Philip Lowe to Be Replaced by Michele Bullock as Reserve Bank Governor

Trying2SaveABuck on 14/07/2023 - 10:47
Last edited 14/07/2023 - 15:35 by 2 other users

In a massive shake up the RBA Governor Philip Lowe will not be given another term and will be replaced by Michele Bullock. Michele Bullock named as next RBA Governor, Philip Lowe’s term comes to an end

I have been critical of Lowe in recent years but the governor of the RBA is probably the most important job in the nation from an economic stand point. Now I'm not a fan of Lowe but on reflection I kind of feel him being given the boot is a 'bit harsh'.

He has had no choice but to up interest rates to try bring inflation down and as someone with a home loan I'm not a fan of the blunt tool the RBA uses in rate rises to slow the economy but it is the 'only' tool they have. Really it is the appointed political leaders who need to be held to account for not managing the economy better (pervious Josh Frydberg currently Jim Chalmers)

I'm sure Michele Bullock will be a fine replacement (likely/maybe even better than Lowe) I couldn't care less that she is a women we live in 2023 and find it a bit strange our PM and Treasurer think that is something that needs to be announced.

She clearly has the CV to lead the RBA and got there on merit mentioning she is a women cheapens the appointment - in my opinion she has gotten the job on merit.

Regardless do people think Lowe deserved the sack, is it fair enough we bring someone new in? Given the circumstances no one else in the world has managed monetary policy much better or worse so what else could Lowe do?

I'm in two minds I understand the change but perhaps it is a tad harsh.

Poll Options

  • 121
    Lowe Deserved the sack
  • 360
    Lowe was a bit hard done by realistically what else could he has done?
Financial

Related Stores

Reserve Bank of Australia
Reserve Bank of Australia

Comments

      • burningrage on 14/07/2023 - 12:13

        So every bank's prediction or market prediction is a valid ground for sacking yeah? Market commenters such as Barrenjoeys (Barclays), HSBC, Citigroup if they make predictions and they are not correct, they should be sacked eh?

        It was a fool for many people to listen to Lowe in the first place but I don't think it warrants a sack. I remained firm the best RBA Governor to be Ian MacFarlane and Glenn Stevens the worst.

        • greatlamp on 14/07/2023 - 19:49

          Surely you see the difference between a bank making a prediction, and the head of the organisation that sets interest rates making a strong statement about the direction of interest rates.

          Is it any surprise that the media presented it as a statement of fact?

          • RockyRaccoon on 15/07/2023 - 07:09
            +4

            @greatlamp: The issue is Lowe made a statement that was condensed by our media to say, they won’t expect rates to rise until 2024.

            There were caveats in that speech, as there were in subsequent speeches.

            Lowe was ill advised. Dealing with important issues careful framing of statements to an audience like media, means be aware they aren’t good on details, headlines don’t tell complex stories.

            “Yes, but” answers always can be shortened to just ‘Yes”

            Senior Politicians employ media advisors to check statements and do the what if’s, knowing what can be misread. Sometimes so they will be. Our QLD premier has many on her staff.

            Guess the reserve bank board will need the same. Keeping in mind Lowe said that it was the board making the assessment, which in the media was changed to Lowe making the assessment. A small but subtle difference.

            Like with bargains, Upto 80% off, is often read as 80% off.

            As well there was a whole real estate industry who gained from these sales, they surely wouldn’t be worried about emphasing the details of the caveats in his speech.

            • Malik Nasser on 15/07/2023 - 09:18
              +1

              @RockyRaccoon: Yes, spot on.
              The media is good at butchering the message and misinforming the public. They are just as much to blame as anyone else.

          • infinite on 15/07/2023 - 21:16
            +1

            @greatlamp: The media intentionally misrepresented his comments and outright lied to the public.

            Pretty much the same as what you are doing.

      • ozmian on 15/07/2023 - 12:52
        +2

        He didn’t make that statement tho people need to stop buying into media headlines and rtfa.

        “But our judgment is that we are unlikely to see wages growth consistent with the inflation target before 2024. This is the basis for our assessment that the cash rate is very likely to remain at its current level until at least 2024.”

        See the words our judgement? Not my judgement? It’s laughable that everyone thinks a single person makes these decisions. Why even have a board. And secondly notice the words assessment and likely? Those words aren’t the definitive statement newspapers ran in the headlines. They was based off of information at the time. Was they wrong? Yep but did he definitely and solely promise rates wouldn’t rise? Nope. People need to take responsibility for their own decisions. The cash rate as it stands is still at an average low of what it has been for the last thirty years (see https://tradingeconomics.com/australia/interest-rate max chart). It’s spent more time above what it is now than below. If people assumed it would stay lower for the life of a mortgage that is their “mistake” and they got it wrong too.

