Finances

<html><body>
<div class="row">
<div class="itemIntroText col-xs-12 ">
In examining why so few people bother to take more than a cursory look at their finances, it is instructive to consider an illustration that might at first seem at an odd tangent from a discussion of economic policy, finances and financial planning.
In recent years television has produced a boom in wonderfully entertaining cooking shows. One is the Ten Network’s Masterchef. In this show otherwise ordinary people with a lot of interest, and possibly a bit of talent, use their skills and knowledge to cook what are often weird and wonderful meals. They do this with direction and advice from some of the best chefs in the world.
Often the contestants do a remarkable job. Sometimes they match the finesse of Heston Blumenthal or the flair and creativity of Gary Mehigan. The contestants’ sense of euphoria and accomplishment when they cook a great dish that the judges enjoy and rank highly is palpable. But more often than not these incredible highs are not realised; the wannabe chefs fail to cut the mustard and their dishes are judged to be merely so-so.
There is drama when the truffle-infused beetroot risotto is overcooked and gluggy, or when the duck breast turns out to be raw inside despite the crispy skin. Sometimes the contestants are too slow at ‘plating up’, forget to drizzle the jus or misjudge the seasoning of the quail compote. These mistakes cost them dearly when it comes to qualifying for the next round or gaining that all-important immunity pin. But the judges, the masterchefs themselves, are there to guide the contestants on what went wrong, making sure that the next time they step up to the hot plate, their earlier mistakes are not repeated.
</div>
</div>
<div class="row">
<div class="itemFullText col-xs-12">
We might apply the Masterchef principles regarding effort, teaching and learning, and even entertainment, to our own economics and finances. There are, or at least there should be, similarities between planning for and preparing a meal and planning and preparing a business plan or investment decision. We know that every day businesses fail despite the best efforts and endeavours of those involved. Business results will often fall well short of the principals’ objectives and dreams. This is because the people running the businesses and making the investment decisions are not the equivalent of the TV masterchefs.
Despite the crushing dismay of the contestants who are sent to the elimination challenge, in the real world a dodgy apricot chicken dish really doesn’t matter all that much. For those who get through to the next round there is always tomorrow night to attempt to cook that restaurant-quality meal. When contestants do cook the equivalent of a dog’s breakfast and must leave the show, tears are shed, there is a convulsion of bitter disappointment, but invariably they go home vowing to learn from their experience.
Many go on to start a restaurant, café or catering business, using their newfound experience to embark on a new career. And the families of the Masterchef contestants will enjoy many culinary treats in the weeks and months after their loved ones leave the show and try out their new skills in the kitchen at home.
Of course, failures among Masterchef contestants have never triggered a recession or driven unemployment higher, nor have they increased economic inequality through a poor decision on tax reform or regulation of financial service advice. None of these culinary deficits have ruined the environment at a great cost to future generations. No one who forgot to plate up the port wine jus has lost their life savings as a result or been financially crippled by one of the few dodgy financial planners around the country. Nor have they implemented policies that trigger mass job losses or an inflationary spiral. Saucepan errors are only about fancy food not turning out to be fancy after all. Nothing more serious than that.
Which begs the question: why is there not a show called ‘Master Economist’? Or ‘Master Financial Planner’?
Let me make the case.
Contestants on such a show, and a few million viewers who might watch it, would soon become engrossed, I reckon, in seeing how their economy and the financial markets work. Imagine, they could be treated to a heated discussion between Westpac’s Chief Economist, Bill Evans, ANZ’s Warren Hogan and BT’s Chris Caton on the commodity supercycle. Or they could watch and learn from AMP’s Shane Oliver, NAB’s Alan Oster and Commonwealth Bank’s Michael Blythe as they discuss why the global growth cycle and commodity price swings will matter for the Australian economy. Think about it. They could see Mark Bouris, Alan Kohler and Marcus Padley go head to head on superannuation investment strategies and the benefits and pitfalls of investing in property, stocks, bonds or international markets.
How exciting would that be?
Imagine a masterclass with ex-Treasury and Reserve Bank of Australia officials such as Ken Henry, Bernie Fraser, Martin Parkinson or Ian Macfarlane talking about how they pulled the policy levers to reform our economy or how they reacted during the global financial crisis to make sure Australia did not fall into recession. What about having Gina Rinehart, Gail Kelly, John Symonds, James Packer or Frank Lowy talking about their business successes and how they did it? What a winner!
The prospects for this show are getting better and better.
But there’s more. Let’s throw in a few academic economists to round it out. Steve Keen could go on about the debt crisis and why we all will eventually be ruined because of debt. Warwick McKibbin could give some insights into the workings of the RBA, Australia’s central bank, citing his experience on the Board and action on climate change, while John Quiggin could reveal his thoughts on income distribution and wealth, and why inequality is a severe handbrake on economic growth. Let’s also see what Bob Gregory has to say about the labour market and why Australia cannot enjoy a 3 per cent unemployment rate with current policy settings.
What about ex-Treasurers Paul Keating, Peter Costello, Wayne Swan and John Howard going head to head? The likes of Professor Judith Sloan, Gerard Henderson, Chris Kenny and Terry McCrann could offer their whacky ideas on economic policy in a lighthearted ‘bloopers and zingers’ section.
The list of possible talent for the show is a mile long. 
If this is not potentially as entertaining as the pressure test cook- off on a wagyu beef and pickled pear tartlet, I don’t know what is. Participants and viewers could get to see world-class economists, policy leaders and financial experts discussing and debating the things that matter to every viewer’s financial wellbeing. And they would all come away from such a show knowing the trade-offs in the policies our politicians need to implement for economic growth, jobs, wealth and financial fairness to be delivered.
Viewers would no doubt get to understand why economists, or at least some of us, are delighted with a strong retail sales report or are dismayed when the government fails to implement a policy change on taxation—for example, where the long-run benefits to the economy are obvious, but the political risks are considered to be too high. Viewers could see the trade-offs involved when government policy is set. Instead of wondering whether the lobster is overcooked, the master economists and contestants could work out what it might mean for Australia and our individual finances if the economic policymakers overcook the economy so inflation runs higher for several years, or if the RBA fails to cut interest rates when growth is too weak so the unemployment rate moves higher.
In much the same way that we marvel at the ability of some Masterchef contestants as they reveal a near-perfect croquembouche, watching ‘Master Economist’ would give viewers insights into why the federal budget matters, why it is important that they think about their own business plan, superannuation, mortgage and personal finances as they move through life. It might even make some of them want to investigate whether any of that $18 billion in unclaimed superannuation money is theirs.
We might present a special challenge for our ‘Master Economist’ contestants: How do you deal with a budget deficit? What has led to the deficit? Which taxes should be hiked and which areas of government spending cut if we are to move back to a budget surplus? What are the consequences of raising the goods and services tax, for example, and how could the extra revenue for the government from such a tax hike alter the nation’s finances? What to do about government spending cuts? Defence is an easy option to cut, especially considering those expensive submarines being built in South Australia...or is it? What are the implications of making such a cut? What would it mean if the ‘Master Economist’ contestant advocated a cut in spending on education? Sure, it might see the budget move to surplus in the next few years, but what about over the longer term when Australia is left with a poorly educated, low-skilled workforce?
I could go on!
These are the sorts of questions policymakers in government confront every day. Little wonder it is a tough job, or that when a decision is made some sectors of the community will feel hard done by—and will voice their views—while others will delight in the government’s largesse.
Stephen <a href="https://thekouk.com/blog/masterchef-vs-master-economist#.VU8neMMJfio.twitter" target="_blank">The Kouk</a> Koukoulas is one of Australia's leading economic visionaries, past Chief Economist of Citibank, heading global research in London for TD and Senior Economic Advisor to the Prime Minister, Julia Gillard.
He is managing director of Market Economics, a macroeconomic advisory firm and advisor to Dun &amp; Bradstreet. 
His most recent book, <a href="https://au.wiley.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/productCd-0730321959" target="_blank">Myth Busting Economics</a> was published last month by Wiley.
</div>
</div>
</body></html>

