Interest rates are going up

Will either party be able to control interest ratest if they win the election?

  • Yes

    Votes: 17 22.4%
  • No

    Votes: 53 69.7%
  • Can't Decide

    Votes: 6 7.9%

  • Total voters
    76
  • Poll closed .
http://finance.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,10667387%5E462,00.html


INTEREST rates will rise within weeks of the upcoming federal election regardless of who wins, economists predict.

A panel of experts polled by The Sunday Telegraph reveals most believe the outcome is largely irrelevant to the current direction of official rates.

An increase of at least 0.25 percentage points is likely after Reserve Bank's first post-election board meeting on November 2, or failing that after its next gathering on December 7.
 
Yes, but only to a certain extent. I think Liberal will control it better because of their anti-inflation economic policies. But at the end of the day, if economic activity is picking up and oil prices continue to rise, then its gonna be difficult to stop rates rising.
 
younginvestor said:
http://finance.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,10667387%5E462,00.html


INTEREST rates will rise within weeks of the upcoming federal election regardless of who wins, economists predict.

A panel of experts polled by The Sunday Telegraph reveals most believe the outcome is largely irrelevant to the current direction of official rates.

An increase of at least 0.25 percentage points is likely after Reserve Bank's first post-election board meeting on November 2, or failing that after its next gathering on December 7.

Hi younginvestor,

I think your question overestimates the impact a government has on the Reserve Bank, especially in the short term...

Indeed, if you believe the statement you quoted in your post:

INTEREST rates will rise within weeks of the upcoming federal election regardless of who wins

...then the whole premise of your question is moot, because both parties will raise rates based on viewpoint in that article.

In your poll, you asked "Will either party be able to control interest rates?"

Can you explain what you mean by "control?" Are you asking which party we think will keep rates lowest? Which party will rein in spending? Which party can contain consumer spending blowouts and the underlying rate of inflation?

Just a few thoughts,

Jamie
 
Last edited:
qazwsx said:
I think Liberal will control it better because of their anti-inflation economic policies

Hi qazwsx,

Can you explain, for the masses, exactly what the Liberal party's "anti-inflation economic policies" are?

Thanks,

Jamie.
 
Jamie said:
Hi qazwsx,

Can you explain, for the masses, exactly what the Liberal party's "anti-inflation economic policies" are?

Thanks,

Jamie.

Jamie, perhaps an example is the recent tax versus levy point see post Election 2004 - the Main focus.

Put simply, labour proposes a 0.1% national payroll tax to provide funds to reimburse worker entitlements when companies go down and are unable to pay.

Now, aside from the merits or otherwise (again see post Election 2004 - the Main focus) this solution adds a cost to business. To maintain the same level of return, business must increase price of products.

A small increase but count every large business in Oz and it can add up. So prices for doodads go up. A small add to the CPI and therefore a little more for the RBA to consider to control inflation. To pay for the new prices of dooh dads workers want wages to go up and again the cycle continues.

This is inflationary policy. A better solution would be tighten severly the consequences for bosses who defraud their staff. The cost of 10 years jail for one person is a lot less than the alternative.

I agree though that Labour did set in motion many of the reforms the Libs have benefitted from but I also believe they took full advantage of the situation they were given.

Regards Peter 147
 
Will either party be able to control interest ratest if they win the election?

A good question, but one to which the answer is abundantly clear.

The central element being, of course, CONTROL.

What follows is an edited extract of a post I made in this thread.

Decisions of the RBA are meant to be aside from political influence.

But, IMHO you cannot have a central bank acting on its own agenda (and in Australia, we don't). Monetary Policy is but one of numerous policies that the Government has at its disposal and it cannot be set in such a way that makes the Treasurer's main policy (fiscal policy) untenable.

Contrary to what many may believe, monetary policy is not even the only method for controlling CPI. Fiscal policy can be used, as can Wages Policy.

To this end, the Hawke Government actually used Wages Policy to great effect in the 1980's:

"the latter... [the inflation rate] ... has undoubtedly been influenced in Australian by the effects of the Accord in reducing real wages, which may have had a greater impact upon the inflation rate than monetary policy"

(Rogers and Neal, 1995, Macroeconomics and the Australian Economy, p. 274)


The Australian experience to do with Government influence has been quite interesting.

