Developers using cows to reduce land tax burden. One of the defining traits of rule makers is that they rarely foresee the extent of gaming likely to occur. It seems Australian agricultural policies are not immune to the type of manipulation seen in Japan.
History repeats (must see video). BP's deep water oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico is almost identical to a spill in 1979, where the same inneffective and oddly named 'solutions' were tried. That spill lasted months and was only brought under control by drilling relief wells to take the pressure from the oil bed.
Melbourne Cycle Scheme up and crawling.
Users will have to bring their own helmets as they won’t be available for hire with the bikes. However, those joining the scheme will be issued with a free helmet, while hotels and other city outlets will have cheap helmets available for hire or purchase. (here)
A cycle by-pass is also proposed in Melbourne - a step in the right direction for urban transport planning.
A lesson on being sceptical about statistics in economics (warning: technical content)
Organic farming – a closer look.
Thursday, June 3, 2010
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Bakfiets – is Australia ready for the cargo bike revolution?
Note: I bought a Bakfiets long cargo bike in September 2010 from Dutch Cargo Bikes and couldn't be happier. A follow-up (3yr) review is here. I am now a local ambassador for Dutch Cargo Bikes. If you would like to test ride this bike in Brisbane (or a three wheeler) email me at cameron@dutchcargobike.com.auRecent discussions on cycling culture and the imminent arrival of our second child have resulted in an obsession with cargo bikes or Bakfiets (Dutch for boxbikes). These bikes are taking the world buy storm, and have now made their way to Australia, with the market well served by DutchCargoBike.com.au, who offer a variety of models.
I want one, exactly like in the photo above, but I don’t know why.
Economists generally believe people know how to make decisions that maximise their welfare. But in many cases we can’t know how much we will enjoy our consumption decisions in advance, since we have never experienced them before – such goods are known as experience goods.
Having already test-ridden one and been impressed, I am now attempting to evaluate the bike's worth by first itemising the pros and cons. Any assistance or insight or suggestions are appreciated.
Pros
Can handle a load of groceries plus children for short trips
Can pick up hitchhikers
No parking or fuel costs and only minimal maintenance
Fun
Cons
$3150 for the bike
Over $4000 if you want electric motor assistance
Plenty of hills in Brisbane
Size and manoeuvrability
Extreme summer heat (can buy a shade for the kids though)
More importantly, to determine the value to our family of the bike I have been thinking in terms of marginal utility. Instead of thinking how good or practical the bike could be in isolation, I think in terms of how much better having the bike would be compared to our current situation.
Sunday, May 30, 2010
Japanese farming: A tale of incentives and externalities
Why is this? What is so peculiar about Japan that people would forgo higher value urban land development to grow rice?
Thursday, May 27, 2010
Induced traffic, super profits, and 3D TV
On that topic, I drove across the William Jolly Bridge on Monday at 4.30pm, and Thursday at 9am. I was alone on the bridge. I fear that the Hale St Bridge, at $1.50 then $2.70 each way, will be completely empty except for maybe a couple of hours each weekday – surely not a good way to spend $370million.
Ken Henry defends the Super Profits Tax on mining against a wave of political and media misunderstanding and misrepresentation. Whether the government adopts Henry’s ideal version of the tax, or some other politically modified version (or none at all), remains to be seen.
An interesting history of the private provision of public goods
3D Cinema and TV – how does it work and why can’t a normal TV project images that trick the eye into seeing 3D?
Monday, May 24, 2010
Update: Tax me, please
Last year I wrote about the important social benefits of land taxes compared to other forms of taxation. My headline was Tax me, please (also cross-posted at Online Opinion).
Maybe it is just a coincidence, but Mark Carnegie’s outstanding piece on the best recommendations from the Henry Tax Review, including the land tax as a substitute for transactions taxes such as stamp duties, is entitled Tax me!
Carnegie’s article sums up my thoughts on the Henry review and is worth reading in its entirety, but here is a taste.
“… economic growth would be higher if governments raised more revenue from land and less revenue from other tax bases.”
“When a government builds a new railway line and the value of the surrounding property soars, surely it is right that this wealth be taxed.” The same is true of people who get dairy farms on the edge of cities rezoned as residential land in quarter acre blocks. As Churchill said, “To not one of these improvements does the land monopolist, as a land monopolist contribute, and yet by every one of them the value of his land is enhanced...”
We all hate paying more tax than we have to but Ken Henry has written a document that is a compelling argument for how to build a better country given that someone has to pay to run the country.
