New Zealand joins its larger and more illustrious economies, the U.S. and the U.K., on the slippery slope with the release today of pretty poor employment numbers. 29,000 jobs lost is no small number for a small economy and with retail numbers looking very soft as well, the Reserve Bank will soon be reaching for the “cut” lever on its interest rate management dashboard.

Regardless of the credit crunch, employment really is the key to how the economy will fare. As long as people are employed then somehow they can get by and service their debts. Well mostly. But now this will see a deeper problem emerge and that is one where people simply cannot service mortgages or debt in any way.

This will reverberate throughout the whole economy. Added to this is a report out today showing house sales down 40% in the last quarter and 53% lower last month from the previous year.

Ouch.

The NZ government has announced a delay in implementing the proposed Emissions Trading Scheme. The 5 year pushback for the transport sector comes at a time when fuel prices are going through the roof and the government is concerned about the impact of further price rises on consumers.

Forgive me for wondering if that isn’t the whole point. First up it was the carbon charge which was dumped back in December 2005 and now the brand spanking new ETS which looked full of holes and now is barely recognisable as a piece of effective policy.

The main concern cited by “critics” is that higher costs may be passed onto consumers. Well the goal of the carbon charge and the ETS is to raise prices in order to lower demand. However, fuel prices are generally regarded as inelastic i.e. demand does not fall as prices rise, which consigns a price approach to the bin. Of course, there is some level of price at which demand will certainly fall. According the research it is when the price increase exceeds income rises i.e. the is the affordability as opposed to higher prices.

Or to put it more succinctly as long as money is available fuel will be purchased regardless fo the absolute price. So the supply of money is a major player in this equation. Now with the credit crunch bedding down money has become less available and so the impact of higher fuel prices is starting to kick in.

So given fuel prices have nearly doubled in the last 3 years, one would expect to have seen a huge fall off in fuel consumption. This has not been the case.

One can conclude that price measures will not reduce emissions and therefore any policy based on this approach is doomed to fail.

Why, you may ask, is no one clamouring for quotas to be implemented? The answer to that is very simple. It’s too hard.

So let’s keep pouring millions of $ into schemes that won’t do the job and keep the veneer of pretending to do something about climate change. They’d be better off spending the money on something important like child poverty and education.

We’re starting to see real signs of a weakening house market here in New Zealand. Sales for Auckland’s top real estate company are down over 50% and a recent auction saw a 6% clearance rate.

I decided ton investigate this myself in Christchurch and looked at some properties recently. One i saw was a 3 bedroom unit which had been bought for $375,000 a year ago. It could be rented for about $350 a week maybe a bit more if it had some money spent on it. It wasn’t in great condition but looked a reasonable investment property.

It was auctioned yesterday and passed in at $317,500. It still hasn’t sold.

We’re not really seeing this come through into prices yet because we only get the median price which is often misleading. In fact it can go up if a few properties sell in the higher brackets and none in the lower levels.

But it’s clear that prices are falling quite heavily in many areas and there is a buyers strike on at the moment.

Although there is the belief that property prices increase regardless the market is clearly starting to realise that capital gains are not guaranteed and therefore investors are starting to look more closely at the maths.

Mortgage rates are 9.5% for 2 years fixed. Yields are 3-5% and prices are falling. Even with the negative equity tax break that’s a big yield gap to fill. There is also the issue of not being able to borrow 100% of the price anymore.

With many fixed rates rolling over this year to much higher rates, the squeeze is really on. This will really start to impact when banks ask for properties to be revalued and then ask for extra equity.

Property investors, like banks, are facing a major liquidity crisis.  Price falls of 10-20% may not be as outlandish as previously thought.

Yesterday the ANZ reported another huge profit even with very large write downs and provisions for bad debts. A mere $510m for the six months to date is not too shabby though we can expect 2008 to be much harder going as loan demand (and supply) falls and consumers pare back on expenditure. We are already seeing signs of that with credit card spending falling along with credit card balances increasing.

But what really stands out is the $3.2bln the banks made in New Zealand in 2007. That is a lot of dough, the majority of which comes from the ability to create money into existence via interest bearing loans.

In the last 10 years loans have risen from $127bln to $323bln an increase of 154%….in 10 years!!!

In that time house prices (from QV data) have risen 178%.

It’s good to see Kiwibank taking a bigger part of this market because at least the profits stay with the taxpayer. And of course the right to create money is a sovereign one so why not have a “national” bank. That’s something worth thinking about.

I like this piece from Micheal Coote on the NZ Securities Commission. He contrasts the approach of US authorities in throwing the book at white collar fraudsters with the rather ame approach of Seccom here in simply posting binding undertakings on its website from offending parties.

It reminds me that nearly 4 years agao i tried to interest Jane Diplock and the Commission in looking at finance companies. There was no reply. Sometimes i wonder what they get paid for. Trawling through their website I came across this speech by Jane Diplock to the International Investment Funds Assocation late in 2007. She is also the Chairman of the International Organisation of Securities Commissions.

It was a mind numbingly boring speech about global regulation of capital markets. Read it if you can’t sleep tonight. What surprises me the most is the lack of concern about the state of global markets, given the speech was dated 1st November 2007. That just about sums it up for me.

What have they been doing? Not much from what I can see. Meanwhile 17 NZ finance companies have gone under and the global capital markets are in dissarray.

But wait maybe they are onto something going by her concluding remarks

“We are at the cusp of a new global adventure into new realms of mutual recognition and consistent standards around the world. We live in exciting times!”

Strewth!

Keep going guys, Alan Bollard pleads. He asks banks and businesses not to hibernate. What?!

Is he suddenly the Finance Minister? It’s really quite odd to see a central bank governor talking like this especially since the last few years he’s been going on about house prices and overborrowing without doing a great deal about it.

Now he’s saying don’t let credit constraints get in the way.

At the same time the Commerce Minister tells investors to get savvy or get “burned”. I love it especially from a Labour government where many ministers have invested in property themselves. Financial literacy? We’d certainly like some.

The facts are very simple. Too much leverage, much of it unseen, caused an asset bubble. That bubble is now deflating and there will be some major fallout. Add to that concerns over global food and energy prices and you have a perfect storm. So for banks now to put the shutters up whilst they count the cost is simply sound business practice.

Westpac has already adjusted its loan criteria. This just fuels the need for lower house prices and demonstrates the role that banks have played in the boom. Yes the interest rate is important but only at the margin. The real issue is how much will they lend: 100% or 65%.

It’s a big difference in what people can afford to pay.  Now landlords have the power as they can raise rents and people will just have to bear it. So along with an increase in mortgagee sales we will see an increase in rent arrears if rents increase beyond peoples’ means.

So it’s a bit late for the officials to weigh in with their comments. They have had plenty of time to look at banking regulation and have completely missed the boat.