on 20-12-2013 02:42 PM
Abbott won’t subsidise productive industries, but he’s heavily subsidising the banks
Prime Minister Tony Abbott beat his hairy chest yesterday and declared his government won’t subsidise businesses, but it seems he means only businesses in productive primary and secondary industries that actually produce for the country.
Because every day that Australia doesn’t have a Glass-Steagall separation of banking, his government like those of his predecessors is heavily subsidising the reckless gambling of the too-big-to-fail (TBTF) banks.
Since 2008, the Commonwealth government has first explicitly, then implicitly, guaranteed the hundreds of billions of dollars that the major Australian banks have borrowed from overseas.
That guarantee enabled the banks to borrow against the government’s AAA credit rating, at quite a few per cent cheaper than they would pay on their own much lower credit rating.
That explicit guarantee ended in 2010-11, but it didn’t matter to the banks. It turns out they don’t need it, because they are too-big-to-fail. The lenders in the international wholesale money markets know that the government cannot let the Australian banks fail, so they continue to lend to them at a much lower interest rate than the banks’ own credit ratings would qualify for.
And what are the banks doing with this money they are borrowing from overseas at low interest? They aren’t lending it on to small businesses and farmers at similarly low interest rates so they can produce wealth for Australia. No, they are speculating, by pouring it into the fully-stretched property bubble. By and large they are lending it to property investors so they keep buying real estate and therefore keep property prices sky-high. The banks are fully aware that these inflated prices lock genuine home buyers out of the market, but their only concern is to keep prices high, because they know even a modest collapse of property prices, in the order of 15 per cent, could wipe them out. Precariously balanced on top of these mortgages is a mountain of derivatives and mortgage backed securities, which will go into meltdown if Australian property prices fall to affordable levels.
Citizens Electoral Council leader Craig Isherwood said today, “Tony Abbott should cut the **bleep**! Of course his government is subsidising businesses, but it is subsidising the banks that are bleeding the nation dry, and not the farming and manufacturing industries that produce our wealth.
“How would Holden and Ford perform if they could borrow at the same low interest rates that the banks can? Australia’s 40,000 family farmers are often paying 12 per cent interest on $65 billion in debt; how would they go if they could pay less than 5 per cent?”
Isherwood concluded, “If Abbott is really concerned about taxpayers, he should do two things: enact Glass-Steagall to split up the banks, so they are no longer TBTF and can no longer run up debts and derivatives bets that the government will be on the hook for; and support our productive industries so they expand, produce more wealth and create more skilled jobs, which means more taxpayers!”
Click here for a free copy of the CEC's infrastructure blueprint, The Infrastructure Road to Recovery, which shows how Australia can build its way out of the depression. <http://cecaust.com.au/main.asp?id=free_infrastructure_nc.html>
Time to stop squabbling about big ears and budgie-smugglers, boats and TV broadcasters and get onto some real issues.
20-12-2013 02:48 PM - edited 20-12-2013 02:51 PM
Did he give that $16m he pledged (pre election) to the Cadbury factory in Tasmania?
I knew that article would be a CEC one long before I got to the end of your post.
Stop the boats.. isn't a real issue, a real problem? OK
Abbott is also critiised for reneging a lot of election promises. Real issues, not ears or speedo's.
on 20-12-2013 03:40 PM
Any government who subsidises a bank with the current amount of money they are hiting consumers with is a government who cares little for it's citizens till it's nearly an election
Labor or Liberal that is reall really wrong.
on 20-12-2013 03:43 PM
the government is not subsidising any bank
on 20-12-2013 04:46 PM
Mr G: "the government is not subsidising any bank" I agree, but would be happy for some proof IF. In the meanwhile plough through the APRA monthly statistics from APRA for Oct 2103 here:-
http://www.apra.gov.au/adi/publications/pages/monthly-banking-statistics.aspx
IF: "By and large they are lending it to property investors so they keep buying real estate and therefore keep property prices sky-high."
Actually the major slice of bank lending goes towards domestic mortgages apart from which banks lend to whom they consider"safe", and as businesses choose their own customers
"Since 2008, the Commonwealth government has first explicitly, then implicitly, guaranteed the hundreds of billions of dollars that the major Australian banks have borrowed from overseas."
Actually the government introduced the Australian Government bank deposit guarantee scheme, for individuals, and any bank guarantee has always been accepted as always being present to prevent a bank failing, not that there has been any likelihood of that happening.
“How would Holden and Ford perform if they could borrow at the same low interest rates that the banks can?"
They can borrow easily within the US, IF, being American companies, at the going US interest rate, but what would be the point in then losing that money via our poorly performing car assembly lines?
Any deposit guarantees are paid for just like any other insurance
The Australian Government received 27% of bank profits through taxes over the three years ending 2012. Banks contribute more corporate tax than any other industry in Australia. In the past five years, banks have paid over $40 billion dollars in tax, plus an additional $4.2 billion for the Government’s guarantee on wholesale funding.
Does that sound like they are being subsidised by the government?
nɥºɾ