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

The Badger replied to Johnny Suede's discussion What player each NRL club would need to cough-up to snare Lomax
"A good young player that will add value to our football program over time is ok, I reckon.
Someone like Mariner or T'oa and another decent youngster in an identified position (e.g. #6) would probably be acceptable."
4 minutes ago
Randy Handlinger replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Official Club Statement: Parramatta Eels commence legal proceedings against Zac Lomax
"I note 7 of the 20 occured in 25/26
 "
1 hour ago
Eelovution replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Official Club Statement: Parramatta Eels commence legal proceedings against Zac Lomax
"Will. Yes you are corect in that Galvin was under contract when the Eels approached him. However the circumstances were different and the Eels approach was totally legal. At that time Richardson-Tigers CEO- had offered Galvin a large increse in…"
3 hours ago
will replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Official Club Statement: Parramatta Eels commence legal proceedings against Zac Lomax
"Just playing devil's advocate here,  but wasn't Galvin still under contract with the tigers when Parra was trying to recruit him?
We are arguing that there is one rule for the storm and one rule us, but really we do it too"
4 hours ago
Hell On Eels replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Official Club Statement: Parramatta Eels commence legal proceedings against Zac Lomax
"LB, Here's the 1EE top 20 most viewed


Brett Finch on Matty Johns podcast (Fish, 2019)


Signing news (PouPou, 2019)


The Parramatta GOAT (Super, 2020)


Some big rumours circulating (Chief, 2025)


Dylan Brown open to offers (Super, 2025)


Dylan…"
7 hours ago
Kurupt - 1 Year Cuck replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Official Club Statement: Parramatta Eels commence legal proceedings against Zac Lomax
"Probably 2009 Melbourne Under Bellamy Saga"
8 hours ago
LB replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Official Club Statement: Parramatta Eels commence legal proceedings against Zac Lomax
"May I ask for what no.1 is?"
9 hours ago
Hell On Eels replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Official Club Statement: Parramatta Eels commence legal proceedings against Zac Lomax
"In two days, this blog has currently rocketed up the charts to 15th most popular blog in 1EE history, and second most popular posted in January. Well done to all the contributors! "
10 hours ago
LB replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Official Club Statement: Parramatta Eels commence legal proceedings against Zac Lomax
"It was he could not sign any Melbourne players for 2025. Yet mid 2025 it could be Storm tried poaching Lomax."
11 hours ago
Randy Handlinger replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Official Club Statement: Parramatta Eels commence legal proceedings against Zac Lomax
"yawn.  you see what suits you.. We will see
We can win in court and still get strong-armed by Vlandys to play nice, just not with Melb"
12 hours ago
Poppa replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Official Club Statement: Parramatta Eels commence legal proceedings against Zac Lomax
"LB, I am assuming that the Ryles distancing himself from Melb is for a season, not a year, technically he is past a year from him leaving Storm anyway. Also contact has already been established via are us contracting a Storm player already."
12 hours ago
Poppa replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Official Club Statement: Parramatta Eels commence legal proceedings against Zac Lomax
"Do you understand what step in and mediate means Randolph.
I agree with Anasta the NRL doesn't need to be involved, we assume those statements were made before the court case and Parramatta's statement.
The smartness of Parra's move is so the Storm…"
12 hours ago
Poppa replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Official Club Statement: Parramatta Eels commence legal proceedings against Zac Lomax
"The NRL is preparing to step in and mediate the growing contract standoff involving Zac Lomax, Parramatta and Melbourne, with the representative back remaining stuck in career limbo.
According to reports from The Sydney Morning Herald, Melbourne…"
12 hours ago
LB replied to Johnny Suede's discussion What player each NRL club would need to cough-up to snare Lomax
"I know some are laughable."
13 hours ago
Yehez replied to Johnny Suede's discussion What player each NRL club would need to cough-up to snare Lomax
"To'a? Foketi? Hubner!!????"
14 hours ago
LB replied to Johnny Suede's discussion What player each NRL club would need to cough-up to snare Lomax
"Brimson I don't mind actually. He's a risk but could be a nice piece at 6 in 2027."
14 hours ago
More…

Keaon done deal

As of Thursday, December 11, 2025, South Sydney Rabbitohs forwardKeaon Koloamatangi has reportedly agreed to a deal with the Parramatta Eels, but it is not yet officially announced by the clubs.  Soon to be announced.

Read more…
14 Replies · Reply by Poppa Jan 9
Views: 1967

ANY MORE SIGNINGS???

I've been frustrated recently about the work we have been doing in the open market. Jonah's alright for a year and JDB is solid but he's getting old. I feel we need more in the forwards and some a replacement outside back. All I have seen is links…

Read more…
0 Replies
Views: 265

 

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