Interest rates and zee big wanks, sorry, banks.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.news.com.au/finance/economy/interest-rates/westpac-refuses-to-pass-on-cuts-reducing-variable-rate-by-just-015/news-story/d6345f1407a54a1660bd7a3d0e4487c2

What's your take? Where does the reserve bank/ govt go from here to stimulate the economy?

Is the perpetual economic growth model dead?

 

You need to be a member of 1Eyed Eel to add comments!

Join 1Eyed Eel

Votes: 0
Email me when people reply –

Replies

  • I’ve been saying it for years, perpetual growth is impossible.

    How can the double digit growth that companies want and demand be possible long term? Without huge population growth this type of economic growth is impossible. I’m a capitalist, centrist, but I do think we need to reconsider or reboot our financial model/system or we may just be in for a major major depression.

    Also I don’t think privatisation of every bloody thing is the answer either. Governments need to control to some degree essential utilities, if not the avg joe blow can’t keep up with the cost of living. All mass privatisation achieves is the pushing up of prices to allow double digit growth for executives and their companies.

    • What he said ^ 

      • Shit  I agree with you both. I'm very concerned.

  • From here we go to negative interest rates and QE, and then we go to a recession.

  • These (experts ) in the reserve bank are leading us down an unowned path tempting young people to borrow at low interest rates than when rates rise leading to unaffordable repayments 

  • Should the govt. still be trying to get us into surplus?

    Can they still brag about being good economic managers?

    Are the big banks just see you in the N.Ts?

    • The govt shouldn't be hell bent on running a surplus - it's practically meaningless. What they need to do is try and find a way to deal with the massive amount of debt in the system. Unfortunately there's not much they can do - it's not like they can drop rates (remember when they dropped rates to "emergency" levels after the GFC - that was something like 4%!!). They're plugging on about the surplus, the unemployment rate (which is bullshit - UNDERemployment is an epidemic) and inflation (why the fuck do we need inflation - wages growth is flatlining)

      They are terrible economic managers. The economy has grown on a construction boom, coupled with a credit frenzy,  that can't (and hasn't) go on forever. We have been in a per capita recession for a few years now. Now they've junked the Aussie dollar which is a terrible outcome for many. Highly leveraged families (and Aussie families are as highly leveraged as anyone on the planet) have a very tough few years ahead.

      The big banks have already started taking profit hits. The bank's share prices, profits and dividends will all head south over the next 12 months.

      It's not a good look.

      • This reply was deleted.
        • "It's Time"

          Mate, they blow smoke up our arse at every opportunity, but when you look at all the indicators - and there's tonnes of them - I can't for the life of me work out how we're going to avoid some sort of pretty ruthless financial impact - not only in Australia but on a global scale.

          We've just dropped rates to the lowest level EVER and the bulk of the media is telling us that things are on the up. Please.

          One thing's for certain though mate - the rich will get richer and the poor (including the middle class) will get poorer.

      • Kram, I'm no expert on economics, but one thing I do understand about inflation is that Governments, or anyone with debt, like inflation as it reduces the cost of longer term debt. As an example, let's say you buy a house for 100k, and at the time have income of 20k. You might be making repayments of 5k per year, so it costs you 25% of your income to meet the payments. 10 years later, all other things being equal, inflation has meant that you are now earning 30k per year. So to meet your house payments it only requires approx. 16% of your income to meet your house payments. Governments will use this logic to reduce the burden of older debts, but in reality it's a never ending cycle.

        Another point is that without inflation there is less incentive for consumers to spend money, holding out in the hope that things will be cheaper at some future point. And an economy without consumer spending probably doesn't need expaining.

        Personally, why do we need inflation, well we probably don't, but that's why governments will always target inflation. You no doubt would understand all or most of this already, this is more a reply for others who might be pondering your question about why we need inflation.

        • This is true mate,and it is true that, long term, inflation will actually improve the average standard of living - provided of course that income keeps up with inflation. The irony with your example is that the Government don't include real estate in their inflation calculations - if they did it would be alot higher than what they report.