        FYI it’s probably good he’s going public confidence clearly isn’t there but it’s not solely on him. He’s the spokes person for the board. The media love to click bait headlines. Government policy. There’s a multitude of factors at play.

      • Nebargains on 15/07/2023 - 14:50
        +1

        Except he never said that and I have no idea why people love to repeat this blatant misinformation.

        • infinite on 15/07/2023 - 21:14

          They repeat it because they hate men and want to take every chance they can to get one removed from a senior position.

          The clowns are jumping up and down now and screeching with joy at replacing him with a woman, who literally supported and backed every last decision Philip Lowe ever made while he was with the RBA & publicly stated she would have made all the same decisions he did.

          • [Deactivated] on 15/07/2023 - 21:22
            -2

            @infinite:

            They repeat it because they hate men

            …. and screeching with joy at replacing him with a woman

            lol

            Such clownish wokeness you sprout

      • redfox1200 on 16/07/2023 - 04:30

        except he never made this statement

    • Ghost47 on 14/07/2023 - 14:01

      Mortgagees

      Mortgagors is the correct term.

      • tsunamisurfer on 14/07/2023 - 14:55

        Yes thank you.

        • Ghost47 on 14/07/2023 - 14:56

          No worries, I see people using the terms incorrectly often.

  • Almost Banned on 14/07/2023 - 11:18
    +2

    I tend to agree that he has been scapegoated a bit - but some of it was earned. He didn't need to make some of the comments he did about future predictions, and the board might have been able to move more quickly to reduce the massive hikes we've seen.
    I also have no doubt that this government is very pleased with themselves that they've managed to replace a man with a woman as the head of the reserve.

    • IMadeYouReadThis on 14/07/2023 - 11:49
      +5

      No he wasn't a scapegoat - he went too slow and too late and didn't deserve more time to do more damages.

      • Nebargains on 15/07/2023 - 14:51
        +2

        You think he just unilaterally makes the decision and the rest of the board just twiddle their thumbs?

        Prepared to be disappointed as his replacement will just continue the same strategy the RBA has previously implemented.

      • infinite on 15/07/2023 - 21:10

        He's clearly been scapegoated, because the diversity hire they traded him out for literately supported and backed every last decision Philip Lowe ever made while he was with the RBA & publicly stated she would have made all the same decisions he did.

        Instead of bringing in someone different, the gov't just slotted someone in his place the exact same but wearing a dress & then patted themselves on the back for it.

  • lordezekiel on 14/07/2023 - 11:41
    +8

    Philip Lowe doesn't care what any of you think. He has been earning nearly a million dollars a year, he's extremely well off. An untrained monkey could have done the same job as he has for the last year, except monkey pull lever, monkey get banana instead of $900,000+

    • Trying2SaveABuck on 14/07/2023 - 11:45

      Philip Lowe doesn't care what any of you think. He has been earning nearly a million dollars a year, he's extremely well off. An untrained monkey could have done the same job as he has for the last year, except monkey pull lever, monkey get banana instead of $900,000+

      you're probably right

    • jv on 14/07/2023 - 12:41
      +4

      a monkey pulling a lever would probably have made better decisions.

    • AlanHB on 15/07/2023 - 22:45

      Though it is potentially paired with being one of the most hated people in Australia for the moment.

      That said, for $900k I'd put my hand up to be strapped to the whipping post too. I'd probably keep off social media during that time though.

  • burningrage on 14/07/2023 - 12:02
    -3

    All I can say to Australia is that best of luck for the many months if not years ahead.

    The preppers will be laughing their way to the bank while the general population will be ruing the day they flirted with socialism/communism.

    • Trying2SaveABuck on 14/07/2023 - 12:04
      +2

      The preppers will be laughing their way to the bank while the general population will be ruing the day they flirted with socialism/communism.

      i 100% agree with you, but it isnt flirting there is a large number of the 'young' generation that are communist/socialist - jump on reddit Australia (r/Australia) post anything removely not left wing and you will be shouted down or banned

    • Cluster on 14/07/2023 - 13:11
      +10

      Socialism/Communism? Baby Boomers voted themselves incredibly generous superannuation taxes and real estate perks over the last few decades. Are they Communists too?

      • Ghost47 on 14/07/2023 - 14:07
        +11

        People love bashing socialism and communism until they are given stuff for free then they welcome it [free stuff] with open arms.