Keating certainly exercised an inordinate amount of influence over the RBA during his term as Treasurer - extending well into his time as PM via the then Governor Bernie Fraser.

IMHO, under Ian McFarlane the RBA has regained some of its independence.

I could trawl back through my posts to earlier references that I have made to Ian McFarlane about how, in the late 80's and early 90's, he opposed some of the decisions that were taken by the RBA. It is a matter of public record (John Edwards book on Paul Keating) that when Treasury and Keating were saying that rates should go higher (to 17+%) that McFarlane, who was then only an Assistant Governor, was saying that rates should fall.

The book also notes that the political imperative for increasing rates in that particular instance (I can't recall the exact date) was that if rates went up, then they could fall again in time for the next federal election.

!!!!!


Since 1996, the Commonwealth Government and the RBA have had a "Statement on the Conduct of Monetary Policy".

http://www.rba.gov.au/MonetaryPolic...olicy_2003.html

And I quote from the Second such statement (see above):

"The Government recognises the independence of the Bank and its responsibility for monetary policy matters and intends to respect the Bank's independence as provided by statute."



Sounds good.



"Section 11 of the Act prescribes procedures for the resolution of policy differences between the Reserve Bank Board and the Government. The procedures, in effect, allow the Government to determine policy in the event of a material difference; but the procedures are politically demanding and their nature reinforces the Bank's independence in the conduct of monetary policy. Safeguards like this ensure that monetary policy is subject to the checks and balances inherent and necessary in a democratic system."



Ok.



So what they are saying is that the RBA is independant but the Government determines policy in the event of any material difference.

IMHO, we have not seen an material difference in recent years - hence the RBA has basically been able to do its own thing. At the end of the day if Costello was not pleased with the RBA's recent performance he would not have re-appointed McFarlane for 3 years.

But I emphasise what I have said on this forum before. The influence of the Treasurer is far reaching and nothing the RBA does is ever completely contrary to what the Treasurer has to do in his primary role of being Chief Financial Officer of Australia Inc.

MB
 
Wel lwe al lknow from studying history that power corrupts & absolute power corrupts absolutely..so personally I would rather trust myself and do away with this representative democracy & just have direct democracy..but thats another story.

On this topic of conversation I find it highly amusing that the Liberals are attempting to run on a platform of 'vote for us as our economic policies will keep interest rates down'..and yet it seems they can't even hold onto interest rates long enough to get it up to an election (pun intended as I swiftly change their name to the Limperals by 'deeds poll') without a rate rise...

If they lie about everything else to the point that even the former heads of
millitary/diplomatic corps are up in arms about honesty in Govt & manage to breed a race of conveniently incompetant underlings & unintelligence officers..then I ask the question -

Whats the point of low interest rates if the govt has this hidden agenda all the time that could potentially throw the country into some massive military debt by following the Americans around blindly into the worlds hotspots...

And as for this amazing job the govt is doing on the economy..pffffffffffffffffft um sorry but I don't see it, big business might be doing great & topline developers might be doing great but in my main industry the music industry it feels like we are already in a recession. There are so many empty nightclubs, venues, bars & festivals that are struggling to stay afloat at the moment it's not funny. IF as Costello says the economy is in great shape then why aren't the clubs, bars & restaurants overflowing with people spending their extra disposable income, it sure as hell isn't because everyone is suddenly amassing a lot more savings. Having a 'great economy' on paper is one thing but if most people don't get to enjoy it then it's hardly democratic joy for all is it!

As far as I am concerned this is not about economics / IR any longer, this is about responsibility to the electorate as most main stream economists don't see any major difference in interest rates arising if either side get into govt.

So you can either vote for the out & out lying cheating meanspirited & tricky
ones or the slightly wet behind the ears but potentially more straight shooting ones. If you ask me they all end up the same which is why you need to clean out the cupboard every election or two.

Jase ;)
 
Hi Jase
Considering the number of articles I've seen in recent months talking about what long hours Gen X ers apparently work etc etc maybe they don't have time to go out and party?
 