If I had my way, I would abolish the states and cut billions from the cost of running the country. But I know that will never happen because Australians would never vote for a referendum to do that and so we are pretty much stuck with the bill as it is. Can’t we at least come together for the good of the country and put aside our personal interests for long enough to capture this powerful vision of a better, fairer, more productive tax system?
Maybe it is just a coincidence, but Mark Carnegie’s outstanding piece on the best recommendations from the Henry Tax Review, including the land tax as a substitute for transactions taxes such as stamp duties, is entitled Tax me!
Carnegie’s article sums up my thoughts on the Henry review and is worth reading in its entirety, but here is a taste.
“… economic growth would be higher if governments raised more revenue from land and less revenue from other tax bases.”
“When a government builds a new railway line and the value of the surrounding property soars, surely it is right that this wealth be taxed.” The same is true of people who get dairy farms on the edge of cities rezoned as residential land in quarter acre blocks. As Churchill said, “To not one of these improvements does the land monopolist, as a land monopolist contribute, and yet by every one of them the value of his land is enhanced...”
We all hate paying more tax than we have to but Ken Henry has written a document that is a compelling argument for how to build a better country given that someone has to pay to run the country.
If I had my way, I would abolish the states and cut billions from the cost of running the country. But I know that will never happen because Australians would never vote for a referendum to do that and so we are pretty much stuck with the bill as it is. Can’t we at least come together for the good of the country and put aside our personal interests for long enough to capture this powerful vision of a better, fairer, more productive tax system?
Sunday, May 23, 2010
One percent realty – a revolution in the making
Real estate agents have a poor reputation. The cynical side of me would say that they get paid a lot for doing very little. Unspoken collusion results in an unwillingness to negotiate commission from the maximum allowable, which, under the Property Agents and Motor Dealers Regulation 2001, is $900 plus 2.5% if the price is over $18,000. Almost ten years on residential property prices have increased is many areas by 300%, yet agents still typically charge this maximum amount in a 'take it or leave it' fashion.
But things are changing fast.
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Housing and population updates
Australian housing finance is falling rapidly with prices likely to follow.
This graph of historical prices and housing finance approvals deserves a look. Also, the graph below was part of the RBA's Luci Ellis' speech on housing last week and was referred to as follows:
Australian housing debt is higher relative to housing assets now than in the past (Graph 4). We should expect this ratio to be higher than in the 1970s and 1980s. The financial regulation of that period artificially restricted household borrowing. For example, unmarried women found it hard get mortgages back then. The question is whether this measure of leverage is higher than can be sustained. After all, it is much lower than in the United States, even before their boom-bust cycle. But we should expect that to be true. Because they can claim home mortgage interest against their tax, American owner-occupiers have less incentive to pay their debt down than their Australian counterparts.
...
Recent data suggest that we do not have a credit-fuelled speculative boom on our hands.
I wonder what data would be required for Ellis to conclude otherwise? If it was so easy to see a speculative bubble in the data, none would ever form.
Finally, a word of caution about the graph. It is the ratio of debt to value. Therefore a rise can be caused either by an increase in debt or a decrease in home values. Clearly the dramatic lift in the US ratio in 2008-09 was caused by declining asset prices, not increased debt.
Strangely Ellis concludes that a 40% aggregate debt ratio was a massive bubble in the US, but 30% in Australia is not apparently, even though we should expect this relationship due to differential tax treatment of mortgage interest.
The RBA is sounding very confused these days.
On another note, the 'population growth increases house prices therefore the Australian market is safe' point of view is looking very shaky. Latest BIS Shrapnel report forecasts significant declines in population growth in the coming years.
BIS Shrapnel says annual net overseas migration - which includes permanent migration and longer-term but temporary stays - will fall from its pace of 298,900 in the year to June 2009 to 240,000 in the year to June 2010. It will fall more dramatically to 175,000 in 2010-11 and 145,000 in 2011-12.
This graph of historical prices and housing finance approvals deserves a look. Also, the graph below was part of the RBA's Luci Ellis' speech on housing last week and was referred to as follows:
Australian housing debt is higher relative to housing assets now than in the past (Graph 4). We should expect this ratio to be higher than in the 1970s and 1980s. The financial regulation of that period artificially restricted household borrowing. For example, unmarried women found it hard get mortgages back then. The question is whether this measure of leverage is higher than can be sustained. After all, it is much lower than in the United States, even before their boom-bust cycle. But we should expect that to be true. Because they can claim home mortgage interest against their tax, American owner-occupiers have less incentive to pay their debt down than their Australian counterparts.