        • GG57 on 14/07/2023 - 14:49
          +4

          I didn't think that 'Baby Boomers' experienced WW2?
          Not downplaying that Boomers had a few challenges and a lot of amazing experiences (depending when they were born); there was the Korean War, the so-called Vietnam War (incl. conscription), a revolution in music, sexual liberation, the moon landing, etc., etc.
          There were punks, hippies, and everything in between.

        • ThithLord on 14/07/2023 - 15:22
          +3

          Paul Keating's 17% interest rates

          In a world where the entire economic landscape of earth was seeing record-high interest rates, one measly Prime Minister of Australia held the keys to it all!

          • Brianqpr on 15/07/2023 - 20:25
            +1

            @ThithLord: On 25k houses

            • CurlCurl on 16/07/2023 - 11:00

              @Brianqpr:

              On 25k houses

              $25.000 houses? You're dreaming.

              Ours was $165,000 in Sydney western suburbs, purchased in 1986. Basic 3 bedroom red brick veneer.

      • Trying2SaveABuck on 14/07/2023 - 16:13
        +1

        Socialism/Communism? Baby Boomers voted themselves incredibly generous superannuation taxes and real estate perks over the last few decades. Are they Communists too?

        no that is capitalism - doing what is best for ones selves private wealth is text book capitalism

        for all the boomer bashing Millenials and more so now Gen Z give most of the older millenials might not admit it but they know the boomers and there low debt, savvy and some what ruthless political views where we probably 'right' in regards to given themselves the best chance at wealth creation

      • infinite on 15/07/2023 - 21:05

        Are they Communists too?

        In much larger numbers than the current generation, yes.

  • JimmyF on 14/07/2023 - 12:22
    +3

    In a massive shake up the RBA Governor Phill Lowe will not be given another term and will be replace by Michele Bullock.

    The massive shake up wasn't replacing Phill Lowe, it was that they had been stripped of the power to set rates.

    At the end of the day, most countries in the world are suffering huge inflation rises and the only lever they have is raising interest rates. Replacing Lowe is just some token gesture to please the plebs, it didn't who was at the top, rates would have went up.

    Lowes main fault was promising something he doesn't really control aka rates won't rise for x years, and then being too slow to raise rates. AU sat around doing nothing while the US and NZ for example had been raising rates. Most believe this was because scumo was pressuring the RBA to leave the rates as is until after the election so it didn't hurt them and Lowe was trying to save face from the earlier comments.

  • azero on 14/07/2023 - 12:37
    -2

    Saying that rates won't go up is an enough of a reason for Lowe to be sacked. If you don't like that - just don't accept that high profile jobs.

    What most people don't see about immigration is - we still need a lot of skilled migrants. But yet the criteria for some are so high, that we don't actually get enough people.

    We outsourced 9 developer jobs last year to India due to lack of on shore applicants. Offshore is low quality and high price. We almost get no developers on skilled visas anymore.

    What we get ultimately is loads of students that uses it as a path for getting residency - and ultimately end up being taxi drivers - which I think the government should cut back on.

    • jv on 14/07/2023 - 12:45

      and ultimately end up being taxi drivers - which I think the government should cut back on.

      Dan already killed of our Taxi industry… All we got out if it was worse service and surge pricing…

      • JimmyF on 14/07/2023 - 16:52
        +5

        LOL Dan didn't kill the Taxi, they did it to themselves with crap service and scams that allowed Uber to slip in.

        • jv on 14/07/2023 - 16:57
          +2

          allowed Uber to slip in.

          Uber didn't 'slip in.'

          The were operating illegally until a 'deal' was done with Dan who changed the law and didn't compensate the taxi licence holders for the licenses he stole off them.

          Similar to if Dan decides to take $500K of your super, give you $50K for it, and says bad luck…

          • [Deactivated] on 14/07/2023 - 16:59
            +3

            @jv: How many t-plates do you own?

            • jv on 14/07/2023 - 17:00

              @[Deactivated]:

              How many t-plates do you own?

              None. How about you?

              • [Deactivated] on 14/07/2023 - 17:00

                @jv: Zero.

                How lucky are we ?!?!

                • jv on 14/07/2023 - 17:01

                  @[Deactivated]:

                  How lucky are we ?!?!

                  Lucky, until you need a taxi or an uber on a busy night… Then pay $$$$$ thanks to Dan.

                  • [Deactivated] on 14/07/2023 - 17:03

                    @jv: Unsure how paying $250K+ for a t-plate back in the day & worthless now will assist me when I need a taxi/uber?

                    • jv on 14/07/2023 - 17:04
                      +1

                      @[Deactivated]:

                      paying $250K+

                      paying $250K to Dan, and a year later, he steals it off you for 50K….

