Quote:

In government, Labor's treasurer Wayne Swan repeatedly rejected calls for an inquiry into Australia's financial system, arguing it didn't need to be fixed. The Murray inquiry into the financial system and the Turnbull government's response shows how wrong he was. Banks not only need tougher rules about how much capital they hold to back loans, they also need controls on the leverage behind those loans, a recommendation endorsed by the Turnbull government. Australian workers were being pushed into default superannuation funds that mightn't always have provided the best value for money. David Murray has recommended, and Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has endorsed, the need for a competitive tender to determine default funds, removing the power from employers who mightn't always do the best thing by their workers. And it will make sure all workers have a choice of super funds, something not yet available more than two decades after super became compulsory. The Abbott government had already endorsed a Labor proposal and Murray recommendation that banks not be required to pay a "deposit tax" in order to receive support in emergencies. Instead, emergency finance will be funded by a levy on all banks after the event should it ever be needed. Labor and its predecessors never got around to defining the purpose of super. Is it for wealth accumulation, is it for retirement incomes, is it a device for income smoothing? Murray has recommended that the government work out the purpose and enshrine it in legislation, something the Turnbull government is going to ask the Productivity Commission to help it do. It'll go further than Labor had in creating an enhanced register of financial advisors that will enable would-be customers to see whether they have been banned or cautioned for breaching the code of ethics. And it will legislate to ban excessive credit card surcharges, of the kind imposed by Qantas and Cabcharge. What it won't do – its only wholesale rejection of a Murray recommendation – is remove the loophole that allows self-managed super funds to borrow. Adopting that very reasonable recommendation would have annoyed a lot of wealthy retirees and would-be retirees, but it says it'll keep borrowing by super funds under review. Murray, a former head of the Commonwealth Bank and Future Fund, delivered a good report. Turnbull has (almost) adopted it in full. http://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/malcolm-turnbull-looks-to-fix-mistakes-of-the-past-20151019-gkd768.html#ixzz3p4KIE9l9

2 Points:

1) The banks are already trying the scare tactic of increased charges, hopefully their bluff will be called or Australians will finally find some balls & walk for a better deal at Building societies/credit unions

2) When I posted Peter Martian articles critical of Hockey's sad joke of Treasury management he was a hack with labor leanings according to Mrs L.W. Mariacostel, I await it's(is that the correct gender neutral term?) highly critical assessment of the above.

The small rate rise by Westpac is balanced by a capital raising from shareholders.

I wouldn't call this a scare tactic. Just a measured response to the requirements of APRA for higher capital levels.

bogarde73 wrote on Oct 20^th, 2015 at 12:31pm:

The small rate rise by Westpac is balanced by a capital raising from shareholders. I wouldn't call this a scare tactic. Just a measured response to the requirements of APRA for higher capital levels.

This is why some are tipping that the RBA will lower interest rates on Cup Day. This would allow banks to hold on to this extra money to meet capital requirements.

I don't actually have a problem with a "deposit tax", as long as it's optional for depositors.

I would work it like this: pay this charge (as a slightly lower interest rate), the deposit is guaranteed. Don't pay the charge, the deposit is not guaranteed. Higher rate of return balanced by higher risk, but the depositor gets to choose.

Dsmithy70 wrote on Oct 20^th, 2015 at 12:03pm:

