After more than 30 stern warnings to the banks not to raise their rates more than the RBA the CBA, encouraged by Wayne Swan's pouring derision on Joe Hockey for daring to suggest that the government should take action to increase banking competition, gave him the one finger salute.

Now the treasurer has had to perform another embarrassing back-flip, Wayne Swan has been forced to eat his words and look at restoring the competition destroyed by his earlier selective support of the big banks.

I could rebut this without much trouble.
Ask are our banks profit makers owned by share holders or the publicly owned things you infer.
But it is pointless.
You are not interested in discussion or even what Abbott would do in power, so in the interests of OLO I leave your sandbox to you.
I am as guilty as you if I contribute to such as your last twenty posts.

yep...aint it a grand scam
resource plundering...[the mining boom]
ie stealing money..from the people...[by paying minimum...royalties..

while the market for their plunder goes through the roof

and the non mining indusdtry...is in stasis..if not freefall
then those fools paying off over priced houses
get wacked..by a nice increase...in intrest[ursury]

and the privatised..common-waelth..[lol]..bank
is the first to up the rate
DOUBLE..if you dont mind

on top of a huge increase,..in proffit
ok credit for hockey...making a point
but govt knows..it cant change nothing

[after all govt..gave the federal reserve...and the mint
to the bankers..in the 30's..in the first place

nice bonus..all round
how do they sleep at night

oh and the shareholders is us
or rather those taking our COMPULSORY super/by the truckload

but recall..those who sit..on the boards..[managing,your..super

[who voted themselves..an average increase..[globally]..
this last year...of 54 percent]...are doing just fine

and its them govt serves in the end
while we cop..it into our back end...again

but soon the poo-poopydoo..hits the fan...big time
then govt..will HAVE to take..back the banks
and jail..the bankers

yes dream-on

make..the boss-miners..pay their way
[govt could be doing..that they are doing]

SM, you are judging this one very wrongly. Hockey has screwed
up big time in a rush to attempt to be popular. Its a shame
that a potential treasurer does not have a better understanding
of our banking system.

Fact is that anyone who agreed to comply with banking laws was
given a guarantee. The GFC created a flight to quality. Many
overseas banks cut and ran, leaving a trail of debris behind them.

Our local big 4 picked up the pieces.

As an intelligent fellow, you are quite able to study the financials
and realise that increased profits have not come from higher margins
on housing loans, but from a decrease in bad loans and a rise
in turnover as well as a rise in corporate banking as distinct from
retail banking.

Joe screwed up on this one and is relying on the rest of us not
understanding the figures, to run with his spin.

Sadly, he just ain't a Costello and its a great shame that the
liberals didn't have the brains to hang on to Costello, when they
had a chance.

So sadly we are left with our present pair of comedians, to lead
the liberals. Its time they scratched through the back bench,
to dig up a bit better talent, IMHO.

Actually Belly,

I have been watching this with some interest, with a particular eye on the strategic game play rather than the politics, and this last week I have seen yet another wedge policy implemented by the libs.

Given that the competition has been nearly eliminated by the unbalanced securities given to the big banks, there is little that the government can do in the short term, and the opposition's 9 point plan was more a long term re-balancing plan than a short term panacea, but with obvious populist appeal. It was also a gamble, as being against the Laissez faire direction of the party, it was an obvious chink that Labor attacked with gusto, but if, as happened, the banks rise was considerably higher than the RBA, then Wayne Swan would look timid and ineffectual.

What was even better, was that Wayne Swan then attacked the banks and said that he would implement a policy (to be announced in a month) that looked remarkably like Joe's 9 point plan, making him look incompetent on top of ineffectual, and validating Joe Hockey as a better treasurer.

The final cherry on top, is that the liberals just need to sit back and watch Labor take on the banks, as well as the miners, the farmers, and the asylum seekers. With the Greens blocking the rear Labor is circling the drain.

Well Yabby they are sure about to change their lack of profit from the home loans, this is their second go at increasing their margins.

I never thought I would be bitching at the salary packages of those who run successful businesses, making good profits for their shareholders, but the bankers have gone too far. Their efforts to justify their salary packages, by ripping off customers are too blatant.

My first home loan interest rate was 4.25%, & at that time everyone was receiving 3.25% on their bank accounts. Banks got along quite well on those margins, perhaps it’s time for them to try again.

I have no use for banks, & would prefer to avoid them permanently.

I know there are arguments against a new government owned bank, but I would like to suggest that we start a government debit card, to be issued to all welfare recipients. All government pensions & other welfare payments could be credited to this card.

This could get a few million people out of the hands of the banks & save a billion or more they pay in fees. Even the threat of such an attack on banks rip off profiteering may be enough to tone down their avarice, to some extent. Heaven knows it needs to be done

'The final cherry on top, is that the liberals just need to sit back and watch Labor take on the banks, as well as the miners, the farmers, and the asylum seekers. With the Greens blocking the rear Labor is circling the drain.'

Hahahaha!

That's heaps funny.

*but I would like to suggest that we start a government debit card, to be issued to all welfare recipients. All government pensions & other welfare payments could be credited to this card.*

Hasbeen, that would be wonderful! It would save the banks billions
in operating costs alone. You don't really think that banks make
money from welfare payments going in and out each week? Do you know
how much it costs to have the bank teller smile at you, or operate
that ATM?

