Author Archives: goonix

The Economist on ‘job creation’ in the energy sector

Posted on by

A very timely opinion piece in The Economist here on how energy policy should not be confused as with job creation.

Too often investment in the energy sector, especially around low-carbon energy, is held up as a way to ‘create’ jobs for the economy. This article dispels the myth:

At the risk of being obvious: energy policy is not a jobs programme. Here are three reasons why politicians shouldn’t try to create jobs through energy policy: it’s ambiguous, it’s inefficient, and, most importantly, it’s undesirable.

In summary the author’s critiques are as follows:

1. What counts as a ‘green’ job, for example? Would that job have occurred anyway? Did the ‘creation’ of that job crowd-out another job?
2. The energy sector is typically capital intensive rather than labour intensive and hence efforts to ‘create’ jobs may be better directed elsewhere.
3. More important issues exist in energy, such as accessing cheap, sustainable energy and the security of energy supply – adding a further goal of ‘job-creation’ muddles this.

Given job-creation via energy seems such a hot topic throughout much of the world right now due to weak economic activity, elections forthcoming in the US and NZ and ongoing concern with carbon emissions and a need to ‘green’ the energy sector, it’s worth keeping in mind these criticisms.

The funniest part about the UK budget 2011

Posted on by

Since I am the UK correspondent for TVHE I thought I had better contribute something to the blog. Then I stumbled across this gem from today.

One of the centre-pieces of the budget was the reduction in fuel tax (it has had a lot of media coverage). Not only was the fuel tax increase cancelled, fuel tax was in fact decreased by 1p per litre. According to Chancellor Osborne, this move would lead to motoring costs falling for families and businesses.

Given the budget was a fiscally neutral one, in that all additional spending/tax cuts come from spending cuts/tax increases in other areas, how is this cut in fuel tax being funded?

By an increase in taxes on North Sea oil production, from 20% to 32%.

I’ll leave it to the reader to think about what effect this increase in production tax might have at the petrol pump.

Govt considering SOE sales

Posted on by

Bill English has been quoted as saying the Government is considering the sale of certain state owned enterprises in its next term. Apparently the Government are currently preparing an “investment statement” that will outline what it considers possible.

Currently a significant portion of Government capital is tied up in the SOEs, around $40 billion dollars (around four times the size of the largest projected Government deficit).

SOEs perform, as a class, very poorly. Recent reports suggest that in the last financial year they returned 1.5% on equity. This is below the risk free rate of return.

Such poor allocation has real costs to the New Zealand economy. The opportunity cost of maintaining investment in such low returning assets (as a whole) effectively amounts to taxpayer resources being wasted.

It is therefore very worthwhile that the Government looks at its investments and considers whether SOEs might be better placed in the private sector’s hands.

Gambling at the TAB, monopolies and innovation

Posted on by

I like to place the odd sports bet. In New Zealand I have no official option but to do this through the TAB, which is a state-sanctioned monopoly.

In other countries there are often many competing institutions offering odds on various events, including sports. In fact, there are now many companies that operate across borders in many countries,  such as BetFair and Bet365.*

The lack of competition in the betting market in New Zealand stifles innovation in the betting options they offer. One recent pundit proclaimed the TAB “the most conservative betting agency in the world”. Essentially the TAB has no incentive to innovate, as they know punters have limited ability to legally gamble through other avenues.

The TAB have started opening more interesting books on the FIFA World Cup, such as whether Lionel Messi will score more goals during the campaign than the All Whites combined (Messi the hot favourite at $1.55!).

If the gambling market were officially opened up to competition I suspect we would see a lot more of this innovation.

*I’m not sure of the legal status of these organisations in New Zealand, although I understand it is possible to open accounts with them (legally or otherwise).

A wild day on the markets

Posted on by

The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell nearly 1,000 points today, the largest intra-day fall since 1987.

It’s not quite certain yet what caused it, with some blaming an “erroneous trade”, possibly via human error or a computer glitch. It seems the initial fall, whatever the cause, then triggered many more sells as paranoia over the global situation, particularly Greece, grew. Crazy!

A novel solution to the student loan ‘problem’

Posted on by

In the 2005 election the Labour Government found itself in a very tight battle to retain power. In order to mobilise the student vote, Labour promised interest free student loans. The bribe assisted Labour in returning to Government for their third consecutive term.

At the time National called the interest free loan scheme “irresponsible”. Since coming to power in 2008, however, they have maintained the policy, presumably for similarly cynical political reasons as led to the policy being introduced in the first instance.

As a result of the policy, students have been encouraged to borrow more and pay back less. Debt has ballooned. There are obviously other factors to take into account, such as increasing student numbers during the economic downturn. Nonetheless, it is clear that when given the option of borrowing interest free money, those with student loans have limited incentive to pay anymore than the minimum from their loan, for which they might as well borrow the maximum.

What is National’s response to the perceived student loan problem? The introduction of a $50 administrative fee that student loan borrowers must pay annually. Note that National have also provided an incentive for students to voluntarily pay back their loans through a 10% discount on their loans.

I propose a rather simpler solution. Abolish the half measures currently in place and start charging interest on student loans again. Only then will the correct incentives be instilled.