Quote: In government, Labor's treasurer Wayne Swan repeatedly rejected calls for an inquiry into Australia's financial system, arguing it didn't need to be fixed. The Murray inquiry into the financial system and the Turnbull government's response shows how wrong he was. Banks not only need tougher rules about how much capital they hold to back loans, they also need controls on the leverage behind those loans, a recommendation endorsed by the Turnbull government. Australian workers were being pushed into default superannuation funds that mightn't always have provided the best value for money. David Murray has recommended, and Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has endorsed, the need for a competitive tender to determine default funds, removing the power from employers who mightn't always do the best thing by their workers. And it will make sure all workers have a choice of super funds, something not yet available more than two decades after super became compulsory. The Abbott government had already endorsed a Labor proposal and Murray recommendation that banks not be required to pay a "deposit tax" in order to receive support in emergencies. Instead, emergency finance will be funded by a levy on all banks after the event should it ever be needed. Labor and its predecessors never got around to defining the purpose of super. Is it for wealth accumulation, is it for retirement incomes, is it a device for income smoothing? Murray has recommended that the government work out the purpose and enshrine it in legislation, something the Turnbull government is going to ask the Productivity Commission to help it do. It'll go further than Labor had in creating an enhanced register of financial advisors that will enable would-be customers to see whether they have been banned or cautioned for breaching the code of ethics. And it will legislate to ban excessive credit card surcharges, of the kind imposed by Qantas and Cabcharge. What it won't do – its only wholesale rejection of a Murray recommendation – is remove the loophole that allows self-managed super funds to borrow. Adopting that very reasonable recommendation would have annoyed a lot of wealthy retirees and would-be retirees, but it says it'll keep borrowing by super funds under review. Murray, a former head of the Commonwealth Bank and Future Fund, delivered a good report. Turnbull has (almost) adopted it in full. http://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/malcolm-turnbull-looks-to-fix-mistakes-of-the-past-20151019-gkd768.html#ixzz3p4KIE9l9 2 Points: 1) The banks are already trying the scare tactic of increased charges, hopefully their bluff will be called or Australians will finally find some balls & walk for a better deal at Building societies/credit unions 2) When I posted Peter Martian articles critical of Hockey's sad joke of Treasury management he was a hack with labor leanings according to Mrs L.W. Mariacostel, I await it's(is that the correct gender neutral term?) highly critical assessment of the above.

You could have let it go at 'well don', but you had to include the cheap shot.

Bam wrote on Oct 20^th, 2015 at 12:44pm:

I don't actually have a problem with a "deposit tax", as long as it's optional for depositors. I would work it like this: pay this charge (as a slightly lower interest rate), the deposit is guaranteed. Don't pay the charge, the deposit is not guaranteed. Higher rate of return balanced by higher risk, but the depositor gets to choose.

The new plan is even better. No levy is charged at all and is only done post-event assuming it is ever needed which it never has been in recent decades since banks were better managed. I Believe the SA State Bank was the last one to go under and that was via chronic poor management.

mariacostel wrote on Oct 20^th, 2015 at 4:49pm:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Oct 20th, 2015 at 12:03pm: Quote: In government, Labor's treasurer Wayne Swan repeatedly rejected calls for an inquiry into Australia's financial system, arguing it didn't need to be fixed. The Murray inquiry into the financial system and the Turnbull government's response shows how wrong he was. Banks not only need tougher rules about how much capital they hold to back loans, they also need controls on the leverage behind those loans, a recommendation endorsed by the Turnbull government. Australian workers were being pushed into default superannuation funds that mightn't always have provided the best value for money. David Murray has recommended, and Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has endorsed, the need for a competitive tender to determine default funds, removing the power from employers who mightn't always do the best thing by their workers. And it will make sure all workers have a choice of super funds, something not yet available more than two decades after super became compulsory. The Abbott government had already endorsed a Labor proposal and Murray recommendation that banks not be required to pay a "deposit tax" in order to receive support in emergencies. Instead, emergency finance will be funded by a levy on all banks after the event should it ever be needed. Labor and its predecessors never got around to defining the purpose of super. Is it for wealth accumulation, is it for retirement incomes, is it a device for income smoothing? Murray has recommended that the government work out the purpose and enshrine it in legislation, something the Turnbull government is going to ask the Productivity Commission to help it do. It'll go further than Labor had in creating an enhanced register of financial advisors that will enable would-be customers to see whether they have been banned or cautioned for breaching the code of ethics. And it will legislate to ban excessive credit card surcharges, of the kind imposed by Qantas and Cabcharge. What it won't do – its only wholesale rejection of a Murray recommendation – is remove the loophole that allows self-managed super funds to borrow. Adopting that very reasonable recommendation would have annoyed a lot of wealthy retirees and would-be retirees, but it says it'll keep borrowing by super funds under review. Murray, a former head of the Commonwealth Bank and Future Fund, delivered a good report. Turnbull has (almost) adopted it in full. http://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/malcolm-turnbull-looks-to-fix-mistakes-of-the-past-20151019-gkd768.html#ixzz3p4KIE9l9 2 Points: 1) The banks are already trying the scare tactic of increased charges, hopefully their bluff will be called or Australians will finally find some balls & walk for a better deal at Building societies/credit unions 2) When I posted Peter Martian articles critical of Hockey's sad joke of Treasury management he was a hack with labor leanings according to Mrs L.W. Mariacostel, I await it's(is that the correct gender neutral term?) highly critical assessment of the above. You could have let it go at 'well don', but you had to include the cheap shot.