skoukoulas-KiNiTp2Y4x

Why I'd love to see a TV show called Master Economist! Stephen Koukoulas

<html><body>
The Australian and Securities Investments Commission has released a guide to aid people in preparing their family affairs before passing on.
ASIC's MoneySmart website implores people to avoid leaving behind a financial mess and provided a range of information relating to sorting out bank accounts and finances, life insurance, updating your will and setting up a trust.
According to ASIC, if you develop a plan and put it in place, you'll make sure your loved ones will be taken care of after you have gone.
More information is available <a href="https://www.moneysmart.gov.au/life-events-and-you/life-events/money-musts-before-you-die?utm_medium=email&amp;utm_campaign=MoneySmart+tips+-+October+2015&amp;utm_content=MoneySmart+tips+-+October+2015+CID_0285e24379a5279d45b24b562a5b1177&amp;utm_source=CampaignMonitor&amp;utm_term=some%20simple%20steps%20you%20can%20take">here</a>.
ASIC has also provided a handy tool for interest-only mortgage calculations, <a href="/expert-insights/finance/46711-asic-releases-interest-only-mortgage-calculator" target="_blank">which you can find here</a>, as well as a handy guide to interest-only loans for property investors <a href="/expert-insights/finance/46852-asic-interest-only-guide-for-property-investors" target="_blank">available here</a>.
</body></html>