Jase said:
And as for this amazing job the govt is doing on the economy..pffffffffffffffffft um sorry but I don't see it, big business might be doing great & topline developers might be doing great but in my main industry the music industry it feels like we are already in a recession. There are so many empty nightclubs, venues, bars & festivals that are struggling to stay afloat at the moment it's not funny. IF as Costello says the economy is in great shape then why aren't the clubs, bars & restaurants overflowing with people spending their extra disposable income, it sure as hell isn't because everyone is suddenly amassing a lot more savings. Having a 'great economy' on paper is one thing but if most people don't get to enjoy it then it's hardly democratic joy for all is it!
Jase ;)

I don't think that economic policy has anything to do with the downturn in the music industry, personally. There are a bunch of other factors that have influenced this. From the changes to smoking legislation, to noise complaints and broad social changes where people are turning towards more "passive" social venues such as cafe's.

Other factors such as the mass commercialization of underground electronic music have left alot of the true supporters of the "cause" to become disenfanchised from the entire industry as the only stuff to be heard at nightclubs is regurgitated sickly pop forced upon us by commercial radio.

Festivals have turned away from being a great place to check out a bunch of bands to an overpriced mosh pit with hour long queues to get a drink and even longer queues to use the restroom.

In Perth, the local music scene is actually thriving due to a few pubs and clubs embracing it and the musicians turn out in droves to support each other. Even the cafe's are getting in on the action with lots of DJ's finding regular gigs playing glitch, breaks and other more ambient forms at cafe's.

Personally I think that greed and turning control of the industry to accountants rather than musicians is far more damaging to the industry as a whole than any economic policy decisions by politicians.

Heck, just take a look at popstars and Australian Idol. Apparently this is how our music industry works. Take an average Joe, spend a million on advertising. Sell a few records, collect the profit and leave them out to flounder in a cut-throat industry while they put the next sucker through the mincer.
 
I tend to agree with Pupperteer. The music industry is floundering because of the music industry. In fact theres a show on SBS tommorrow night at 8:30 (thats tuesday the 7th of september 2004) all about it, even though its more about the American scene than the Australian one.
 
younginvestor said:
http://finance.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,10667387%5E462,00.html


INTEREST rates will rise within weeks of the upcoming federal election regardless of who wins, economists predict.

A panel of experts polled by The Sunday Telegraph reveals most believe the outcome is largely irrelevant to the current direction of official rates.

An increase of at least 0.25 percentage points is likely after Reserve Bank's first post-election board meeting on November 2, or failing that after its next gathering on December 7.

I would agree that interest rates are likely to rise after the election, regardless of who wins. This election is so tight that both parties are making promises of extra government spending. That is likely to put more pressure on interest rates. Get prepared for interest rates increases.

my few cents worth...
 
Hiya Thommo

I dont have a view on rates one way or the other, nor really what causes them.

What I care most about is that my clients that have lots of rate risk exposure look hard at taking some risk management on their rates, since for some of them a 1 or 2 % rate rise could be problematic. I should add that this client base consist mainly of PPOR owners only.

As a scientist, if low rates are a sign of poor health, in the absence of other data id have to conclude that high rates (10 % 18 % I dunno, whats high) were a sign of good health.

What level of interest rate is healthy ? being mindful that when we had 18 % mortgage rates we had double digit wages growth, inflation ?

ta
rolf
 
HouseKeeper is right - be prepared.
Thommo may be right - low interest rates could be a sign that things aint well

BUT

Wouldnt it be pertinent to say that no matter what happens with the interest rates, your wealth machine has (should have) the protection in place to simply keep churning along?

If it has inbuilt protection for/against rate rises then the point is moot.

By protection I mean

1) A sensible portfolio LVR taking into account economic conditions
2) Having a sensible policy on fixing loan interest rates
3) Offsetting IP investments with counter-cyclical paper investments

Any others ideas?
 
Thommo said:
Low interest rates are like a high temperature.

A sign things aint well.

IMHO, that depends on the definition of "low interest rates".

If "low" means 0-3% or thereabouts (ala Japan and the US) then, yes, it is a worrying sign.

But Australia has never had this problem.

While interest rates in Australia over the past decade have been some of the lowest seen in decades and they have been accompanied by price stability and consistent economic growth (refer to Graph 5).

Hardly the signs of a sick economy.

MB
 
RBA policy is to not change interest rates during an election campaign or for the month afterwards.