Banks today work on an average spread of around 2.2%, which is
about half of what it was in the 80s and early 90s. On housing
loans, which are their least profitable business, their spread
is less. Right now Westpac will pay you 7% on your money over
5 years, actually charging you little more for a housing loan.

So if banks cannot recoup their increased cost of funds, they will
simply start to ration out home loans and focus on more business
loans.

Why total bank profits are up, is because their total lending
is up. Return on assets, ie the total amount on their books,
runs at around 1%, on a total figure of around 2.2 trillion$

So if they drop their interest charged by 1% or pay 1% more
for all their loans, they will effectively make zero.

Sorry, it ain't gonna happen, unless of course they can dramatically
reduce costs, with your "you beaut" scheme.

Not so Yabby.Banks with the aid of the fractional reserve banking can make 1000% on deposits.They make record profits in hard times for many.These institutions don't make anything of tangible worth.They are the money changers,the gate keepers of the medium of exchange.Why are they so powerful?

How are your bank shares going Yabby?

*How are your bank shares going Yabby?*

My bank shares are doing ok Arjay. It is precisley because
I own them, that I take so much trouble to understand the fundamentals
of Australian banking. I stand to lose the lot, if the banks
get it wrong, as in the US or Britain. You too can buy bank
shares, without even leaving your computer screen Arjay, if
you are prepared to risk your life's savings.

My bank shares are not doing as well as my BHP shares BTW.

*Banks with the aid of the fractional reserve banking can make 1000% on deposits*

They cannot Arjay, you still after all this time, don't understand
the way the banking system works. A simple check of a bank balance
sheet would clarify this, but perhaps you don't understand balance
sheets. I can't go to school for you Arjay. But keep dreaming.

http://secretofoz.com/ You'll love this doco Yabby.It puts banking in true perspective.

Do Big Banks makes political donations ? :)

Swan will be long on rhetoric and short on substance.

How degraded are the banks when Westpac will whine about 'cost of money' to them, yet then trumpet an 85% INCREASE in profit over last year ?

A POX on Westpac and it's CEO and her luxury mansion(s?) and on every other big bank.. hypocrites,parasites, scum and bottom feeders.

May I take a second to break this up.
Is it not true bank interests got higher than this under Howard?
What did he do about it?

Ah, Boazy watches channel 7 and sucks in every word, like most
gullible consumers.

http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/Westpac-interest-rates-margins-mortgage-lending-pd20101103-ATW4X?OpenDocument&src=sph

In fact Westpac's retail banking margins declined, but we won't
let the facts interfere with a good story.

Now I don't expect the Arjay or Boazys of this world, to have the
ability to understand bank figures, which they clearly don't.

But Hockey claims to want to be treasurer. He should know. If he
doesen't, then he is unqualified to be treasurer IMHO and is simply
a shin kicker.

I consider it laughable but despicable that Wayne Swan rages about the high salaries and other aspects of bank charges, and many other incidents relating to overcharging of goods and services, after all, over the last five years, he has been the treasurer, he is the one who is responsible for this being able to happen. The tax system is there specifiably for that purpose. He and the party have determined the conditions which allow the high salaries and the high cost of goods and services. If the treasurers over the last 40 years had accepted the 66.6% top tax that had been successful during the previous 20 years, and applied no tax on the incomes below about $30,000, This recession – or near recession would never have happened and our workers would not be kicked out of their homes and losing their employment, apparently they like the brown stain on their face, as they make no attempt to avoid it. And when the Liberal party or any other party is in power, they are the ones responsible. They cannot blame “Global” for every fault that the party comes up with, they have to be man enough – or women – and have the integrity and decency to accept their own blame, when it applies, and try to ensure that our workers are not disadvantaged as they have been by the stupid or corrupt people who have brought this derogatory situation into the lives of our workers, by those people who are supposed to be ensuring good management of our country and good economy.

"""
Is it not true bank interests got higher than this under Howard?
What did he do about it?
"""

If we're going to quote history, I'm glad he didn't give us a recession we had to have!

Terry McCrann on the herald sun reports "Westpac took a hit. Only a small one, but a hit nevertheless."

Hmm, I wish I could have a business that takes a hit and still returns 6.4 billion in profit, one can dream I suppose.
Thieves they are, nothing but thieves!

*Hmm, I wish I could have a business that takes a hit and still returns 6.4 billion in profit, one can dream I suppose*

You sure can RawMustard. You can invest those hard earned savings
and buy bank shares. Given that Westpac is capitalised at around
70 billion, your return will be a bit over bank interest, but with
alot more risk involved.

They will even send you a detailed, annual report. On page 87
you'll read that things are going backwards in the retail market,
as the cost of finance is increasing faster then what the bank
can charge.

You'll also read that as some of the bad loans allowed for last
year, did not all go bad, the bank made significant extra profit
this year. So next year those magic figures simply won't be there.

So there you go Rawmustard, your wish and dream can come true,
if you are prepared to take the risk and cop abuse from those
who simply don't understand the figures.

Any body want to join me with a LARGE sign outside the Westpac 'bunker' saying "Robber Barrons and their Mansions" :)

Photo of WP ceo's new digs included.

Standard variable rates under Howard only exceed today's rates in the last year when the economy was roaring, unemployment was less than 4% (close to zero in real terms) and the two choices to reduce inflation were either to raise taxes, (which in the light of a record surpluses was not warranted) or allow interest rates to increase.

Here we have higher unemployment and a more sluggish economy, but with fiscal debt, and continued stimulus spending, of course rates are increasing.

