🚀 go-pugleaf

On Wed, 08 Apr 2009 18:23:45 +1000, David Clayton <dcstar@NOSPAM.myrealbox.com> wrote:

>Now we hear (again) that the banks "cannot" pass on the Reserve Bank
>official interest rate cut because (apparently) a lot of their cost of
>borrowing is not actually related to this official rate.
>
>Surely that means that every single rate *increase* that was previously
>passed on in full was a total lie as a lot of the funds that the banks
>sourced to lend out were also not related to the RBA rate?
>
>Talk about "having your cake and eating it to", after years of ripping-off
>borrowers by sourcing cheap funds overseas to create record bank profits
>they now use this reality to keep *their* profits at record levels as
>official rates fall!
>
>I would also speculate that every variable bank deposit rate will be cut,
>so the cost of these funds will drop further boosting the bank profits.
>
>If the RBA rate cuts end up going straight into bank profits and don't get
>passed on and have their intended "stimulus" effect in the economy, they
>why would the RBA bother to make any more cuts in the future?
>
>If only us poor retail customers could borrow directly from the RBA at
>those juicy low rates...

...and...

How come there's little or no fuss about the fact that the Credit Card interest rate (on
balances etc) has not tracked the recent Cash Rate changes?

A year ago when the Cahs Rate was at its peak (of 7.25%), the Credit Card interest rate on my
monthly bill was just over 20%.  It was 19% on my most recent bill.  Double dipping?

-- 
steve.hat.stephencarter.not.com.but.net
Nothing is Beatle Proof!! 
Mr Kite posters and more at http://www.zazzle.com/mr_kite*
Mr Kite posters and more at http://www.zazzle.co.uk/mr_kite*