...
Recent data suggest that we do not have a credit-fuelled speculative boom on our hands.
Finally, a word of caution about the graph. It is the ratio of debt to value. Therefore a rise can be caused either by an increase in debt or a decrease in home values. Clearly the dramatic lift in the US ratio in 2008-09 was caused by declining asset prices, not increased debt.
Strangely Ellis concludes that a 40% aggregate debt ratio was a massive bubble in the US, but 30% in Australia is not apparently, even though we should expect this relationship due to differential tax treatment of mortgage interest.
The RBA is sounding very confused these days.
On another note, the 'population growth increases house prices therefore the Australian market is safe' point of view is looking very shaky. Latest BIS Shrapnel report forecasts significant declines in population growth in the coming years.
BIS Shrapnel says annual net overseas migration - which includes permanent migration and longer-term but temporary stays - will fall from its pace of 298,900 in the year to June 2009 to 240,000 in the year to June 2010. It will fall more dramatically to 175,000 in 2010-11 and 145,000 in 2011-12.
Friday quick links
Latest research suggests that government owned banks are better for growth than private banks.
Another potential rebound effect - encouraging snus instead of cigarettes might lead to another avenue for nicotine addiction and potentially more cigarette use.
A belief in supernatural communication with the dead must surely be evidence for irrationality
One reason (not) to get an iPad - freedom from porn
Another potential rebound effect - encouraging snus instead of cigarettes might lead to another avenue for nicotine addiction and potentially more cigarette use.
A belief in supernatural communication with the dead must surely be evidence for irrationality
One reason (not) to get an iPad - freedom from porn
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Lower bound problems of hedonic indices
Prices are a fundamental feature of modern economies, yet measuring a true price change is exceedingly difficult due to the constantly changing quality of goods and services. I have previously discussed the use of hedonic price indices, where adjustments are made for quality changes using regression techniques, and the potential pitfalls when interpreting the results of this method. I apologise for raising this issue again, but I hope to clarify my message with an example.
While a hedonic index is a useful tool, and when part of a package of price indices can clarify our understanding of price and quality movements, many unresolved issues persist. One issue that attracts little attention is how to interpret and apply results from hedonic price index calculations.
Today I want to further elaborate upon, and demonstrate using the table below, what I call the lower bound problem of hedonic price indices. Quality improvement does not imply that prices faced by consumers have dropped, especially if lower quality goods are no longer available. Buyers of cheaper products will not see the price declines measured by a hedonic index, and may even see price increases.
The above table has been constructed to show how different methods for determining price changes can produce significantly different results. This hypothetical market could be computers, cars, or any other market where quality changes noticeably over time.
The animal names are the models. For car markets, it could be Corolla, Landcruiser and so on, or for computers, Dell Latitude, Apple MacBook or any other model. The reason to include models is that one method for determining price changes is called the model-matching technique. Because models typically have fewer quality changes than the market as a whole, and that they typically represent a segment of the market (budget or premium), compiling prices over time for the same model can give a reasonable measure of price changes for similar quality products. In the table above two models are highlighted, Kangaroo and Echidna, to show how their prices have changed over the period. If we take the average price change of models we can match over the period (the model matching technique), we get a price change in this market of -42% over the eight-year period.
The number beside each model is a measure of quality. I have used a single number in this situation, but typically there would be a number of associated quality measures. You will note that the quality of each model improves over time, thus if we use a hedonic (quality controlled) method for measuring price change, it will show a more substantial price decline. If we were to buy a ‘quality level 9’ product in 2001 it would be $3,000, while in 2009 it would be $1,000 – a 67% decline in price.
Using a median price index, where quality is not considered, the data in this table shows a median price increase of 14% over the period (assuming an equal volume of sales in each price category). In this scenario, this measure more accurately shows the price movement of the market as a whole. If you wanted to stay at the same level in the market, this is the price change you would experience.
Finally, and this is the main pitfall when utilising quality-adjusted prices measures to make policy decisions, the price change for the lower bound market entrant has increased 33%. The cheapest computer/car/shoe/phone/appliance, or whatever good this happens to be, has gone up in price significantly while the quality-adjusted measures show large declines.
Measures such as the CPI (a price index) and the Analytical Cost of Living Indexes do consider quality change, yet we apply these measures as a way to adjust welfare payments, even though most welfare recipients will be lower bound market entrants for much of their consumption bundle.