*Photo of WP ceo's new digs included*

Ah Boaz, given your history as an intellectual light weight on OLO,
we could hardly expect more from you!

Fact is that Kelly started off as a South African bank teller.
She worked her way up and despite being a migrant and a female,
people recognised her talent and she worked her way up over time.
All credit to her for her achievements.

Today she leads a 70 billion $ company and shareholders clearly
recognise that a gold watch is not going to do it, to win her
undivided attention and loyalty.

What she is paid is down to shareholders and the board, it is
private money and has nothing to do with customers.
Westpac competes on the basis of products supplied to the
marketplace, not on the basis of staff salaries. You clearly
are not aware of that.

So you get your knickers in a twist about what private companies
pay their employees, yet seemingly say nothing when the Victorian
Govt coughs up millions of taxpayer funds, to pay Tiger Woods
to play a game of golf here.

Boaz, I can only conclude, you remain confused as ever!

dont blow me a swanie river
blow me down..a swanie river swan diver
cant find evidence of collusion

as the swan.dive.. turns into a duck..dive

the oversight group...aaac?..[that cant find collusion ]
of bankers..rigging the intrest rate..!

must*..not know how*..the fed reserve..BORED
is populated...BY BANKERS...lol

cant see..the forrest..for the trees?
old chap?

or cant.. find the intrest..
to get to....the actual colluders..
colluding..for their own intrests..?

and our..as high as the market can bare..intrest rates

it aint..half bleeding obvious...old chap

lets find-out..how much bankers..
are giving to political parties...eh..ol boy?

bah..you an joe...both got..the same boss's

History is still truth Howard never would have introduced Hockeys wish list.
This country is better for the ALP/Lib Nat bank reforms.
Some here appear to want to see bank profits controlled but would scream if they had to tell profit margins in their concerns.
Yabby has it right, rather than policy's sections of coalition kick shins.
In time Turnbull will be both leader and treasurer in place of Hockey and Abbott, a problem for Labor.

"""
You sure can RawMustard. You can invest those hard earned savings
and buy bank shares.
"""

Ah I would Yabby, but that low life that no one voted for in Victoria has stolen all my hard earned money :( Now there's a topic for discussion when it comes to thieves!

I get the impression that Australia is no longer regarded as an advanced nation, but is subsiding into a “3rd world”country. I get this impression because of the wholesale selling of our national resources, and the import of all our required manufactured goods. The prices of our resources is determined by the purchasers in foreign countries, not by a responsible person in our own country and they accept that the negotiators in our country are persons of low intelligence and probably low integrity, which of course, they are, I doubt if people can genuinely disagree with that assessment. It has gone well past the stage of accusing the Labor, Liberal or the LNP, It is all of them. I can see no sign of intelligence in the manner of their pursuing – any of them, in what they consider, the path to a profitable successful future for our country, their decision s are deplorable. The trade for our non renewable, non value added resources has been manipulated by our large companies, so we receive goods from China, Japan, Germany and many other countries, goods we used to manufacture here in Australia, ourselves. No party, especially Labor and Liberal can claim that they have had nothing to do with the destruction of our industries or farming economy, or of our total economy. Our position of the poor workers and very rich CEO's, has been created by the lowering of the top tax from 66.6% in the period from 1950 to1970, that was with the expertise of a Liberal person, Harold Holt. But no party, Liberal or Labor have had the integrity or maybe courage to continue that direction, although it also needed a change to the level of no tax, which should have been about $30,000 today to bring reasonable living conditions to our low income earners and small business. Both Labor and Liberal talk big but do little in that regard.

Could we mix some cyanide with that crow.

merv09 >>. It has gone well past the stage of accusing the Labor, Liberal or the LNP, It is all of them. I can see no sign of intelligence in the manner of their pursuing – any of them<<

Well said merv, their is no nationalism or vision for OUR nation from any of them. They are but painted ships on a painted ocean, they go nowhere fastened by a global economic caliphet and the lie that is globalization.

Merv09, I've read your points before, about returning to the good
old 50s to 70s, which you view with nostalgia.

There are in fact good reasons not to. The world has changed.

Australia rode on the sheeps back then and eventually the sheep
collapsed from all the weight. Keating was correct, we were heading
for being a banana republic.

Its a complex argument, but I'll try and keep the points as brief
as possible.

If we increase the tax on the rich, as you suggest, the rich can
afford to simply move elsewhere, be it Hong Kong, Singapore or
wherever. Lets take Maquarie Bank. They don't need to be based
in Sydney, it could be anywhere. The people who work there, pay
a huge amount of tax. Charge them too much, you will get no tax
at all. Capital today is global, it moves easily.

Secondly, manufacturing today is increasing specialised, with
specialised machinery, huge investments and volume of scale required.
So to make say a computer locally, might force you as a consumer to
pay 10'000$. Could you still afford to buy one?

If the poor were forced to buy Australian made clothes, shoes etc,
do you think they could still afford to dress their children?

So we've gone to market economics, as part of the global market.
Consumers have had a huge benefit, with better and cheaper products.
Real wages have increased too. Australians are better off then
ever before.

Houses are more expensive, but that is political, not economic.
To build a house is not the problem, land release to do so is,
as town planners try to force us into high density living, rather
then urban sprawl. Australia is not short of land, yet today its
by far the biggest cost in buying a house

You make it sound so wonderful Yabby, but what your failing to tell people is that your utopia is only possible because of the exploitation of workers in other countries and the removal of personal freedoms from the poor here to better themselves.