                      • [Deactivated] on 14/07/2023 - 17:05

                        @jv: That's why we're lucky we didn't.

                        • jv on 14/07/2023 - 17:06
                          -1

                          @[Deactivated]: But thousands of others weren't so lucky.

                          Some lost their families, some committed suicide. All thanks to Dan.

                          • [Deactivated] on 14/07/2023 - 17:09

                            @jv: I think the t-plates sank in value in all states when uber came along.

                            It is sad when you consider the ramifications of the political decision-making & the fact that the compensation was in no way fair.

                            • jv on 14/07/2023 - 17:10
                              +1

                              @[Deactivated]:

                              I think the t-plates sank in value in all states when uber came along.

                              Because the government was planning on legalising them…
                              They were operating illegally.

                              • [Deactivated] on 14/07/2023 - 17:12
                                -1

                                @jv: I know however you need to be thankful that it didn't impact you.

                                • jv on 14/07/2023 - 17:14
                                  +1

                                  @[Deactivated]:

                                  I know however you need to be thankful that it didn't impact you.

                                  It impacted people I know…

                            • jv on 14/07/2023 - 17:12

                              @[Deactivated]:

                              & the fact that the compensation was in no way fair.

                              Government should have just paid everyone what they paid for it…

                              It was bad enough that they lost their livelihood, but to also steal their assets was disgusting.
                              Many if not most of the owners had everything invested in these and were going to use them upon retirement.

                              • [Deactivated] on 14/07/2023 - 17:14
                                +1

                                @jv: All eggs in one basket rarely works out well.

                                • jv on 14/07/2023 - 17:15
                                  +1

                                  @[Deactivated]:

                                  All eggs in one basket rarely works out well.

                                  A bit like having Super with one superannuation company that the government keeps pushing….

          • JimmyF on 14/07/2023 - 18:34
            +1

            @jv:

            The were operating illegally until a 'deal' was done with Dan who changed the law and didn't compensate the taxi licence holders for the licenses he stole off them.

            LOL Its not Dans job to police companies operating illegally now is it jv?

            The law changed as the customer had spoken, around Australia, not just here.

            Taxis plate holders did get compensated, look it up. The smart ones offloaded them way before Uber become an issue, as they looked overseas and saw what happened.

            Taxi companies had a decade to change its ways and provide better service so Uber wouldn't take hold. They did nothing.

            Taxi companies had a front row seat of how Uber was playing out in the states, with the states being about 3-4 years ahead of us. Again they did nothing. But the smart ones did offload the plates for a profit!

            Not sure what more you wanted anyone to do. Taxis did this to themselves,

            • jv on 14/07/2023 - 22:15
              -2

              @JimmyF:

              LOL Its not Dans job to police companies operating illegally now is it jv?

              He allowed them to do it and then changed the law so they couldn't be taken to court.

              I wonder if any kick backs came his way?

            • jv on 14/07/2023 - 22:16
              -1

              @JimmyF:

              so Uber wouldn't take hold.

              Uber were never allowed to operate at all in Victoria. They were doing it illegally…

              They were being taken to court until Dan decided to change the law.

              • JimmyF on 15/07/2023 - 08:56

                @jv:

                Uber were never allowed to operate at all in Victoria. They were doing it illegally…

                So what did the Police do about it? What did the Taxi authority aka CPV do about it? As that is their job to stop not Dans.

                They were being taken to court until Dan decided to change the law.

                LOL At this stage the 'war' was over, Taxis had already lost and Uber was legal in other states.

                Looks like Dan had to clean up a mess that again the Taxi authority body couldn't do.

                He allowed them to do it and then changed the law so they couldn't be taken to court.

                As above, he didn't allow them, it wasn't his job to police this matter. He changed the law after the war was lost. Happens all the time.

                Why don't you tell me about the other states that 'allowed' Uber to run illegally and also changed the law?

      • Mrgreenz on 14/07/2023 - 22:01
        +2

        You would be one of very few who belives the introduction of rideshare was a bad thing.

        • jv on 14/07/2023 - 22:13

          one of very few

          Nope… more than a few…

          But you stay happy paying exorbitant prices…
          Even taxi drivers often don't use the meter any more because they don't have too…

          • Mrgreenz on 14/07/2023 - 22:28
            +3

            @jv: The whole taxi plate buisness was as absoloute ponzi, and was shown to be.

            People are choosing rideshare for a reason. Because they don't have to service the amortization of the $250k taxiplates

            • jv on 14/07/2023 - 22:39

              @Mrgreenz:

              The whole taxi plate buisness was as absoloute ponzi,

              With the government happy to rake in the $$$$$$$ issuing new licenses.