In an ideal world, a selection of price indexes using different methods would be produced for each major consumption category to show paint a clear picture of the situation being faced by different members of society. Not only would we measure ‘pure price change’, but also changes to the cost of living which can more easily guide policymaking.
While a hedonic index is a useful tool, and when part of a package of price indices can clarify our understanding of price and quality movements, many unresolved issues persist. One issue that attracts little attention is how to interpret and apply results from hedonic price index calculations.
Today I want to further elaborate upon, and demonstrate using the table below, what I call the lower bound problem of hedonic price indices. Quality improvement does not imply that prices faced by consumers have dropped, especially if lower quality goods are no longer available. Buyers of cheaper products will not see the price declines measured by a hedonic index, and may even see price increases.
The above table has been constructed to show how different methods for determining price changes can produce significantly different results. This hypothetical market could be computers, cars, or any other market where quality changes noticeably over time.The animal names are the models. For car markets, it could be Corolla, Landcruiser and so on, or for computers, Dell Latitude, Apple MacBook or any other model. The reason to include models is that one method for determining price changes is called the model-matching technique. Because models typically have fewer quality changes than the market as a whole, and that they typically represent a segment of the market (budget or premium), compiling prices over time for the same model can give a reasonable measure of price changes for similar quality products. In the table above two models are highlighted, Kangaroo and Echidna, to show how their prices have changed over the period. If we take the average price change of models we can match over the period (the model matching technique), we get a price change in this market of -42% over the eight-year period.
The number beside each model is a measure of quality. I have used a single number in this situation, but typically there would be a number of associated quality measures. You will note that the quality of each model improves over time, thus if we use a hedonic (quality controlled) method for measuring price change, it will show a more substantial price decline. If we were to buy a ‘quality level 9’ product in 2001 it would be $3,000, while in 2009 it would be $1,000 – a 67% decline in price.
Using a median price index, where quality is not considered, the data in this table shows a median price increase of 14% over the period (assuming an equal volume of sales in each price category). In this scenario, this measure more accurately shows the price movement of the market as a whole. If you wanted to stay at the same level in the market, this is the price change you would experience.
Finally, and this is the main pitfall when utilising quality-adjusted prices measures to make policy decisions, the price change for the lower bound market entrant has increased 33%. The cheapest computer/car/shoe/phone/appliance, or whatever good this happens to be, has gone up in price significantly while the quality-adjusted measures show large declines.
Measures such as the CPI (a price index) and the Analytical Cost of Living Indexes do consider quality change, yet we apply these measures as a way to adjust welfare payments, even though most welfare recipients will be lower bound market entrants for much of their consumption bundle.
In an ideal world, a selection of price indexes using different methods would be produced for each major consumption category to show paint a clear picture of the situation being faced by different members of society. Not only would we measure ‘pure price change’, but also changes to the cost of living which can more easily guide policymaking.
Sunday, May 16, 2010
A Rum Thing
Guest post by Stephen Hogg
This Business Spectator article gave me pause for thought. It is discusses how ASIC recently made a ham-fisted attempt at reigning in rogues in the market making a buck off spreading a rumour and then profiting from inevitable price movements. It’s called rumourtrage, and is the practice of spreading false or misleading information in respect of securities in order to take advantage of artificial changes in market prices.
Now don’t get me wrong, it’s a cunning idea. I know a lot of people who wish they had thought of it some years ago. But I became stuck on one point made by ASIC. At the end of the article it is made plain that when ASIC was figuring out how to put a stop to all this, that:
"The principles were developed noting concerns that confidence in the integrity of Australia’s markets could be undermined if investors believe rumours are actively spread in the market to distort proper price discovery"
I think is a flawed statement.
This Business Spectator article gave me pause for thought. It is discusses how ASIC recently made a ham-fisted attempt at reigning in rogues in the market making a buck off spreading a rumour and then profiting from inevitable price movements. It’s called rumourtrage, and is the practice of spreading false or misleading information in respect of securities in order to take advantage of artificial changes in market prices.
Now don’t get me wrong, it’s a cunning idea. I know a lot of people who wish they had thought of it some years ago. But I became stuck on one point made by ASIC. At the end of the article it is made plain that when ASIC was figuring out how to put a stop to all this, that:
"The principles were developed noting concerns that confidence in the integrity of Australia’s markets could be undermined if investors believe rumours are actively spread in the market to distort proper price discovery"
I think is a flawed statement.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)