          At the moment inflation is a pie in the sky target as far as i'm concerned. The cost of living is going up but only as a result of increased costs in basic living expenses such as fuel, electricity, gas, water, and of course our burgeoning debt level. At the same time wages are, in real terms, going backwards. The upshot is that punters are spending less on discretionary spending (retail, restaurants, cars, holidays, tv's etc) and in the current climate their mindset has turned to "battening down the hatches". Car sales, retail sales etc have dropped off a cliff and alot of what was formerly being spent on a new SUV or big screen tele is now being directed to paying down debt. ALOT of middle class big-city families are getting nervous about their net worth - negative equity territory is a very real prospect.

          There's little to no confidence out there mate. I reckon the next couple of years are going to be very interesting times for everyone. I personally still very much see an economic melt down and a housing bust in our foreseeable future.... THen again I see an Eels premiership in the near future so what would I know :)))

This reply was deleted.

Latest comments

LB replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin's discussion SACK LARIE DALEY
"The only difference was Walsh got hit after passing so the argument was he was relaxed and his head hit the floor after. What made it worse for Ponga, to be send off, was not rapping the arm."
1 minute ago
HH - Love You Iongi Time! replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin's discussion SACK LARIE DALEY
"Was not a send off. Definitely a sin bin.
Have not seen too many replays however he did not wrap his arms around in a genuine tackle attempt and even though there was head to head contact it was still a dangerous, high risk play. 
Koula was…"
8 minutes ago
BlacJac replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin's discussion SACK LARIE DALEY
"Agree with the horrible post game interviews, didn't realise how much better Fox was than 9 until this game. Can't stand 9 presentation "
11 minutes ago
Blue Eel replied to Hell On Eels's discussion Podcast Debate: Have Your Say
"Great idea Hoe! That's a winning concept. Nos and Capt have expressed the position for considered change in recruitment strategies,  and the call for an inquiry into what is going wrong has been supported by both. They would both do the cause a…"
11 minutes ago
Diggs for PM replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin's discussion SACK LARIE DALEY
"Someone went off a bit early!!"
14 minutes ago
Angry Eel replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin's discussion SACK LARIE DALEY
"I don't think there's much difference between that and the Sualii send off a couple of years back. Fuck Qld"
14 minutes ago
Gucci replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin's discussion SACK LARIE DALEY
"Can't stand these interviewers, fuck it's all roses and daisies, ask the fucken tough questions. How NSW couldn't match a 13 on 13 line up, how the NSW squad only won by 2 points and used 18 players vs 12 for 24 minutes. How refs are directly…"
16 minutes ago
LB replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin's discussion SACK LARIE DALEY
"Shoulder to head on Koula, got sent off."
21 minutes ago
LB replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin's discussion SACK LARIE DALEY
"lol, V'Landys will step in. Will game two the idiot."
21 minutes ago
Angry Eel replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin's discussion SACK LARIE DALEY
"NSW got away with that one. Obviously the Ponga send off was the turning point and the game opened up for NSW but prior to that it was a disaster. Having one general play kicker is just suicidal putting all the pressure on Cleary. "
22 minutes ago
Michael Matthews replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin's discussion SACK LARIE DALEY
"Horeshit
That is the worst result on the back of the worst call for a send off
 "
22 minutes ago
Mallee57 replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin's discussion SACK LARIE DALEY
"Why what happened missed it "
23 minutes ago
Gucci replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin's discussion SACK LARIE DALEY
"All part of the story. Next game it will be all QLD, 6 agains and penalties to even it up. NRL doesn't want anymore dead rubbers. Some of the games this year feel so scripted it's not funny. "
23 minutes ago
Mallee57 replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin's discussion SACK LARIE DALEY
"Very very lucky to win! The weather definitely helped."
24 minutes ago
Kurupt - Your Mums Favourite Thug replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin's discussion SACK LARIE DALEY
"Can't even get the kicking tee out there"
37 minutes ago
Angry Eel replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin's discussion SACK LARIE DALEY
"Won't get charged. Not fair on the fans"
37 minutes ago
More…

Remember Rodney Hogg

Rodney was a late arrival to Test cricket at age 27. Born in Victoria he was overlooked by state selectors and moved to Adelaide to find an earlier path to Shield.He was selected and within a year he was noticed by Alan Davidson who mentioned his…

Read more…
6 Replies · Reply by Poppa 12 hours ago
Views: 192

 

<script src="https://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js"></script>
<!-- Sidebar -->
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<script>// <![CDATA[
(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});
// ]]></script>