

Data which hint at debt risk include information on the level of bank bad debts and loan arrears. Debt is only “too high” when a significant proportion is not paid back. This hurts the banks, undermines credit growth and in many cases, leads to recession.

Fair enough.

But the RBA’s own data shows that bad debts in Australia continue to track near record lows. Late payment times are also near historical lows. In other words, the risks to the economy from financial instability and high debt are not showing up in any hard data.

The RBA thinking appears to be a hunch, a feeling, the “vibe”.

Lowe also made the startling observation that if policy was eased as a means of lifting inflation back to the target range and lowering unemployment, “it would be mainly through people [households] borrowing more money”.

What?

Lowe doesn’t seem to realise that there is more to economic management than interest rates. Household borrowing need not rise with lower interest rates if the policy makers were to use its other policy levers to impose lending restrictions in areas it considers problematic. Dwelling investment and housing more generally seem to be the main ones.

It is simple.

With such regulatory changes, lower interest rates need not add to household debt if interest rates are cut, but would allow for a further lift in business investment, encourage exports through a lower Australian dollar, and improve the cash flow for those with debt.

In other words, the non-housing parts of the economy currently in need of a boost would get that boost.
Perhaps most extraordinary of all, in a comment matching the cliché “I am from the government and I know what is good for you”, Lowe noted that “we’re about maximising the welfare of the people” as a reason for his heavy hand on monetary policy.

This ignores the 720,000 people unemployed and the 1.1 million under employed. It also ignores the chronically low wages growth which is dogging the economy.

The RBA could and should cut interest rates if it was serious about lowering unemployment and getting inflation back into its target band. In concert with a tightening in lending rules, it would not lead to higher household debt, and it might just see the economy sustain 3 per cent GDP growth, get inflation back to the target and get unemployment below 5 per cent.

 

comments powered by Disqus

THE LATEST FROM THE KOUK

How Labor lost the federal election SO badly

Thu, 07 Nov 2019

This article first appeared on the Yahoo Finance website on 20 May 2019 at this link:  https://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/why-labor-lost-the-election-so-badly-211049089.html 

----------------------------
How Labor lost the federal election SO badly

The Coalition did not win the election, Labor lost it.

The tally since 1993 for Labor is a devastating seven losses out of nine Federal elections. By the time of the next election in 2022, Labor will have been in Opposition for 23 of the last 29 years. Miserable.

The reasons for Labor’s 2019 election loss are much more than the common analysis that Labor’s policy agenda on tax reform was a big target that voters were not willing to embrace.

Where the Labor Party also capitulated and have for some time was in a broader discussion of the economy where it failed dismally to counter the Coalition’s claims about “a strong economy”.

In what should have been political manna from heaven for Labor, the latest economic data confirmed Australia to be in a per capita recession. This devastating economic scorecard for the Coalition government was rarely if ever mentioned by Labor leader Bill Shorten and his team during the election campaign.

This was an error.

If Labor spoke of the “per capita recession” as much as the Coalition mentioned a “strong economy”, voters would have had their economic and financial uncertainties and concerns confirmed by an elevated debate on the economy based on facts.

This parlous economic position could have been cited by Labor for its reform agenda.

Why animals are a crucial part of the Australian economy

Thu, 07 Nov 2019

This article was written on 31 October 2019: It was on the Yahoo Finance website at this link: https://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/animals-crucial-australian-economy-192927904.html 

------------------------------------------------------

Why animals are a crucial part of the Australian economy

Animals are a critical part of the Australian economy, either for food, companionship or entertainment.

But every month, millions of sheep, cattle, pigs, chickens, fish and other animals are bred and then killed. Most of them are killed in what we define as ‘humane’, but no doubt tens of thousands are horribly mistreated, as are a proportion of the animals we keep as pets.

Animals are slaughtered to provide food for human food consumption, to feed other animals (your cats and dogs are carnivorous) and for fertiliser.

The Australian Bureau of Statistics collects a range of data on animal slaughterings and the most recent release of the Livestock and Meat data release included the following facts.