- Joined
- 27 February 2008
- Posts
- 4,670
- Reactions
- 10
where did the 4 plus Billion come from that has been injected into the big 4 recently then ?
http://www.businessspectator.com.au...-cash-into-market-JX6SY?OpenDocument&src=srch
http://www.businessspectator.com.au...-to-cushion-banks-JY2JN?OpenDocument&src=srch
http://www.businessspectator.com.au...funds-into-market-JZ55H?OpenDocument&src=srch
i may have it all wrong and would appreciate some guidance if my take on the RBA is wrong
not according to ABA, who cited overseas borrowings/investments as the main reason:- without ozzie govt guaranteeing deposits they were going elsewhere and Oz banks were very concerned their access to funds would continue to dry up - also the reason for the unlimited guarantee rather than a cap.As seen from recent Aus bank profit announcements, they were operating quite profitably and were quite liquid as per div announcements.
So in the normal course of events Aus banks were not in any sort of trouble... unless there was a hysterical run to withdraw deposits. The whole point of the guarantee was to restore confidence in the Banking system to prevent such a run.
The guarantee we were talking about is that on deposits. The government have not been required to pay any of the banks any tax payer dollars because the banks have been unable to honour deposits. It was a move to shore up confidence at a time when there was considerable (unjustified) anxiety about how safe depositors' funds were in the banks.I dont understand how this point is relevant?
The guarantee we were talking about is that on deposits. The government have not been required to pay any of the banks any tax payer dollars because the banks have been unable to honour deposits. It was a move to shore up confidence at a time when there was considerable (unjustified) anxiety about how safe depositors' funds were in the banks.
And if by some extraordinary event the banks were unable to honour deposits then, yes, the government would have to honour their promise and come to the rescue.
This is a completely separate issue from the normal (and extra) funds which flow between the RBA and the banks.
JuliaNo, it was not poor English on my part. It was incorrect interpretation on yours. I chose to ignore the scintillating repartee between some other participants and my post was purely directed towards you. My suggestion that you were patronising reflected your attitude towards what I had ealier said. But that's fine, Rob. Whatever you say. It's just too tedious to attempt a genuine exchange with you.
Julia
You declared some remarks I made as "patronising". As you highlighted the specific remarks in question, I responded by saying they were made by me "contemptuously".
As these were my remarks, I know the sense in which they were made.
For you to suggest I misinterpreted my own remarks again shows your poor comprehension skills.
As for a genuine exchange, your attitude is totally disingenuous in this arena.
I have elaborated my points whereas you have simply regurgitated the odd fact along with party political lines that simply don't hold water.
If you don't have the guts to get involved in a proper debate on the issues, don't pretend it's all too hard and wrap it in a personal affront.
LOL You are an offensive piece of work arent you.
:topic
Lol... on another thread someone nominated me for the 'stirrer' award. I think you have out qualified me, MrBurns.:
I have yet to hear a good argument from detractors of Rudd.
Even when mortgage funds froze withdrawals and Labor said to those who might be suffering to go to Centrelink, what was Turnbull's solution?
I can do it without trying.LOL You are an offensive piece of work arent you.
I only stir when provoked and the verbal diarrhoea that is thrown at some people in here is at best a gutless effort by those who choose to hide behind a computer screen.
Irony?
LOL im not too good with the engrish language but my thoughts were of the word " hypocrisy"
One last word of clarification, if you care to look at my posts you will see that I only abuse the Govt who deserve it , I never target anyone in here unless they target me first with the possible exception of my response to rerob to his post aimed at Julia.
You could try responding to rebuttals with something at least worthy of your thread's title.
Being pissed of with a decision of government - or of Rudd in this thread - is par for the course.
Understanding the context of the decision or statement might prove enlightening.
I am more than happy to argue the toss where I think people who could know better, either don't know, don't want to know, or don't know they don't know!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?