mick.cee-iDmgDDAmu8

Money musts before you die: ASIC's MoneySmart

<html><body>
<div class="page" title="Page 1">
GUEST OBSERVER
The Westpac Melbourne Institute Index of Consumer Sentiment rose by 0.1 percent in March from 99.6 in February to 99.7 in March. 
The Index appears to be stabilising around that point where optimists and pessimists are around equal in number. The encouraging 2.3 percent lift we saw in the Index in February has been sustained in March.
In this survey we ask respondents for information on the news items that have affected their views and whether the news has been well received. This gives us an assessment of what may be on the minds of respondents.
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2017/03/15/Screen%20Shot%202017-03-15%20at%2010.51.27%20AM.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2017/03/15/Screen%20Shot%202017-03-15%20at%2010.51.27%20AM.png" alt="">
As we saw in December the two dominant news categories were ‘economic conditions’ (27.9 percent of respondents recalled news on this topic) and ‘budget and taxation’ (25.2 percent). On both counts respondents saw the news as less unfavourable than had been the case in December. In particular ‘economic conditions’ showed a marked improvement.
It is also interesting to note that overall awareness of ‘budget and taxation’ news is down significantly from a year ago when 37.1 percent of respondents recalled news on this topic. That difference can be largely attributed to a fall from 17.6 percent to 3.7 percent in those respondents recalling news on taxation.
Other well-recalled news items covered: employment (15.7 percent,  up from 11.1 percent in December); interest rates (15.6 percent); and international conditions (12.0 percent). Despite no move by the Reserve Bank over the intervening period news on interest rates was much more positively received while the pessimism around international conditions eased. Respondents, who regularly assess the news on employment as unfavourable, were somewhat more concerned in this survey.
The Westpac Melbourne Institute Index of Unemployment Expectations fell by 3.1 percent in March pushing the Index back to around the levels in December. Recall that lower readings on the index mean more consumers expect unemployment to fall in the year ahead. Our take on the index is that respondents’ assessments of the unemployment outlook have stabilised around a level which is consistent with spare capacity consistently available in the labour market with little prospect of that spare capacity actually clearing.
There was one quite significant movement within the components of the Index: the ‘Family finances compared to a year ago’ sub-index fell by 5.3 percent. This component is now at its lowest level since June 2014 when respondents were shaken by the May Budget announcement.
However on that occasion the overall Index was much lower than we see today, indicating that, currently respondents are particularly concerned about their own finances. News from the December quarter national accounts that wage incomes had fallen by 0.5 percent is indicative of the source of these concerns. That news, of course, complemented other recent reports that wages growth had fallen to a record low of 1.9 percent.
Other components of the Index are less newsworthy. The ‘family finances, next 12 months’ sub-index fell 0.2 percent, the ‘economic conditions, next 12 months’ sub-index rose 1.6 percent; the ‘economic conditions, next 5 years’ sub-index rose 3.9 percent and the ‘time to buy a major household item’ sub-index dipped 0.1%.
Housing sentiment lifted in March. The ‘time to buy a dwelling’ index rose by 7.0 percent. However that increase only recovered the 7.8 percent fall in February. The recovery was mainly attributed to a sharp turnaround in Victoria where the state government has recently announced a range of new measures including abolishing stamp duty for first home buyers.
Despite this, the national index still seems to be drifting lower having fallen by 4.9 percent over the last year. That compares with the 13 percent fall we saw over the previous year. The Index is still around 25 percent higher than the deep lows we saw in the 2007/08 period.
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2017/03/15/Screen%20Shot%202017-03-15%20at%2010.52.35%20AM.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2017/03/15/Screen%20Shot%202017-03-15%20at%2010.52.35%20AM.png" alt="">
House price expectations continue to rise. The Westpac Melbourne Institute Index of House Price Expectations rose by 2.2 percent to be 26.7 percent above the level of a year ago.
Every quarter we also ask respondents for their preference for their savings. This can provide us with any evidence that consumers are becoming more or less risk averse. There was a notable shift in March with the proportion nominating ‘pay down debt’ jumping from 20.5 percent in December to 25.7 percent, and the proportion favouring real estate dropping to just 11.6 percent, a record low since we first started asking this question back in 1974. The moves indicate a clear increase in risk aversion.
The Reserve Bank Board next meets on April 4. The Bank will decide to keep rates on hold. Even though income growth and inflation are too low and there remains ample spare capacity in the labour market (unemployment rate of 5.7 percent compared to a ‘full employment‘ rate of around 5 percent) the Bank has no flexibility to cut rates. The evidence is clear that the rate cuts the Bank embraced last year in the face of low inflation fuelled house  prices and household leverage. The Bank is concerned about possible excesses in the housing market.
Markets accept the view that rates will remain on hold in 2017 but are pricing in at least two hikes from the Bank next year. We expect that growth in the economy will slow in 2018 as the residential construction boom unwinds. As we saw in today’s report households are concerned about their finances, largely because of weak income growth. This concern is unlikely to fade in 2018 appropriately constraining household spending and discouraging investment. That is no environment for higher rates. Accordingly, we expect rates will remain on hold throughout 2018 as well. 
</div>
<div class="page" title="Page 1">
<div class="page" title="Page 1">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
<div class="page" title="Page 1">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
BILL EVANS is chief economist of <a href="https://www.westpac.com.au/" target="_blank">Westpac</a>. Justin Smirk is ‎senior economist, Westpac Group and can be contacted <a href="https://www.westpac.com.au/about-westpac/westpac-group/" target="_blank">here</a>.
</div>
</div>
</div>
 
