Scrappage shmackage

A scrappage scheme is being raised as a way of getting old clangers off the road to be replaced with new cars. The government would give you $2000 to scrap your old falcon on the condition you bought a new car. Superficially this might have some appeal but if analysed it seems like a terrible idea. A cash grab by an industry that has failed to see the writing on the wall. This is a good example of why a broad based market mechanism, like carbon trading or a carbon tax is needed to find where the most cost effective savings can be made. A scrappage scheme could cost us a lot of money and achieve no reduction at all, because it doesn't necessarily reduce total emissions it just updates the fleet. It's dependent on the cars producing less total emissions, so the cars would have to be smaller on average than the ones they replace and the total distance travelled would also have to be held at a constant. Are people tempted to drive their new cars more?

100 year mortgages

I'd heard about 50 year mortgages in Japan but inter-generational 100 year loans..... Thankfully we haven't had this discussed in Australia yet. Give it time.

I particularly like this quote from the article:

"This is about giving people options - not telling them how to live their lives, not telling them that they can only have a 25-year mortgage which has to be paid off at the end of the term," says Mike Lazenby, the chief executive of Kent Reliance.

People can be trusted to make decisions in their own best interests, right?

"It's worked in Switzerland and Japan, but in this country we do tend to think in straight lines - I think a bit of innovation should be encouraged."

You can't argue with that!

Negative interest rates

To understand how interest rates can go negative, you need to view interest rates as a control lever. Interest rates are put up to slow the economy when demand outpaces supply, causing an increase in inflation and lowered to counteract a slow-down. What happens when you start to approach a zero rate of interest and the economy is still slowing?

Japan experienced a "lost decade" of relatively stagnant growth in the 90's, triggered by the collapse of a real estate bubble. It took Japan about 15 years to barely turn things around. Lately a lot of references are being made to Japan's multiple attempts to restart growth. Paul Krugman and others have written extensively on the topic.

In the Japanese collapse commercial real estate prices fell by over 80% and the Japanese Central Bank lowered interest rates from over 8% to 0% without significantly improving growth because people were concentrating on paying down debt.

Commercial interest rates don't have to reach zero to be considered negative, they just need to fall below inflation, but in Japan in 2003 the actual rate the banks were lending money to each other really did fall below zero. The interest on retail deposits in the bank was effectively zero or 0.001% - so you would be losing money with fees.

Like Australia and other western countries, the Japanese government tried multiple stimulus packages, but struggled to have an impact. It's difficult to draw comparisons with the Japanese experience because of the entrenched culture of savings that means the bonuses are mostly pocketed. They have at times apparently resorted to vouchers for electronic goods to get people spending.

iPhone and iTunes wish list 376

All the previous 375 ideas have been quickly forgotten.

Iphone Syncing

When the iPhone syncs it doesn't remember the track I was listening too. This is a problem for me because I listen to long podcasts. They can be an hour and a half long - Too long for me to finish in my commute to work.

Multi-tasking in iTunes

It would also be nice to have tabbed browsing in iTunes so I can be sorting my podcasts and choosing music to listen to. I also don't like to jump out of lists to go to the iTunes store. There could also be an icon to show which playlist the current playing track is in. So when I'm sorting other playlists I can return to the playlist I'm currently listening too.

Some alternative solutions are appearing

After reading Steve Keen's insightful analysis of the causes of the current crisis, I have been waiting to see what kind of solutions he would propose. Finally he has outlined ideas such as improving support for the unemployed. I haven't read everything he has written so he may have covered this earlier, and he has hinted before that some kind of debt forgiveness maybe required. The credit crunch is certainly a tricky situation. Deleveraging is going to take a lot of money out of the economy, but how can anything else occur when private sector debt combined with household debt has reached 165% of GDP. The only way is down. Something similar to Steve Keen's proposal for letting people stay on as renters to the bank has actually occured already in the US, although not on a coordinated national scale, and it happened after a wave of foreclosures rather than as a preventative measure.

One rule for the few

Shaun Carney wrote an interesting article in The Age about executive pay excesses. He notes that in the good times the public has been passive and excepting of the ever increasing remuneration paid to corporate executives. Now that things are turning down and governments around the world are having to prop-up or rescue companies it is now a cause for outrage. There are many competing arguments to justify and explain the escalating pay, but none have proven totally satisfactory and complete.

Is the high pay the economic rent that must be paid to secure rare and extraordinary talent? Explaining it as a reward for risk or exceptional results doesn't fly, because the risk is borne less by the executives than by the shareholders and sometimes taxpayers and their personal contributions to company performance isn't proportional to their rewards.

The pay doesn't necessarily represent rewards for innovation either. English economist John Kay has pointed out in his writings that many innovators aren't the beneficiaries of the wealth their inventions and innovations have generated.

I find what Malcolm Gladwell has written about serendipity, group dynamics and collaborative environments interesting when thinking about how an individual's output can be influenced by external factors. The market is not sophisticated enough to equitably reward all beneficial production, risk taking and innovation efficiently and money is not the singular motivator that it is often mistaken for. Perhaps it is a case of a self-selected greedy elite exploiting a weakness in the corporate governance. There doesn't appear to be a satisfactory way of linking executive performance with longer term outcomes. Relying on executives to rein in their own excesses doesn't fill me with hope.

Paul Woolley's excellent talk on the global financial industry still has me wondering about the evident failure of the market to make "super-profits" impossible through competition.

Priveleged jobs

Tim Colebatch writing in The Age calls for emissions trading to be delayed to protect jobs. This is a worthy sentiment on the surface, except that it's not backed up by proof. How can the assumption that emissions trading will cause a net loss in jobs be tested? Are existing jobs more important to the economy in the long term than the creation of new jobs?

Job losses cause trauma, family upheaval and stress and I'm not diminishing that or wishing it upon anyone. If unemployment was handled better in this economy then it may allow for faster innovation and adaptation. The shifting of risk onto the individual has made people more exposed to change and more vested in the status quo.

I wonder if boom times suppress innovation. Change is uncomfortable and when money is easy you don't need to engage in disruptive change to increase productivity. We should be on a war footing in tackling the risks of global warming. When pushed, necessity is the mother on invention.