Comments on: Rudd’s money back guarantee is panicky policy

By: Graeme Lewis

Graeme Lewis — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

Can’t help yourself can you Mr Keane! When there is nought else to say, it must be Malcolm Turnbull who brought it on - even caused it.
What Turnbull said both about the guarantee thing, and about the ETS were eminently sensible in the circumstances. He wanted a limit of $100k, and he wants to limit the downside of the ALP’s ETS. Nothing wrong with any of that!
The guarantee thing is undoubtedly bad policy - yes, but to do otherwise would be foolish. Only do I ask why it had to be unlimited as to its ceiling.

By: Stephen

Stephen — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

Bernard Keane seems to be ignorant of the fact that the guarantee is for deposit - money that belongs to the public. It is not a guarantee for the viability of the banks. If it is bad policy to him, is he suggesting that we should all withdraw our money and put it under the bed? Because if it is dangerous to guarantee our deposit, then our deposit must be unsafe.

By: Ben Shah

Ben Shah — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

Does this not take the moral hazard argument to a new level? And how does a government guarantee deposits if the coffers are bare? Still, gives anybody who wants it the chance to get their cash out of the bank and into gold or silver. Wait till you see how much money that will be good for after they inflate the #$#@ out of the currency supporting these world wide guarantees. If one country does it you get Zimbabwe, but if they all do it together you get goodbye middle class savings and pensions. Minsky people, time to bring Keynes back and say goodbye to structured finance and the parasites who live off the spread.

By: Arty

Arty — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

I assume that by making the guarantee amount unlimited the PM has avoided the necessity for all us rich people having to open a rash of $90,000 accounts to replace our single multi-million dollar account.

By: DumbBorrowers

DumbBorrowers — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

The guy who said that “now they say money in the bank isn’t safe” probably doesn’t have any money in the bank so who gives a fuck what that moron thinks?

By: Andrew

Andrew — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

I agree with Kool aids concerns. Everyone rushing around trying to stop the share and house bubbles from imploding will just end up debasing the currency. Its all very nice for those in trouble to have their debts inflated away so that oweing $500 000 doesnt seem so bad compared with the price of a cup of coffee, but how does this protect those who have saved over this boom period? All I get is a banking/taxation system which pays depositors at sub-inflation levels. Having avoided the worst excesses of the negatively gerared economy, I am now forced to be involved in the bad decisions of the mob by the government buying into their debt. I think that the only way to get the Government to protect your savings is probably to go bankrupt.

By: Kool Aid

Kool Aid — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

You bet our money is not safe in banks. It’s not safe from the coming ravages of inflation which has been unleashed by all this money printing. What the Kool Aid drinkers should be asking is; how will Rudd guarantee us protection from the erosion of our savings?