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body></html>

bevans-rYk9SxEa4r

Time to buy dwelling index rises 7 percent: Westpac's Bill Evans

<html><body>
<h2>OPINION:</h2>

Never in our lifetime have we experienced such a global shock that has also provided a unique opportunity to take stock of our lives. Many of us are pausing to consider what areas we’re happy with, what we need to change, and new habits we would like to form to enable a more fulfilling life.

We also face challenges that have put a spotlight on our finances and show us just how financially resilient we may or may not be. This can be a confronting situation to find ourselves in but, like anything, we get to choose how we respond to the challenge.

I believe that there has never been a more critical time to take a closer look at our finances and set ourselves up for a less stressful and more prepared approach to our financial future.

In my work as Assemble’s Financial Coach, I help residents improve their financial wellbeing and guide them towards achieving their ultimate goal of homeownership via the Assemble Model.

My first piece of advice is to take stock of where your money is going.

During this period of uncertainty, it is best to focus on the essentials – food, transport, utilities, and housing. Consider reviewing any items outside of these essentials to check whether you can remove them altogether or look at reducing these costs to ensure you are on the best or cheapest deal available. If you work towards stripping these expenses right back, you may have the chance to decide if you still wish to continue paying for these non-essential items once you return to your lifestyle after COVID-19 passes. You may even consider new ways to use that extra money if you find that you could quite comfortably live without them.

While you may have had to reduce spending on the things that took a reasonable amount from your weekly budget – such as dining out, gyms or beauty treatments – it's important to take a look at where you can reallocate these outgoing costs.

If you’ve lost your job or had your hours reduced, this is the time to find more funds to better support you throughout this time. This could include using your emergency fund and any resources offered by the government, such as JobSeeker, or contacting service providers to pause payments or put bills on hold. It’s okay to accept the financial support available as there is no shame in asking for help.  If you feel overwhelmed, remember that this time will pass, so lean on friends and family for emotional support if you need it.

If your employer has not been affected, then this puts you in the fortunate position of being able to redirect these non-essential costs to boosting your savings. This could include a home deposit, increasing your emergency fund to future-proof yourself in the event your circumstances change, or to pay down debts that would have otherwise taken more time and money in interest costs to get rid of.

For example, if you’re no longer spending $160 on a gym membership each month, then this can be reallocated by increasing your monthly debt repayments by an additional $160 or setting up an automatic transfer for that amount across to your savings or emergency fund instead. You can apply this concept to many expenses, such as dining out, social events, exercise classes, public transport and pay TV or sports channels that you’re not using. All of these subscriptions and fees can add up, and you can get these amounts working for you in other ways.

You need to give your money ‘a job to do’ because if you leave it sitting in your account, it won’t be long before it’s given another ‘job’. These can come up as ‘bored in iso online shopping’ or ‘the extra chocolate stash’ – which isn’t beneficial to your financial position.

Although COVID-19 has been devastating for people, significantly impacting our health system and economy, it has brought an opportunity to re-evaluate how we spend our time, which influences how we will earn and spend money in the future.

This can mean that in the months ahead when we’re readjusting our lives and setting new goals, we can do it with confidence in our financial position and a new understanding of how we want to spend our time based on what we truly value.
</body></html>

Finances

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Finances

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News