<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Australia and the Global Financial Crisis</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.stubbornmule.net/2008/10/australia-and-the-gfc/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.stubbornmule.net/2008/10/australia-and-the-gfc/</link>
	<description>Obstinately objective</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 13 Mar 2010 00:43:30 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Reduce, Re-use, Recycle &#124; A Stubborn Mule's Perspective</title>
		<link>http://www.stubbornmule.net/2008/10/australia-and-the-gfc/comment-page-1/#comment-4115</link>
		<dc:creator>Reduce, Re-use, Recycle &#124; A Stubborn Mule's Perspective</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Sep 2009 08:33:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.stubbornmule.net/?p=1439#comment-4115</guid>
		<description>[...] Australia and the Global Financial Crisis [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Australia and the Global Financial Crisis [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Shoots Are Greener in Australia? &#124; A Stubborn Mule's Perspective</title>
		<link>http://www.stubbornmule.net/2008/10/australia-and-the-gfc/comment-page-1/#comment-3073</link>
		<dc:creator>Shoots Are Greener in Australia? &#124; A Stubborn Mule's Perspective</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Jun 2009 23:51:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.stubbornmule.net/?p=1439#comment-3073</guid>
		<description>[...] have written before about Australia and the global financial crisis, looking at the extent to which we have been better insulated from the worst of the crisis than the [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] have written before about Australia and the global financial crisis, looking at the extent to which we have been better insulated from the worst of the crisis than the [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: stubbornmule</title>
		<link>http://www.stubbornmule.net/2008/10/australia-and-the-gfc/comment-page-1/#comment-3009</link>
		<dc:creator>stubbornmule</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 May 2009 00:27:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.stubbornmule.net/?p=1439#comment-3009</guid>
		<description>@Tom: it does depend on how you &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.stubbornmule.net/2009/03/australian-banks/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;measure the top 20 banks&lt;/a&gt;, but I take your point. The current crisis creates all sorts of opportunities. Fortune favours the brave, but I&#039;m not sure how many are brave enough to take this opportunity!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Tom: it does depend on how you <a href="http://www.stubbornmule.net/2009/03/australian-banks/">measure the top 20 banks</a>, but I take your point. The current crisis creates all sorts of opportunities. Fortune favours the brave, but I&#8217;m not sure how many are brave enough to take this opportunity!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tom</title>
		<link>http://www.stubbornmule.net/2008/10/australia-and-the-gfc/comment-page-1/#comment-3008</link>
		<dc:creator>Tom</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 May 2009 08:04:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.stubbornmule.net/?p=1439#comment-3008</guid>
		<description>This is an opportunity for australia not to be missed. Our banks are in the top 20 of the world most financially sound banks, there is a definite lack of investment everywhere (bar for government investment) so why not take this opportunity to turn around our high CAD (current account deficit)? Lets reverse the trend of more investment coming into australia than is going out. Decrease our net foreign debt and equity by increasing the inflow of funds to australia through profits and debt repayments. Avoid the debt trap we are inevitably moving towards while we still can.

The financial giant that is america has been momentarily staggered, lets take advantage while we still can.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is an opportunity for australia not to be missed. Our banks are in the top 20 of the world most financially sound banks, there is a definite lack of investment everywhere (bar for government investment) so why not take this opportunity to turn around our high CAD (current account deficit)? Lets reverse the trend of more investment coming into australia than is going out. Decrease our net foreign debt and equity by increasing the inflow of funds to australia through profits and debt repayments. Avoid the debt trap we are inevitably moving towards while we still can.</p>
<p>The financial giant that is america has been momentarily staggered, lets take advantage while we still can.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: stubbornmule</title>
		<link>http://www.stubbornmule.net/2008/10/australia-and-the-gfc/comment-page-1/#comment-3006</link>
		<dc:creator>stubbornmule</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 May 2009 21:06:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.stubbornmule.net/?p=1439#comment-3006</guid>
		<description>@kelly: I do think that the experience of the financial crisis supports changes to regulations.

Banks are a bit different to other businesses as they form part of the mechanics for the operation of our economy. If, say, a textile firm went out of business it may be a shame and society may want to provide some kind of assistance, financial or otherwise, to workers who have lost their job. But the failure does not threaten the broader economy. The same is not always true of banks, particularly if they are large or a number are threatened at once, as we have seen recently. In this case failure could have far broader repercussions. This has been understood for a long time, which is why banking is already subject to extensive regulation. But the regulation of banks is effectively an ongoing experiment. The rules are designed based on problems or near misses that have been observed over the years. The latest crisis show that we have not yet got the mix quite right. Two key lessons are the importance of preventing individual banks from becoming &quot;too big to fail&quot;. First, since it will never be possible to completely eliminate risk, we should at least have an environment where a single institution could be allowed to fail, like a textile firm or any other sort of business, without threatening the whole system. Second, it has become evident that it is not only traditional retail and commercial deposit-taking banks whose failure can threaten the economy. The same can be true of the so-called &quot;shadow banking system&quot;, comprising businesses such as investment banks, hedge funds and the like. Changes to regulation should therefore extend greater restrictions on the activities of these sorts of firms.