In your world it's ok to have people(Including children) working for nothing and being beaten for not performing with no protection so that you can buy a cheap computer.

I'm starting to wonder what moral compass you might be following.
I wonder, have you ever visited an industrial area in Asia?

It's not quite like that I'm afraid, RawMustard.

>>...what your failing to tell people is that your utopia is only possible because of the exploitation of workers in other countries<<

Lifting half a billion people out of poverty can hardly be described as exploitation, surely?

http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90776/90883/6961967.html

and

http://content.undp.org/go/newsroom/2010/november/helen-clark-africa-china-poverty-reduction-and-development-conference.en

China is the country that has predominantly been providing us with the cheap products that have allowed us to continue our pampered existence. And they seem to have benefitted from doing so, wouldn't you say?

>>...and the removal of personal freedoms from the poor here to better themselves.<<

Not sure I follow you on that one, what freedoms are you referring to?

>>In your world it's ok to have people(Including children) working for nothing and being beaten for not performing with no protection so that you can buy a cheap computer.<<

In your world, it is ok to have people (including children) go short of clothes, food - and computers, of course - for absolutely no discernible purpose.

>>I'm starting to wonder what moral compass you might be following. I wonder, have you ever visited an industrial area in Asia?<<

Yes, I have.

The people work very hard there, and earn enough to feed their families, and even start to think about buying some of the luxuries that we have taken for granted for so long. Like a car. And a TV. And a computer.

Here's another thing, RawMustard.

They are immensely proud of what their country has achieved since joining the world economy some thirty years ago.

And in my book, they have every right to be.

I'm sorry Pericles, but I've heard that song before and the tune is kinda off. And your links are nothing but spin, one from a man with the integrity of a snake oil salesman and the other from an organisation full of social misfits hell bent on controlling the world.

I understand the position your arguing from and to that I agree, but it's not how it's playing out and it's not what I have seen with my own eyes and experienced with my own being.

I've dealt with multinationals in both China, and the Philippines and I can tell you that their wish to lift poor people out of poverty was the last thing on their minds. These giants had no time for improving working conditions of their workers and did everything they could (together with support of their governments) to prevent workers from organising and protesting their human rights. It was all about keeping the status quo and creating riches for a select few.

It was really easy for them to show that's not how they work. They subcontract out the dirty bits to smaller, more slimier operators not in the lime light and thereby creating the illusion they're all squeaky clean.

I don't need to supply links on this topic to back my stance. As I've said, I've been there and experienced it for myself. I even lived in the Philippines for a year to get an operation up and running. In the end I pulled out I was so appalled at their attitudes towards their workers and anyone they felt was beneath them.

cont...

"""
Not sure I follow you on that one, what freedoms are you referring to?
"""

The freedom for the small guy here to start a business without having to wade through so much red tape, rules and regulations he has no time to concentrate on making his said business work.(which the others don't have to follow by the way), one trip up and he's history. The odds for a small guy here in Australia are so stacked against him it's a miracle if he even gets off the ground.

For that one in a million - that through sheer determination does manage to get off the ground, he's just buried over night by some unscrupulous slime ball here that takes his ideas to china and then floods the market with exact copies at a fraction of the price, a price that can never be matched here because the rules are stacked in favour of the big guys operating out of said countries!

Oh and sorry Shadow Minister for hijacking your thread, but I guess it's all kinda related.

Rawmustard, I am sorry to hear about your personal misfortune.
I also acknowledge that business is tough, far tougher then many
realise, especially Govt bureaucrats with a big stick, who commonly
don't have a clue and are far more intent on stamping their own
career on everyone else's shoulders. They do far more damage
then they realise.

but this:

*I've dealt with multinationals in both China, and the Philippines and I can tell you that their wish to lift poor people out of poverty was the last thing on their minds*

That may well be so. For life in Asia is far tougher then life
in mollycoddled Australia. The rules of the jungle still apply
in many places. But what cannot be denied is the big picture and
in that Pericles is absolutaly correct. Hundreds of millions of
Chinese have indeed dragged themselves out of poverty, wheras 30
years ago, many of them were starving. I doubt if too many would
prefer to return to those times.

Things might be rough, but they are improving. That is the issue.

Ah but Yabby, their improvement has come at our loss. 500 million out of poverty there, 500 million into poverty in western developed nations. No more out of poverty, just evened out so as to make it look like good is being done.

*500 million out of poverty there, 500 million into poverty in western developed nations*

Rawmustard the total employed in western developed nations, would
be less then 500 million. So where are all these people living
in poverty?

You mean the people of Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong,
etc, who have all powered their way out of poverty?

Did you mean the Americans, where 80% of the population are still
employed, earning some of the highest wages on the planet and leave
the dirty work to the Mexicans?

Or did you mean the Australians, where the average wage is around
1200$ a week and they are better off then ever before?

Show me where these 500 millions are, who were not poor before.
I would love to know.

The quality of comment in OLO our lost children section at least has dropped like a stone.
Sonofagun talks of poisoning our leader,raw mustard revels in the view he/she is hot stuff and wages war on those who disagree.
Fact is we no longer own banks, as in any business they exist for profit.
We seem to think people are lined up and forced to borrow money by these evil beggars.
But ignore those who hold shares as greedy.
And that after decades of bank reforms, remember our banks stood while others fell, we want what? American style banks?
Or do we want to introduce the Islamic system of banking.
What next? maybe regulate petrol prices, food, the very cost of housing, lets put a lid on silly unwise uninformed comments too.

