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

Hell On Eels replied to Joel K's discussion Club to take up De Belin option
"TolElls, Set up a new Averillo blog if you want to discuss it. I'm not going to reopen a blog closed by moderation. Hopefully, people keep it relatively civil (as much as possible) or drift horribly off topic into personal attacks and it will stay…"
38 minutes ago
Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin replied to Joel K's discussion Club to take up De Belin option
"Well if those above JRcant get the players he needs, what choice does he have, he needs to have 30 players. "
44 minutes ago
Kurupt - Your Mums Favourite Thug replied to Hell On Eels's discussion Moderation Note: Forum Standards
"Wtf, which blog was this in?"
49 minutes ago
Nightmare Off-Season replied to Hell On Eels's discussion Moderation Note: Forum Standards
"Hey HOE,
I have a question.
So, Daz & a few others attacked Muttman with very personal attacks a few weeks back, he has since left the site which is a massive loss.
For some reason, those attacks from Daz, Bourban Man and others seemed to slip…"
2 hours ago
TolEllts replied to Joel K's discussion Club to take up De Belin option
"Admins, Why can't we reply to Averillo blog? What bad will it do the forum of the Eels executives and R&R team if Eels fans are venting their frustrations about the recruitment which unfortunately are contributing to the bad results in the field.…"
2 hours ago
Randy Handlinger replied to Joel K's discussion Club to take up De Belin option
""
2 hours ago
LB replied to Joel K's discussion Club to take up De Belin option
"At the same time he still has a percentage to meet in terms of how much the cap needs to be spent whether he likes it or not.
So if it is like "This player wants $400k and we have $900k available" well he has to spend that money anyway.
So the issue…"
3 hours ago
LB replied to Joel K's discussion Club to take up De Belin option
"They are fine players, though are they just better in better teams? Do they themselves make you better?"
3 hours ago
LB replied to Joel K's discussion Club to take up De Belin option
"Surely if MON does not go, which no idea whether he will or wont, Rogers goes."
3 hours ago
LB replied to Joel K's discussion Club to take up De Belin option
"Well true. I mean i mentioned all the Lomax stuff based on a contact and they were spot on with pretty much most of what was told. So cannot 100% discount this but still it was a friend of Jack's that said it."
3 hours ago
Coryn Hughes replied to SuperEel 22's discussion Which players would you target as a value investment?
"That's easy you'd take Bostock purely from an athletic perspective he offers more and his body type is prototypical for outside backs that go well in the game at the moment."
4 hours ago
Parrafan101 replied to Joel K's discussion Club to take up De Belin option
"Wasn't their rumours about the players disliking Jim because his inept ability to sign anyone. I guess the more things you see and hear the more and brighter things become clear. Poor MON, maybe the guy tries to sign some stars but our ceo is tight…"
4 hours ago
Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin replied to Parra-all-the-way's discussion One proud fan
"Nobody has agreed with Poppa since he bent the knee for his lovely wifey Marcia… now he only laughs when she gives tge nod"
4 hours ago
Mr 'BringBackFitzy' Analyst replied to Mallee57's discussion Eels Next Match vs Bulldogs
"Dogs team aren't happy and it seems Crichton is part of the problem."
4 hours ago
Hell On Eels replied to Hell On Eels's discussion Moderation Note: Forum Standards
"Chiefy,
Of course, mate. Totally understandable. Criticism, passion and disagreement are welcome.
It’s the below-the-belt, cheap-shot stuff that attracts moderation attention.
Likewise, ranting about moderation being unethical or in bad faith is not…"
4 hours ago
Poppa replied to Parra-all-the-way's discussion One proud fan
"Agreeing with Chiefy is fraught wth danger, he han't got anything right since Mrs Arthur put him on the "kiddies table" with the other Arthur boys. Unfortunately it was a sleep over and Chiefy wet the bed. He has had a problem with "wet dreams" ever…"
4 hours 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 on Wednesday
Views: 240

 

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