Your influence on this board is infectious Maria.

Cliff48 wrote on Oct 20^th, 2015 at 4:52pm:

mariacostel wrote on Oct 20th, 2015 at 4:49pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Oct 20th, 2015 at 12:03pm: Quote: In government, Labor's treasurer Wayne Swan repeatedly rejected calls for an inquiry into Australia's financial system, arguing it didn't need to be fixed. The Murray inquiry into the financial system and the Turnbull government's response shows how wrong he was. Banks not only need tougher rules about how much capital they hold to back loans, they also need controls on the leverage behind those loans, a recommendation endorsed by the Turnbull government. Australian workers were being pushed into default superannuation funds that mightn't always have provided the best value for money. David Murray has recommended, and Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has endorsed, the need for a competitive tender to determine default funds, removing the power from employers who mightn't always do the best thing by their workers. And it will make sure all workers have a choice of super funds, something not yet available more than two decades after super became compulsory. The Abbott government had already endorsed a Labor proposal and Murray recommendation that banks not be required to pay a "deposit tax" in order to receive support in emergencies. Instead, emergency finance will be funded by a levy on all banks after the event should it ever be needed. Labor and its predecessors never got around to defining the purpose of super. Is it for wealth accumulation, is it for retirement incomes, is it a device for income smoothing? Murray has recommended that the government work out the purpose and enshrine it in legislation, something the Turnbull government is going to ask the Productivity Commission to help it do. It'll go further than Labor had in creating an enhanced register of financial advisors that will enable would-be customers to see whether they have been banned or cautioned for breaching the code of ethics. And it will legislate to ban excessive credit card surcharges, of the kind imposed by Qantas and Cabcharge. What it won't do – its only wholesale rejection of a Murray recommendation – is remove the loophole that allows self-managed super funds to borrow. Adopting that very reasonable recommendation would have annoyed a lot of wealthy retirees and would-be retirees, but it says it'll keep borrowing by super funds under review. Murray, a former head of the Commonwealth Bank and Future Fund, delivered a good report. Turnbull has (almost) adopted it in full. http://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/malcolm-turnbull-looks-to-fix-mistakes-of-the-past-20151019-gkd768.html#ixzz3p4KIE9l9 2 Points: 1) The banks are already trying the scare tactic of increased charges, hopefully their bluff will be called or Australians will finally find some balls & walk for a better deal at Building societies/credit unions 2) When I posted Peter Martian articles critical of Hockey's sad joke of Treasury management he was a hack with labor leanings according to Mrs L.W. Mariacostel, I await it's(is that the correct gender neutral term?) highly critical assessment of the above. You could have let it go at 'well don', but you had to include the cheap shot. Your influence on this board is infectious Maria.

It didn't take long here to realise that most posters are not really top-shelf debaters.

mariacostel wrote on Oct 20^th, 2015 at 5:40pm:

Cliff48 wrote on Oct 20th, 2015 at 4:52pm: mariacostel wrote on Oct 20th, 2015 at 4:49pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Oct 20th, 2015 at 12:03pm: Quote: In government, Labor's treasurer Wayne Swan repeatedly rejected calls for an inquiry into Australia's financial system, arguing it didn't need to be fixed. The Murray inquiry into the financial system and the Turnbull government's response shows how wrong he was. Banks not only need tougher rules about how much capital they hold to back loans, they also need controls on the leverage behind those loans, a recommendation endorsed by the Turnbull government. Australian workers were being pushed into default superannuation funds that mightn't always have provided the best value for money. David Murray has recommended, and Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has endorsed, the need for a competitive tender to determine default funds, removing the power from employers who mightn't always do the best thing by their workers. And it will make sure all workers have a choice of super funds, something not yet available more than two decades after super became compulsory. The Abbott government had already endorsed a Labor proposal and Murray recommendation that banks not be required to pay a "deposit tax" in order to receive support in emergencies. Instead, emergency finance will be funded by a levy on all banks after the event should it ever be needed. Labor and its predecessors never got around to defining the purpose of super. Is it for wealth accumulation, is it for retirement incomes, is it a device for income smoothing? Murray has recommended that the government work out the purpose and enshrine it in legislation, something the Turnbull government is going to ask the Productivity Commission to help it do. It'll go further than Labor had in creating an enhanced register of financial advisors that will enable would-be customers to see whether they have been banned or cautioned for breaching the code of ethics. And it will legislate to ban excessive credit card surcharges, of the kind imposed by Qantas and Cabcharge. What it won't do – its only wholesale rejection of a Murray recommendation – is remove the loophole that allows self-managed super funds to borrow. Adopting that very reasonable recommendation would have annoyed a lot of wealthy retirees and would-be retirees, but it says it'll keep borrowing by super funds under review. Murray, a former head of the Commonwealth Bank and Future Fund, delivered a good report. Turnbull has (almost) adopted it in full. http://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/malcolm-turnbull-looks-to-fix-mistakes-of-the-past-20151019-gkd768.html#ixzz3p4KIE9l9 2 Points: 1) The banks are already trying the scare tactic of increased charges, hopefully their bluff will be called or Australians will finally find some balls & walk for a better deal at Building societies/credit unions 2) When I posted Peter Martian articles critical of Hockey's sad joke of Treasury management he was a hack with labor leanings according to Mrs L.W. Mariacostel, I await it's(is that the correct gender neutral term?) highly critical assessment of the above. You could have let it go at 'well don', but you had to include the cheap shot. Your influence on this board is infectious Maria. It didn't take long here to realise that most posters are not really top-shelf debaters.