Yabby:>> Secondly, manufacturing today is increasing specialised, with specialised machinery, huge investments and volume of scale required. So to make say a computer locally, might force you as a consumer to pay 10'000$.
If the poor were forced to buy Australian made clothes, shoes etc,
do you think they could still afford to dress their children?<<

Well Yabby I again find you defending those "with" and denigrating those "without", no surprise there.

Re your "informed" views on the positives of the world economy to the Aussie mum struggling to clothe the nippers, let me educate you on why it is so.

From the late 1950's technology decimated the workers on the factory floor, but productivity and output soared. The Union movements of all first world nations demanded better reward for the "few" left to run the machines and the result was the world wide union vs management strikes and tribulations of the early 1970's.

Having had enough of the labor unrest the "Money" then conspired with the UN Industrial Development Organization the World Bank and the IMF to cobble together the Lima Agreement, a protocol that set guidelines and targets for a "new economic order". This "new order" simply put sent all manufacturing to cheaper climes and dismantled national trade protection policies.

These commercial doyens of humanity then turned subsistence farmers into subsistence factory workers, and that is sharing the wealth according to the UN and the Money. Now what of that poor Aussie mum who according to you should be grateful for the cheap imports. If she lives in the mining boom stricken WA as of August this year 23% of kids are unemployed. If she lives in Vic then 28% of the kids are unemployed and I won't burden you with the NSW number. Thank god for fast food outlets and the service industry for youth unemployment would be 70% without them.

Yes Yabby we are certainly lucky imports are cheap, as cheap as your factional rhetoric.

Belly my friend tis not only Swan for the cyanide, I have enough for both sides of politics, I despise both sides equally and the lawyer festooned pits that are our houses of governments.

*Well Yabby I again find you defending those "with" and denigrating those "without", no surprise there.*

No so sonofgloin. But I do sometimes take the time to explain how
modern economics works, for as we can see on OLO, many simply
don't understand it and jump to conspiracy theories. I just made
it my business to learn about this stuff, as anyone with a bit of
patience can do.

*Thank god for fast food outlets and the service industry for youth unemployment would be 70% without them.*

Sheesh, adults are clearly failing them, by not explaining to them
that they need skills.

http://www.immi.gov.au/skilled/general-skilled-migration/pdf/critical-skills-list.pdf

That is just a few that are urgently required. Plumbers, electricians,
welders, accountants, chefs, all urgently required too. We can't
just import skilled people forever, we need to train those teenagers.
They need to want to be trained and realise that there is more to
life then flipping burgers.

A young kid I know, freshly trained in metalwork, applied for a
mining job. Starting salary 96'000$ a year. Not bad for a 20 year old.

Yabby:>> No so sonofgloin. But I do sometimes take the time to explain how modern economics works, for as "we" can see on OLO, many simply don't understand it and jump to conspiracy theories.<<

Fellow OLO compatriot Yabby, who is the "we" that can adjudicate on the ability of the OLO contributor to understand how economics works? Obviously you are placing your flag firmly in the "I understand economics" camp and all your detractors in the "have not got a clue" camp.

Everybody on this forum takes part in the cycle of production distribution and the consumption of goods and services, we are economic geniuses. But to put it in a nutshell, the Money wants laissez faire, the economists differ between frugal and Malthus/ Keynes consume approach.

This reply like all your others is a sham rhetorical response, intimating that those who have experienced better are deluding themselves and things are better than they realize. Their lack of understanding of global commerce leaves them ignorant of the true picture.

You’re not ignorant Yabby so you will understand these figures.

For most of the postwar period Australia’s national household savings were around 23 percent of GDP, but by 1991-92 this figure had fallen to 16 per cent, it is now struggling to hit 4 percent of GDP, and we owe 90 BILLION to foreigners....Fiscal yourself around that Yabby.

A puzzling response, RawMustard.

>>I'm sorry Pericles, but I've heard that song before and the tune is kinda off. And your links are nothing but spin<<

Are you disagreeing that 500 million people have been lifted out of poverty in China? Those links were two out of very many, all of which agreed on the number, so name-calling the two I selected for you "one from a man with the integrity of a snake oil salesman and the other from an organisation full of social misfits hell bent on controlling the world" isn't going to change the facts, I'm afraid.

What puzzles me is why you think it is such a bad thing to do.

>>I don't need to supply links on this topic to back my stance<<

That's something of an admission, I would have thought...

And how exactly does this remark of yours, complaining of the...

>>...removal of personal freedoms from the poor here to better themselves<<

relate to the...

>>...freedom for the small guy here to start a business without having to wade through so much red tape<<

That's "removing freedom from the poor"? Oh, puh-leeeze. I thought you meant something serious.

I suspect that you may simply be re-living a personal experience, if so, I feel sad for you. But the reality is that while getting a business off the ground here is difficult, and successive governments don't make it any easier, that has nothing at all to do with "personal freedoms" with which we are all equally endowed.

This is also somewhat inconsistent: you began by telling Yabby...

>>...your utopia is only possible because of the exploitation of workers in other countries<<

But now you have come full circle to assert that...

>>...their improvement has come at our loss. 500 million out of poverty there, 500 million into poverty in western developed nations<<

I think you may be getting a little confused.

It happens.

Sonofgloin, we owe a great deal more then 90 billion lol. Of
the 2.2 trillion $ that our banks have on their books, hundreds
of billions is owed to foreigners.

