25 Sep 2015
by Jim Rose
in applied price theory, labour economics, labour supply, occupational choice, personnel economics, politics - New Zealand
Tags: employment law, employment protection law, employment regulation, fixed costs of employment, Leftover Left, The fatal conceit, unintended consequences, zero hours contracts
This Labour Party link made it very easy for me to submit to the Select Committee of Parliament to oppose the Bill on regulating zero hours contracts. I oppose the Bill for the exact opposite reasons that the Labour Party opposes the Bill.
I encourage others to make a submission to Parliament as well opposing this draft amendment that will lower the wages of workers. My submission is as follows:
I do not support the proposed changes to the legislation governing zero hour contracts in the Employment Standards Legislation Bill. There should be no regulation of zero hours contracts.
Zero hours contracts is creative destruction at work in the labour market, sweeping away obsolete working time arrangements, mostly in the retail services sector. Plenty of new ways of working have emerged in recent years that include the proliferation of part-time work, temporary workers, leased workers, working from home, teleworking and sub-contracting. Employment laws were built on the now decaying assumption that workers had career-long, stable relationships with single employers.
Advance notice of work schedules is always known only to a minority of temporary and permanent employees in New Zealand, and there’s not much difference between that advance notice between temporary and permanent employees.
Critics overplay their hand if they suggest that somehow workers are very much disadvantaged and employers are holding all the cards. Job turnover and recruitment problems are a serious cost to a business. Workers will not sign zero hours contracts if they are not to their advantage.
Unless labour markets are highly uncompetitive with employers having massive power over employees, employers should have to pay a wage premium if zero-hour contracts are a hassle for workers.
The fixed costs of employment are such that you shouldn’t expect zero-hour contracts: you’ll typically do better with one 40-hour worker over two 20-hour workers because of these costs. Zero hour contracts would be most likely in jobs with low recruitment costs and where specialised training needs are low. Workers with low fixed costs of working will move into the zero-hour sector while those with higher fixed costs would prefer lower hourly rates but more guaranteed hours. Again, read lower here as meaning relative to what they could elsewhere earn.
Unless we have a good idea about why firms are moving to zero hours contracts, which we don’t, and why employees sign these contracts rather than work for other employers who offer more regular hours, meddling in these novel working time arrangements is risky.
Employers must pay a wage premium to induce in workers to sign zero hours contracts. This Bill seeks to deny workers the right to seek higher wages.
Feel free to use the above text as the basis for your own submission to Parliament.
24 Sep 2015
by Jim Rose
in financial economics, politics - New Zealand, Public Choice, public economics
Tags: expressive voting, government ownership, privatisation, state owned enterprises
I asked for information from the Treasury for as far back as 2000 but could only get information back to 2008 on the return on equity of the portfolio of state-owned enterprises to the taxpayer.
Source: New Zealand Treasury – released under Official Information Act.
Apparently, long-term information on the performance of the state-owned enterprise portfolio is not available. Anyone wanting to know the performance of an individual or group of listed companies simply looks at the share price was far back as they want. The prices of individual shares reflect market expectations of future dividends and future price movements, and they go up and down as new information is revealed. The history of a share price indicates the ups and downs of a company in one number far better than any other available indicator.
I also included the adjusted rate of return on equity taking out the two dogs in the portfolio: Solid Energy and KiwiRail.
Source: New Zealand Treasury – released under Official Information Act.
24 Sep 2015
by Jim Rose
in applied price theory, applied welfare economics, comparative institutional analysis, economics of regulation, entrepreneurship, health economics, industrial organisation, law and economics, politics - USA, property rights, survivor principle
Tags: creative destruction, endogenous growth theory, innovation, intellectual property rights, patents and copyrights, pharmaceutical innovation, price controls
Our research shows that when prices fall, innovation falls even more. Patients would see their lives cut short by delayed or absent drugs.
Source: Drug Price Controls End Up Costing Patients Their Health – NYTimes.com
…cutting prices by 40 to 50 percent in the United States will lead to between 30 and 60 percent fewer R and D projects being undertaken in the early stage of developing a new drug. Relatively modest price changes, such as 5 or 10 percent, are estimated to have relatively little impact on the incentives for product development – perhaps a negative 5 percent.
Source: The Effect of Price Controls on Pharmaceutical Research
Source: U.S. Pharmaceutical Policy In A Global Marketplace
22 Sep 2015
by Jim Rose
in Economics of international refugee law, environmental economics, global warming, international economics, law and economics, politics - New Zealand
Tags: climate refugees, global warming, Greenpeace, Kiribati, nuisance suits, political refugees, vexatious litigation, war refugees
Political support is tenuous enough for admitting more political refugees and war refugees to New Zealand without visa overstayers trying it on with claims for asylum on the basis of climate change – that they are a climate refugee.
Currently New Zealand small refugee quota of 750 is under review. Chances of that been increased to 1000 are reasonable. If people are trying to open the floodgates to millions of people as potential refugees of climate change, if Greenpeace’s own alarmist rhetoric about global warming is to be believed, Greenpeace only strengthens the hand of the anti-immigration and xenophobic parties such as New Zealand First and within the National Party caucus.
Not everyone is a worthy cause, particularly those who make vexatious legal claims that were always going to fail in court. The High Court, the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court all ruled that it is not their place to expand the scope of the international refugee convention to cover those displaced by climate change. As the Court of Appeal ruled
No-one should read this judgment as downplaying the importance of climate change. It is a major and growing concern for the international community. The point this judgment makes is that climate change and its effect on countries like Kiribati is not appropriately addressed under the Refugee Convention.
Source: Doing Business in Kiribati – World Bank Group
Kirabati can do a lot more to help itself rather than looking to others to solve its problems. It is ranked 133rd in the World Bank’s Doing Business database. This means it can do a lot to help its own development, which strengthens its resilience against climate change and rising sea levels. In the High Court, Priestley J observed:
The economic environment of Kiribati might certainly not be as attractive to the applicant and his fellow nationals as the economic environment and prospects of Australia and New Zealand. But he would not, if he returns, be subjected to individual persecution…
The appellant raised an argument that the international community itself was tantamount to the “persecutor” for the purposes of the Refugee Convention. This completely reverses the traditional refugee paradigm. Traditionally a refugee is fleeing his own government or a non-state actor from whom the government is unwilling or unable to protect him. Thus the claimant is seeking refuge within the very countries that are allegedly “persecuting” him.
Kiribati’s Human Development Index value for 2012 is 0.629—in the medium human development category—positioning the country at 121 out of 187 countries and territories. The rank is shared with Indonesia and South Africa. Kiribati is not unusually poor if it is similar in human development index ranking is to Indonesia and South Africa. Since 1980, Kiribati life expectancy at birth has increased from 55 years to 68 years. Average years of schooling is nearly 8 years and expected years of schooling for their children is now 12 years.
Previous Older Entries Next Newer Entries
Recent Comments