Thats very fortunate for you Maria  :)

mariacostel wrote on Oct 20^th, 2015 at 4:49pm:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Oct 20th, 2015 at 12:03pm: Quote: In government, Labor's treasurer Wayne Swan repeatedly rejected calls for an inquiry into Australia's financial system, arguing it didn't need to be fixed. The Murray inquiry into the financial system and the Turnbull government's response shows how wrong he was. Banks not only need tougher rules about how much capital they hold to back loans, they also need controls on the leverage behind those loans, a recommendation endorsed by the Turnbull government. Australian workers were being pushed into default superannuation funds that mightn't always have provided the best value for money. David Murray has recommended, and Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has endorsed, the need for a competitive tender to determine default funds, removing the power from employers who mightn't always do the best thing by their workers. And it will make sure all workers have a choice of super funds, something not yet available more than two decades after super became compulsory. The Abbott government had already endorsed a Labor proposal and Murray recommendation that banks not be required to pay a "deposit tax" in order to receive support in emergencies. Instead, emergency finance will be funded by a levy on all banks after the event should it ever be needed. Labor and its predecessors never got around to defining the purpose of super. Is it for wealth accumulation, is it for retirement incomes, is it a device for income smoothing? Murray has recommended that the government work out the purpose and enshrine it in legislation, something the Turnbull government is going to ask the Productivity Commission to help it do. It'll go further than Labor had in creating an enhanced register of financial advisors that will enable would-be customers to see whether they have been banned or cautioned for breaching the code of ethics. And it will legislate to ban excessive credit card surcharges, of the kind imposed by Qantas and Cabcharge. What it won't do – its only wholesale rejection of a Murray recommendation – is remove the loophole that allows self-managed super funds to borrow. Adopting that very reasonable recommendation would have annoyed a lot of wealthy retirees and would-be retirees, but it says it'll keep borrowing by super funds under review. Murray, a former head of the Commonwealth Bank and Future Fund, delivered a good report. Turnbull has (almost) adopted it in full. http://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/malcolm-turnbull-looks-to-fix-mistakes-of-the-past-20151019-gkd768.html#ixzz3p4KIE9l9 2 Points: 1) The banks are already trying the scare tactic of increased charges, hopefully their bluff will be called or Australians will finally find some balls & walk for a better deal at Building societies/credit unions 2) When I posted Peter Martian articles critical of Hockey's sad joke of Treasury management he was a hack with labor leanings according to Mrs L.W. Mariacostel, I await it's(is that the correct gender neutral term?) highly critical assessment of the above. You could have let it go at 'well don', but you had to include the cheap shot.