Indeed, after the war, people had known hard times, they put
something away for a rainy day. Not any more for many. With the
great economic conditions and the teat of govt ready to rescue them,
people are living it up like there is no tomorrow, borrowing to the
hilt for houses and loading up credit cards. 20 billion $ a year alone
is gambled away on the pokies etc.

The great housing bubble has good underlying tax reasons and so
have poor cash savings. Higher interest rates are the outcome of
all this.

Put your money in the bank at say 5%, inflation takes 3-4% and
marginal tax rates on the full 5% can swallow another 2% or so.
Net result is people go backwards saving, as inflation is not allowed
for by the tax office.

So what do so many do? As soon as they have a bit of cash, they
buy an investment property, negative gear it, and long term
come out in front, protected from inflation, saving alot of
tax in the process.

The net result is there for all to see. Massive investment in
housing, some of the world's most expensive houses, limited cash
savings, our banks going cap in hand to overseas money lenders,
to finance it all.

I've raised this point many times on OLO, but nobody cares. Now
that interest rates are being squeezed upwards, they are starting
to squeal. Shoot the messenger is the new game in town, for
that is all that banks are, in this case.

Yabby:>> Sonofgloin, we owe a great deal more then 90 billion lol. Of
the 2.2 trillion $ that our banks have on their books, hundreds
of billions is owed to foreigners.<<

I was refering to Commonwealth debt, the amount of tax money that must be paid back, not personal lines of credit.

Yabby:>> The net result is there for all to see. Massive investment in housing, some of the world's most expensive houses, limited cash savings<<

"Around 70 per cent of Australian households own property. The rate of ownership has remained remarkably stable at this level for over four decades according to data by the Australian Bureau of Statistics in its Census of Population and Housing and its Survey of Income and Housing 2009(SIH)."

The same percentage of us own homes, but we have nothing in the bank. How you spout rhetoric that defies the facts is beyond me, but then again at the last federal election I learnt that almost half the population are imbeciles, so your thought process really should be no shock, forget I mentioned it Yabby. Give me the same government based historical data to support your thoughts on how things have never been better please rather than regurgitated spin.

yabby..<<..Or did you mean the Australians,..where the average wage is around..1200$,,a week and they are better off then ever before?>>

oh dear...mr howhards line..[corr..it aint half cbvious..guv]
the abverage..person..should be getting..the average wage

but golly gee..they dont
mainly because a few..[like your 20 year old..
get over their fair share]...think of the many...serving your food..for 13 to 15 dollars..an hour

the..'average'..working slob..is luckey to get 500..
[if that]..after tax...and these are..by far..the many

the few dragging home 3 times that..do much to..distort the numbers
[thats why i hate ..the use of average wage..to make a point]

im not getting into the extra study they puty in
or having to work in the never never..[or peeing it all against the wall]..

the fact is the average..worker..
gets far below the average..wage..

[and yes thats all they deserve]

its still a cheap shot..
to use the average/wage..to score points

grow-up...howard needed to decieve..the great unwashed
here at least be honest..

the average wage..is a media spin/line
that allows..simplistic throwaway..lines..
that generalise..to make particular points

*The same percentage of us own homes, but we have nothing in the bank.*

Speak for yourself, sonofgloin. Last time I checked, households
had around 460 billion in bank deposits, which divided by 10 million
households would work out to 46k$, if my back of the envelope
calculation is correct.

But that is not nearly enough to cover the excessive borrowing
habits of the rest.

You've also ignored the many people who own a second home and
a third home, huge amounts of them, just as I had mentioned.

As to houses, 40 years ago it was a 3 by 1, 12 square fibro.
Now we live in the world's biggest houses, nearly twice that
size. McMansions are common. Upgrading the house makes sense,
for any profits are all tax free, unlike bank interest, where
the govt robs people blind. So that is what people do

oh and the shareholders is us
or rather those taking our COMPULSORY super/by the truckload

One Under God so many many issues you raise and have written about over the years on OLO [reading and catching up on your contributions]all true and years later!

Thank you from me, am profoundly grateful.

Yes, 'Banks'[ripped off on fees left right and centre over the years] and Super?....mine almost gone according to my statements. $19,000 I found on one statement four years ago, from one company; I was elated as a person who had won lotto! According to this year's statement it now reads: $177.00 LOL. Broke all my life from crooks stealing my hard earned lowly income!. I phoned and emailed them to no avail. "It must have been lost when other people lost their Super a few years back".

No pension or long service leave later for me [I reckon the pension will disappear in a few years or be worthless anyway]in terms of not rising in line with inflation, so that just leaves the couple of books i wrote years ago, to be printed and marketed.

Not playing victim as health and safety are the main priorities in life OUG.

I wish you too would write a book and I will be the first to buy it!

Sorry about this we are unique superannuation is OUR business not the banks.
Other please consider, my job saw me beg people to take control of their super.
Some have 4 or 5 different accounts, join them up please.
Why pay fees on every one, slackness not understanding your own best interests is harmful.
How many know some bosses get kick backs for putting your super in selected funds?
How many understand some funds still charge exit fees up to all CONTRIBUTIONS?
Banks are the last place my super would lay in shares or property out gain them every time.
Recent changes to super laws are better but our governments must stop the theft of unknowing victims who coast through life not caring till its gone.
I helped hundreds maybe thousands get the super in to one fund and most big funds are industry not for profit low fee ones look at YOUR super today.

