The (RBA’s) problem is we’re all too rich
The bank’s fight against inflation is much harder due to the extraordinary boom in household wealth, which is keeping the economy motoring along. Expect interest rates to stay high.
this post was submitted on 05 May 2026
12 points (100.0% liked)
AusFinance
1347 readers
5 users here now
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
There should be an mutually tied tax for this. When the rate goes up for borrowers so does the tax on retirement savings. It's bullshit to hit the people with the most expenses only.
ues, but that change won't come by voting ALP/LNP/ONP (the latter just hate ex-pats)
Until the Overton Window moves nothing much changes.
We could also not hit people with mortgages at all. In the US all mortgages are fixed-rate for the whole term of the loan.
sure, you'd need to socalise banking for that to occur, it's only because of US Government backed Freddie and Fannie offering that deal that commercial banks had to compete.
Probably doesn't need to just hit "retirement savings" but you could say savings as a whole. At least that way offset accounts wouldn't be negatively impacted.
Just raise it. Inflation is awful.
There needs to be more than one interest rate.
There already is. The RBA only sets the "cash rate". Your mortgage isn't at the cash rate, and neither are the loans businesses take out. They're influenced by it, and a lot of banks will essentially have their rates rise and fall in lockstep with it, especially for regular people who don't have the negotiating power to lock in special agreements, but they don't have to.
That's kind of the case in the US. They don't have variable-rate home loans, so only business borrowing is affected by the US Federal Reserve's interest rate.
That will stop people wasting so much money on checks notes fuel and food. In the RBA's defence, they are damned either way, and they have no other influence mechanism.
And consequently this degrades peoples trust in our public institutions. "They only have one lever". Yeah, and it isn't having the intended effect.
Por que no los dos?