He's still far ahead of you ...   ;D

Bam wrote on Oct 20^th, 2015 at 11:32pm:

mariacostel wrote on Oct 20th, 2015 at 4:49pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Oct 20th, 2015 at 12:03pm: Quote: In government, Labor's treasurer Wayne Swan repeatedly rejected calls for an inquiry into Australia's financial system, arguing it didn't need to be fixed. The Murray inquiry into the financial system and the Turnbull government's response shows how wrong he was. Banks not only need tougher rules about how much capital they hold to back loans, they also need controls on the leverage behind those loans, a recommendation endorsed by the Turnbull government. Australian workers were being pushed into default superannuation funds that mightn't always have provided the best value for money. David Murray has recommended, and Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has endorsed, the need for a competitive tender to determine default funds, removing the power from employers who mightn't always do the best thing by their workers. And it will make sure all workers have a choice of super funds, something not yet available more than two decades after super became compulsory. The Abbott government had already endorsed a Labor proposal and Murray recommendation that banks not be required to pay a "deposit tax" in order to receive support in emergencies. Instead, emergency finance will be funded by a levy on all banks after the event should it ever be needed. Labor and its predecessors never got around to defining the purpose of super. Is it for wealth accumulation, is it for retirement incomes, is it a device for income smoothing? Murray has recommended that the government work out the purpose and enshrine it in legislation, something the Turnbull government is going to ask the Productivity Commission to help it do. It'll go further than Labor had in creating an enhanced register of financial advisors that will enable would-be customers to see whether they have been banned or cautioned for breaching the code of ethics. And it will legislate to ban excessive credit card surcharges, of the kind imposed by Qantas and Cabcharge. What it won't do – its only wholesale rejection of a Murray recommendation – is remove the loophole that allows self-managed super funds to borrow. Adopting that very reasonable recommendation would have annoyed a lot of wealthy retirees and would-be retirees, but it says it'll keep borrowing by super funds under review. Murray, a former head of the Commonwealth Bank and Future Fund, delivered a good report. Turnbull has (almost) adopted it in full. http://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/malcolm-turnbull-looks-to-fix-mistakes-of-the-past-20151019-gkd768.html#ixzz3p4KIE9l9 2 Points: 1) The banks are already trying the scare tactic of increased charges, hopefully their bluff will be called or Australians will finally find some balls & walk for a better deal at Building societies/credit unions 2) When I posted Peter Martian articles critical of Hockey's sad joke of Treasury management he was a hack with labor leanings according to Mrs L.W. Mariacostel, I await it's(is that the correct gender neutral term?) highly critical assessment of the above. You could have let it go at 'well don', but you had to include the cheap shot. He's still far ahead of you ...   ;D

Still crying over the massive loss in the 2016 election?

Bam wrote on Oct 20^th, 2015 at 12:44pm:

I don't actually have a problem with a "deposit tax", as long as it's optional for depositors. I would work it like this: pay this charge (as a slightly lower interest rate), the deposit is guaranteed. Don't pay the charge, the deposit is not guaranteed. Higher rate of return balanced by higher risk, but the depositor gets to choose.

This can’t work. All those people with unsecured deposits would run to the bank to withdraw their cash and in so doing start a run on that bank. Once there is a run your guarantees don’t mean sh1t.

The credit card surcharge thing was obvious. Pretty much was always going to happen once they allowed merchants to charge consumers directly.

Kytro wrote on Oct 21^st, 2015 at 8:27am:

The credit card surcharge thing was obvious. Pretty much was always going to happen once they allowed merchants to charge consumers directly.

There is no excuse to charge well over the surcharge amount. In fact, for most places there is no excuse to charge it at all.

mariacostel wrote on Oct 20^th, 2015 at 4:49pm:

You could have let it go at 'well don', but you had to include the cheap shot.

From the queen of cheap shots & revised history via omission.
I can only take the above as a compliment :)

mariacostel wrote on Oct 21^st, 2015 at 8:32am:

There is no excuse to charge well over the surcharge amount.

There is 1 & thats when the card companies charge a percentage for transactions.

I pass on those charges to customers & advise when the tell me their card of choice

0 - Visa/MC
3% - Amex/Diners
10% - cabcharge

The amount of business amex/diners loses is staggering 99.9% of people go OK I'll grab my visa/mc

Cabcharge not so much as most is business picking up the tab,  all the entitlement mentality that entails no one cares.

Dsmithy70 wrote on Oct 21^st, 2015 at 10:21am:

mariacostel wrote on Oct 21st, 2015 at 8:32am: There is no excuse to charge well over the surcharge amount. There is 1 & thats when the card companies charge a percentage for transactions. I pass on those charges to customers & advise when the tell me their card of choice 0 - Visa/MC 3% - Amex/Diners 10% - cabcharge The amount of business amex/diners loses is staggering 99.9% of people go OK I'll grab my visa/mc Cabcharge not so much as most is business picking up the tab,  all the entitlement mentality that entails no one cares.

ALL card companies charge a percentage of transactions. Many companies don't have a surcharge at all except for AMEX.