Dream on Mirko, it isn't likely to happen.

David

The biggest problem with that is, if you earn $100,000 / yr You are regarded as on the bread line. So the bank would be left with no profit at all.

Ralph Norris's claim of one percent return on assets is really deliberately understating the return. The assets Norris speaks about are mainly the amounts owed to banks by people and companies who have borrowed money from the bank. The return should really be stated as a return on net assets. Stated the correct way the return on net assets is obscene and of the order of 20-30%.

As stated in another article today the banking systems were the principal cause of the GFC and the housing bubble in the USA and elsewhere. The Australian banks were only rescued from the consequences of their own stupidity by the Commonwealth Governments customer guarantees.

Limiting the recourse of the banks to the realisable value of the property mortgaged would be an excellent step to limit the banks' future profligacy and stupidity. I am reminded of a conversation I once had with a competent accountant. He stated, "I did accountancy because I wasn't good enough at mathematics to tackle science or engineering", (subjects which require real thinking ability and competence).

The crime of a thief breaking into a bank is that of diminishing the amount of money that bank can lend.

From this standpoint, banks’ CEOs who overpay themselves, can be equated to thieves so grossly stupid as to be insensitive to the damage they cause to the banking system that feeds them.

Probably they are so busy running the Bank and caring about the siphoned money that they cannot devote one single minute to consider the consequences or their conduct.

They share the maniacal addiction of gamblers and public utilities CEOs.

They need help, the help needed by anyone that manages the wealth of a community.

They should be persuaded to follow the example of our politicians and public administrators who always give us a transparent account of how they spend our tax-money and rate-money.

left to their own devices, banks have not only the capacity to enrich a community but to destroy it as well, as witness the last GFC.
If it was the Australian government which rescued the banks from their own stupidity and greed, maybe it behooves them now to accept a few restrictions on their unbridled financial shenanigans.

A 1% tax on profits over a billion is the very utter least that the Treasury can demand of them as an equaliser impost to house the homeless, feed the hungry and educate the ignorant.

This nation owes that to itself, otherwise the notion of "a fair go" which our forefathers fought and died for will be no more than an empty hollow and hypocritical slogan.

This thread seems to be a socialist wet dream.

The assets either belong to creditors or shareholders, for whom the banks need to provide returns. The 20-30% would be fantastic if it were true, but again it exists in the fantasy world of the left wing student.

Top notch CEOs help make their companies huge profits, are highly in demand, and can move to another highly paid job easily.