There's no reason at this time for the RBA to change this policy & I can't see either party advocating a change.

So expect a couple more neutral announcements.

The next likely opportunity for the RBA to modify interest rates is in December.

And the RBA doesn't meet in January....

So there's a strong possibility that unless there are majorly bad or good economic results that there will be no movement in interest rates until February next year at earliest.

Cheers,

Aceyducey
 
Hi there,

I love to hear all this wonderful economic news, how well things are going here and growth rate and the need for interest rate rise as we grow too fast :confused: . Maybe this is why the government had so much surplus as lower unemployment rate means less social security payments and much more taxes as we spend faster than can receive.

Interestingly, several people I am trying to do business lots crying poor, or at least I am getting the money excuse lots of cases, when the economy should be very healthy :D .

Several friends in business also do not talk about how good are the times, but rather how hard to get people to spend money. I am not so sure that another interest rate rise, even in early next year, would not do much more harm than use to the economy, especially if oil prices will remain above $40/barrel.

Just the 2c.
 
Aceyducey said:
RBA policy is to not change interest rates during an election campaign or for the month afterwards.

There's no reason at this time for the RBA to change this policy & I can't see either party advocating a change.

So expect a couple more neutral announcements.

The next likely opportunity for the RBA to modify interest rates is in December.

And the RBA doesn't meet in January....

So there's a strong possibility that unless there are majorly bad or good economic results that there will be no movement in interest rates until February next year at earliest.

Cheers,

Aceyducey

Hi Acey

I disagree with your point on next Feb. I vote December and even November.

WHY

1. OK we all accept this political waffle about “I will not let rates rise if in Gov” is nonsense. The RBA makes the call and IMO they are a lot smarter, independent, and savvier than their boring image implies. Example: how many times have they bought the Aus $$ and made a killing on the exchange rates? Many!

2. The RBA has consistently taken a long term view as to managing the economy. Example: When they raised rates in Nov and Dec 2003 self interest groups (Builders, Retailers, etc.) cried "the sky will fall". We were told by “experts” the market will crash, the dollar will surge to $1 US (I remember all the posts on the forum, myself included, regarding the 80 US cents and climbing Aussie dollar), our exports sector would die?

What happened? :confused:

Whilst you could literally sell a 1 Bed Shack in Woop Woop, sight unseen, in Sept 2003 to IP investors with negative gearing in their wallet and CG in their eyes, not here in Sept 2004 but there has been no crash, no forced sales, no builders without work. :)

The RBA has since been proven by economic data to have taken the right call, retaining a good balance between insurance again overheating, acceptable growth and a measured slowdown in property. On the dollar the RBA toughed it out and we are back around 70 cents. :)

3. Everything IS good at the moment. Growth is strong, unemployment is weak, even the high petrol price has not stopping us buying cars at record levels. Consumer Confidence is at all time highs according to reports. Confidence equals spending and the RBA wants to slow it.

4. Bang for your Buck (or in this case max gain for the pain). ;)

Why raise in February? It is too late. By then we will all have maxed out our credits cards on Christmas presents, parties, annual holidays, etc, sucking more imports and more consumer debt. “The horse has bolted” as the saying goes.

But November…… before many holidays are booked, presents acquired, summer renovations planned, and well before the supposed, post Christmas Sales splurge, is the best time to remind Australia the RBA can and will use rates to control our spending, if we will not.

5. They did it last time and nothing is better than all the media gloom and doom from a double punch in November and December when people are just reaching into their wallets to spend. Retail spending over this period outstrips the rest of the year so “hit em when it hurts most” should be their approach.

6. By going in November the RBA will also reinforce their independence to the new Government. What better way to say “regardless of what you said in the campaign, don’t forget, we are in charge”. ;)

7. They cannot lose politically! If the Liberals are back they will say “bad RBA, mean RBA” but secretly be thinking “who cares, 3 more years baby!” It Labour is back they will say “it is the Libs fault, we just got here” :eek:

8. Too many reports and comments that all is well (REA and Property Seminar Promoters), possible rate drops (as predicated by some economist in Zambia), more CG for all (based on 10 year buy and hold). RBA will want to kill any unrealistic revival.

So there is my theory of why a December and even November rise is on the cards.

I await the replies, Peter 147
 
Back
Top