Even so, the new regulations will, of course, not be perfect. But they will, with luck, represent an improvement in this ongoing experiment.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@kelly: I do think that the experience of the financial crisis supports changes to regulations.</p>
<p>Banks are a bit different to other businesses as they form part of the mechanics for the operation of our economy. If, say, a textile firm went out of business it may be a shame and society may want to provide some kind of assistance, financial or otherwise, to workers who have lost their job. But the failure does not threaten the broader economy. The same is not always true of banks, particularly if they are large or a number are threatened at once, as we have seen recently. In this case failure could have far broader repercussions. This has been understood for a long time, which is why banking is already subject to extensive regulation. But the regulation of banks is effectively an ongoing experiment. The rules are designed based on problems or near misses that have been observed over the years. The latest crisis show that we have not yet got the mix quite right. Two key lessons are the importance of preventing individual banks from becoming &#8220;too big to fail&#8221;. First, since it will never be possible to completely eliminate risk, we should at least have an environment where a single institution could be allowed to fail, like a textile firm or any other sort of business, without threatening the whole system. Second, it has become evident that it is not only traditional retail and commercial deposit-taking banks whose failure can threaten the economy. The same can be true of the so-called &#8220;shadow banking system&#8221;, comprising businesses such as investment banks, hedge funds and the like. Changes to regulation should therefore extend greater restrictions on the activities of these sorts of firms.</p>
<p>Even so, the new regulations will, of course, not be perfect. But they will, with luck, represent an improvement in this ongoing experiment.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kelly</title>
		<link>http://www.stubbornmule.net/2008/10/australia-and-the-gfc/comment-page-1/#comment-3005</link>
		<dc:creator>kelly</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 May 2009 17:53:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.stubbornmule.net/?p=1439#comment-3005</guid>
		<description>Do you think the ongoing financial crisis provide enough justification for a significant change in our financial system regulations?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Do you think the ongoing financial crisis provide enough justification for a significant change in our financial system regulations?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tom Mackenzie</title>
		<link>http://www.stubbornmule.net/2008/10/australia-and-the-gfc/comment-page-1/#comment-2936</link>
		<dc:creator>Tom Mackenzie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Mar 2009 07:09:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.stubbornmule.net/?p=1439#comment-2936</guid>
		<description>What i dont understand is the stimulus packages coming out now. Surely the sudden injection into the economy will be seen by investors and retailers (the main recipients of the flow on cash) will be seen as superficial, despite the multiplier effect which will, admittedly, could possibly significantly stimulate the economy.

I would see it more a case of common sense that the government take this crisis as a chance to make us less independent of imports. Create new jobs through govt companies working for the government!! 

Alot of the recent &quot;news worthy&quot; layoffs (ie. pacific brands) could be re-employed by the businesses in making, oh i dont know, the uniforms of all the public service employees, contracts supplied to australia&#039;s boat industries to build patrol boats, which will become increasingly important in our region, the various equipments used by our defence forces etc. Take this chance to solidify our independence of imports from america, china etc. for the very supplies we need.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What i dont understand is the stimulus packages coming out now. Surely the sudden injection into the economy will be seen by investors and retailers (the main recipients of the flow on cash) will be seen as superficial, despite the multiplier effect which will, admittedly, could possibly significantly stimulate the economy.</p>
<p>I would see it more a case of common sense that the government take this crisis as a chance to make us less independent of imports. Create new jobs through govt companies working for the government!! </p>
<p>Alot of the recent &#8220;news worthy&#8221; layoffs (ie. pacific brands) could be re-employed by the businesses in making, oh i dont know, the uniforms of all the public service employees, contracts supplied to australia&#8217;s boat industries to build patrol boats, which will become increasingly important in our region, the various equipments used by our defence forces etc. Take this chance to solidify our independence of imports from america, china etc. for the very supplies we need.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: stubbornmule</title>
		<link>http://www.stubbornmule.net/2008/10/australia-and-the-gfc/comment-page-1/#comment-2377</link>
		<dc:creator>stubbornmule</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Feb 2009 03:24:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.stubbornmule.net/?p=1439#comment-2377</guid>
		<description>@Tim: P.S. If you are reasonably quick, you should be able to edit your comments after submitting them if there are spelling errors.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Tim: P.S. If you are reasonably quick, you should be able to edit your comments after submitting them if there are spelling errors.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: stubbornmule</title>
		<link>http://www.stubbornmule.net/2008/10/australia-and-the-gfc/comment-page-1/#comment-2376</link>
		<dc:creator>stubbornmule</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Feb 2009 03:23:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.stubbornmule.net/?p=1439#comment-2376</guid>
		<description>@Tim: Am I correct in assuming that the &quot;Socialist Government&quot; you refer to is the Rudd Government? If so, I think you&#039;re characterising them as far further left of centre than they really are. Also, the roots of the current problems that Australia is facing predate the Rudd Government (although, if Labor had been in power earlier, I don&#039;t think they would have done anything to prevent the problem). The crisis is partly imported, partly home-grown. I agree that inappropriate lending was a big part of the problem, for which banks should take some blame, as well as consumers hooked on credit. However, voting for the Rudd Government was not the cause of the crisis.

Also, one quick technical point. The aim of lowering interest rates is to pump more money &lt;b&gt;into&lt;/b&gt; the economy, not to take it out.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Tim: Am I correct in assuming that the &#8220;Socialist Government&#8221; you refer to is the Rudd Government? If so, I think you&#8217;re characterising them as far further left of centre than they really are. Also, the roots of the current problems that Australia is facing predate the Rudd Government (although, if Labor had been in power earlier, I don&#8217;t think they would have done anything to prevent the problem). The crisis is partly imported, partly home-grown. I agree that inappropriate lending was a big part of the problem, for which banks should take some blame, as well as consumers hooked on credit. However, voting for the Rudd Government was not the cause of the crisis.</p>
<p>Also, one quick technical point. The aim of lowering interest rates is to pump more money <b>into</b> the economy, not to take it out.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim</title>
		<link>http://www.stubbornmule.net/2008/10/australia-and-the-gfc/comment-page-1/#comment-2375</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Feb 2009 01:16:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.stubbornmule.net/?p=1439#comment-2375</guid>
		<description>Apologies for any spelling mistakes.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Apologies for any spelling mistakes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
