Re: Rudd, I'm pissed off aren't you?
M
Like it or not our government is largely in step with other nation's efforts to stem the financial bloodletting going on.
That's true, but it remains to be seen whether these actions are effective.
They involve no small degree of moral hazard at least.
Indeed, it's acting more quickly than most and is trying its hardest to lead by example.
Ah, here we have what Mr Rudd is all about. He seems to see himself as a latter day Messiah, his mission being to put the world at large to rights.
However, to suggest that he was the leader in the guaranteeing of bank deposits is completely wrong. He did it reluctantly to prevent funds going offshore to other banks (originally the Bank of Ireland) who had already guaranteed deposits. No credit to Mr Rudd or Mr Swan in this.
Moreover we have subsequently seen the ramifications of their unlimited guarantee - a total dislocation of the financial system. Had Mr Turnbull's advice of capping the guarantee at $100K been heeded, it's unlikely that the redemptions from the non-bank funds would have proceeded at any greater rate than was already happening as a result of people feeling worried about the market linked funds.
There is no book telling countries what has to be done in these circumstances, and arguing the toss about a "cap" or no cap on bank deposits, or what can be guaranteed, and what should have a fee paid in order for a guarantee to be effective, falls into the Turnbull bipartisan camp for egomaniacs.
Nonsense. As above the cap or non-cap does in fact make a considerable difference.
I listened to Turnbull again today finding a powerful voice in private enterprise agreeing with one of his earlier positions. That's all good and well, but Turnbull is not in power, and he has also been told clearly what his party needs to do before the government will consider his hand of bipartisanship.
Has he? It must have passed me by. Could you explain exactly what Mr Turnbull is, umm, required to do and who exactly says so?
I'm impressed with Rudd's efforts to date.
I suppose this all depends on the base from which you are judging.
I spoke with someone the other day who declared Mr Rudd has charisma!!!
He may be quite intelligent, process driven, hard working, determined and possessed of many other features, but to suggest this robotic person has charisma was, I thought, quite extraordinary.
He certainly cuts a better image of a leader than Bush in the present climate:
Ah, now we understand the base from which you feel able to make the earlier comment. To offer that he is better than Bush hardly represents any sort of valid endorsement.
Articulate, knowledgeable, and decisive. He's also injected some honesty by fessing up to not knowing exactly how some things will impact, but determining to respond wherever consequences are dire.
Yes, indeed, even if means going off half cocked as they did with the unlimited guarantee. All for the sake of appearing decisive. A bit more thoughtfulness might have been a good thing.