"""
Are you disagreeing that 500 million people have been lifted out of poverty in China?
"""

Such a subjective number, I'll never know. The point I was making is we get told by people I don't trust to tell me the weather. I didn't see it with my own eyes.

"""
What puzzles me is why you think it is such a bad thing to do.
"""

On the contrary, I think its a noble thing to do (lift people out of poverty), but not at the expense of destroying lives in other nations. Yabby say's we've never had it better. Who's this we? Tell that to all my friends that have lost their businesses(their dignity) and are now mowing lawns for a living. Ask them if they've never had it better? Tell their wives that were happy to stay at home and raise their children in a stable family environment and now must work 40 hours a week to pay for their incredible living standard; and that's the ones that could get a 40 hour job. Remember you only have to work 10 hours a week now to be above the poverty line according to our illustrious masters!
And an Average pay of $1200 a week, Oh, puh-leeeze!

And people wonder why our youths are more frequently drinking and stabbing each other!

"""
I suspect that you may simply be re-living a personal experience, if so, I feel sad for you.
"""

Spare me your sympathy, Pericles, I don't need it nor want it. I just want a level playing field for my fellow Aussies. Is that too much to ask?

cont...

"""
That's "removing freedom from the poor"? Oh, puh-leeeze. I thought you meant something serious.

But the reality is that while getting a business off the ground here is difficult, and successive governments don't make it any easier, that has nothing at all to do with "personal freedoms" with which we are all equally endowed.
"""

Are you serious? How is it not removing freedoms when they (our illustrious masters) tie a ball and chain around both our ankles, while our competitors are given a free run?
Shackles are shackles no matter how you want to spin them!

And we're only equally endowed as long as we start a business that doesn't compete with others that have no government handicap placed on them.

Lets also not forget that if we embrace our new found exploitable populous, we're labeled as capitalist dogs here at home, it seems there's no winning, that's not freedom if you ask me!

"""
I think you may be getting a little confused. It happens.
"""

No Pericles, not confused at all, just totally P'd Off!

And are you denying that those poor souls in those countries are not being exploited?

Yabby:>> Speak for yourself, sonofgloin. Last time I checked, households had around 460 billion in bank deposits, which divided by 10 million households would work out to 46k$, if my back of the envelope calculation is correct.<<

Yabby you are a simple soul, being unable to correlate a fact based argument re our national savings. Let me re post my research re national savings that you obviously did not read but had the temerity to respond to.

"For most of the postwar period Australia’s national household savings were around 23 percent of GDP, but by 1991-92 this figure had fallen to 16 per cent, it is now struggling to hit 4 percent of GDP."

Yabby regardless of your simplistic attempt to exhibit that every household in Australia has a lazy $46k under the mattress, the above numbers refute your delusion of how prosperous the average Aussie is. Our household savings totaled just under a quarter of our GDP thirty years ago..... Now we have 4% of GDP total savings.

UPDATE: Yabby those numbers I trotted out were from 2009. You prompted me to go back to the ABS and look at the 2010 numbers, quote:

"The Household saving ratio was 1.5% in seasonally adjusted terms in the June quarter 2010. The trend estimate for household saving was 2.2% in the quarter."

Yabby we are worse off than a measly 12 months ago. Well I and the ABS think so....but given all you say is spin and deflection, this won’t give you any clarity. But at least I have discovered that I will learn nothing meaningful from what you say.

Shadow Minister, I made my comment on Swan, but while we are talking controlling the banks, what of Samuels. What sort of real control can the pollies exert while this dishonorable calls the shots.

Samuels has not delivered once for the protagonist when the big end of town was the defendant. The corporates that control our food, oil, utilities, and banks always come out as pristine as new borns.

Regarding real outcomes delivered to the people, Canada has enacted an act that has seen a rapid growth in small business:

"Section 50(1)(b) of the Act prohibits selling products in one area of Canada at prices lower than in another with the intention or effect of eliminating competition or a competitor. The Competition Bureau has established Predatory Pricing Guidelines defining what is considered to be unreasonably low pricing."

Small business took less than 12 months to return as a viable community wealth segment and the on flow to the domestic economy is tangible. This is the minimum Samuels could do so everything we eat and put in the car does not come from one of two in the market.

St George was the last straw for me when it came to this lubricant for the monopolies who heads the obviously corrupt ACCC.

Sonofgloin, it seems like your own research is confusing you.
For you are confusing terms and drawing wrong conclusions.

Australia is basically a trillion $ economy.

We have personal savings from the past, which sit as investments
etc.

Then we have a savings rate, which is the % of GDP each year that
we actually save.

Just like the Americans, in great times people spent more then
they earned, for they stopped worrying about that rainy day and
blew it one way or another. Our savings rate dropped down to
around 1% at one time, like the Americans.

Interestingly, as the GFC set in, Americans stopped living it up,
cut their waste of money and started saving again, ready for that
rainy day. Their savings rate increased to 4%. I'd be surprised
if Aussies didn't do the same, but would have to check.

All this has nothing to do with the money that sensible Australians
have squirreled away in bank accounts over many years, which is
the 460 billion that I mentioned.

Do not blame me, if you get confused.

Yabby:> Do not blame me, if you get confused<<

.......lol

Fair enough Songofgloin, I'll hold your hand and make it even
easier for you.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/banks-sit-on-record-holdings-as-wary-consumers-save/story-e6frg8zx-1225899237294

Now even you can figure out roughly how much money people have in
banks and even you can find out how large the yearly Australian
GDP is, hint around a trillion.

So even you can figure out that your last claims were in
fact a crock.

But of course you would never admit it.

Our banks are owned by share holders not the government.
Those who scream the most are on record, saying deregulation was good for this country.
Not all banks, yet, maybe never again, put their rates up by the same amount.
They do actively compete with one another.
Controlling bank interest rates, is Socialism, what else must we impose the wishes of some on?
Fact is, far too many unthinking people are being had by opposition tin can rattling.
IF in power Abbott/Hockey would NEVER control bank interest rates.
America found, and nearly bought the world to its knees, giving low interest loans to those who could not pay, is not ever going to work.
If you can not afford the costs do not buy it, but do not forget mums and dads also invest in banks.

Yabby:>> Now even you can figure out roughly how much money people have in banks and even you can find out how large the yearly Australian GDP is, hint around a trillion.<<

Yabby given your premise is "we are better off than previously" the current GDP as opposed to the historic GDP of the last thirty years is not relevant. Whether the gross number is trillions or zillions the average household has a smaller percentage in savings of it than at any other time post WWII. So GDP has gone through the roof and we have 2% of it in savings that is one tenth of the savings percentage of GDP of thirty years ago.

I understand your point that 2% of a trillion is a load more than 2% of 250 billion (GDP FOR 1980) but when our economy was in the billions we had over 20% of it in household savings which still beats the net $ amount per household held in savings at present, trillion dollar economy or not.

*and we have 2% of it in savings that is one tenth of the savings percentage of GDP of thirty years ago.*

We don't have 2% of it in savings, we save 2% of it. We could save
more, we decide to spend it.

Sonofgloin, you are making the fatal mistake of thinking that
people save more when they earn more. They save more when they
feel they need to save more. If you look at the Chinese savings
rate, despite their very low wages, they still save a substantial
amount of their wages, the quote is often around 30% or so.

http://www.gfmag.com/tools/global-database/economic-data/10396-household-saving-rates.html

If you scroll down to the table of the savings rates of 31 countries,
the difference has nothing to do with rising incomes, everything to
do with culture. Many of these countries have become richer, yet
their savings rate dropped.

In the 60s, people remembered the war, they remembered the depression.
They never had social welfare, as they have today. So they saved more.

I employed a young 17 year old teenager from a farming background in
the 90s. Her parents instilled in her that same savings culture.
Whilst her girlie friends bought dresses and cds, she saved every
penny. One day that some girl came to work, complaining she was
short of cash. Eventually I found out why. She'd bought a whole
pile of Westpac shares for 3 bucks each, cause that is what mum
and dad had taught her. She still has those shares, they are now
worth 23$ each. If a 17 year old can do it, so can the rest of you.

Yabby again you deliver nothing substantial except a half cocked story about a girl who had astute folks.

The following comes from the ABS.

IN 1980 THE AVERAGE WAGE WAS $27K
IN 2009 THE AVERAGE WAGE WAS $50K.....+85%
IN 1980:
BREAD was 54c, $3-30 in 2009....+500%
MILK was 63c, $3-50 in 2009....+500%
SUGAR was 90c, $3-20 in 2009....+200%
BUTTER was $1-00, $3-40 in 2009...+200%
POTATO was 36c, $2-20 in 2009...+300%
*Source: ABS Average Retail Prices of Selected Items, Eight Capital Cities

Yabby these staples influence the price of everything produced, and I won't even touch on oil prices over that 30 year spread.

Wages up by eighty five percent and the basic food items up by multiple hundreds, by the way are these products as cost effective as the cheap imports you mentioned as being a "corporate gift" to the struggling Aussie mum, as previously regurgitated by you in your defense of the world economy.

Sonofgloin, given your innacuracy to read figures, I'd be
happy to read the URl that you are quoting from. So feel free
to post it.

All statistics that I have seen, have shown that real wages have
kept well ahead of the CPI.

Belly given your political leanings I am a little surprised that you see the current banking system here in Oz as ok. But then I recalled it was Paul Keating who deregulated and floated the currency.

My issue is that 13 trading licenses for foreign banks went into the deal, and they were only interested in commercial lending, the cream at the top, so the local banks merged and preyed on the small business and household. Keating would not issue 13 new licenses to Australian owned corporations or consortiums who wanted to get into the usury business, he chooses to send currency os via the 13 new foreign leaches. Home grown leaches would have given competition across the most important banking sector, the one that mums and dads as you say have a stake in.

Keating floats the dollar in 83 with home loan rates of 10 % and in 89 it hits a historical high of 18%. Belly the most unsavory aspect to this is that Keating is a Labor man, deregulation would have been better suited to the Liberals “money over the masses” track record, but it was also Keating who first broached a GST undoubtedly to screw more money from us. Is this your Labor party, anti people but pro money and trendy causes.

Yabby I have posted "from the ABS" each time. I find all this information in five minutes each time I respond to you, I suggest you do the same and if you find I have gilded the lilly in regard the the ABS stats let me know.

http://www.ausstats.abs.gov.au/ausstats/free.nsf/0/72525342F0994FA6CA25750C0013CB6D/$File/63020_MAR1980.pdf

Average weekly earnings 1980 march quarter, 245 bucks a week.
As I thought.

Yabby my unreserved apologies on the errant 1980 wage figure. I must have dreamt that one up, rather than 27k it should be 15k, that makes the disparity percentage less and my argument on these consumables less valid in regard to impact......Sonofgloin.