              • Mrgreenz on 14/07/2023 - 22:47
                +2

                @jv: And the purchasee's of the inflated licences were happy to charge inflated fares to make an inflated profit. With hopes of selling the inflated licence for a larger inflated price down the track.

                If only the music dodn't stop

              • JimmyF on 15/07/2023 - 08:58

                @jv:

                With the government happy to rake in the $$$$$$$ issuing new licenses.

                hahaha but yet you blame Dan for 'allowing' Uber, so cutting off this income stream.

                If the gov was really racking in $$$$ Then why allow Uber?

                Your hate for Dan blinds you from the facts.

            • jv on 14/07/2023 - 22:40

              @Mrgreenz:

              People are choosing rideshare for a reason.

              Until they get stung and then wake up and never go back.

              • Mrgreenz on 14/07/2023 - 22:48

                @jv: Not happening, go to any airport and cast your eyes on the que of taxi's waiting to be filled

                • jv on 14/07/2023 - 22:55

                  @Mrgreenz:

                  Not happening

                  It's been happening for a long time.

                  Uber is one of the most unethical, dodgiest companies in existence…

                  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversies_involving_Uber

                  • JimmyF on 15/07/2023 - 09:00

                    @jv:

                    Uber is one of the most unethical, dodgiest companies in existence…

                    This I don't disagree with….. But if you want to present a equal view, lets do Controversies involving Taxis next. As they certainly have LOTS.

        • greatlamp on 15/07/2023 - 16:07

          We allowed a US conglomerate of venture capitalists to operate illegally, destroying the livelihoods of Australian businesses, then the law was changed so that they could operate at will.

          It's a farce, the rule of law means nothing. The benefits of ridesharing to the consumer are completely irrelevant

          • JimmyF on 15/07/2023 - 18:50

            @greatlamp:

            We allowed a US conglomerate of venture capitalists to operate illegally, destroying the livelihoods of Australian businesses

            LOL Uber didn't import US workers over here to drive for Uber. For every job lost, a new one was created with Uber. Some would say Uber is even more popular than Taxis had ever been, so created more jobs than lost. Plus taxis didn't disappear, they are still around.

            As for destroying the livelihoods, sure some maybe. But lets be honest, no one liked Taxis before Uber arrived, it was the LAW that ONLY they could give rides, so they didn't care about levels of service, clean cabs, showering and picked over the jobs for what they wanted to do ignoring the rest. The taxis did this to themselves AROUND the world, not just here.

            Anyone who ever booked a 'taxi' before Uber knows the fear if they'll arrive or not, having to keep ringing up asking where they are.

            It's a farce, the rule of law means nothing. The benefits of ridesharing to the consumer are completely irrelevant

            The taxi industry has an entire body which was meant to stomp out illegal 'taxi services', yet they didn't do their job, which allowed Uber to get a foothold, legal or not.

            I don't like Uber as a company, but the Taxi industry certainly wasn't an angel in any of this either.

            • greatlamp on 15/07/2023 - 20:40

              @JimmyF:

              LOL Uber didn't import US workers over here to drive for Uber. For every job lost, a new one was created with Uber.

              The owners of those cabs were Australians, middle class Australians not foreign millionaires.

              But lets be honest, no one liked Taxis before Uber arrived

              I agree with you but it is not relevant.

              The taxi industry has an entire body which was meant to stomp out illegal 'taxi services', yet they didn't do their job, which allowed Uber to get a foothold, legal or not.

              Yes this is the point. Nobody seems to care since the Taxi industry apparently deserved it. What other local industries deserve to be destroyed? The compensation paid to taxi licence owners by Uber is a joke and sets a precedent.

              • JimmyF on 15/07/2023 - 21:06

                @greatlamp:

                The owners of those cabs were Australians, middle class Australians not foreign millionaires.

                The drivers of Uber cars were Australians, middle class Australians not foreign millionaires. No jobs had been lost, people just changed jobs. Taxi drivers jumped from Taxis to Ubers. The ones crying had been the RICH cab owners who owned the cars and never drove them as they lost their work force to Uber as the drivers didn't want to share a cut anymore.

                I agree with you but it is not relevant.

                It is, as Taxis provided a poor service offering that people hated, hence why they would op to use an 'illegal' service.

                Yes this is the point. Nobody seems to care since the Taxi industry apparently deserved it.

                Well it was the Taxi industry's own job to CARE, they didn't even care enough to stop Uber. They had the power to police/fine Uber drivers for breaking the law, they didn't really even try.

                What other local industries deserve to be destroyed?

                AirBnB is going a good job at wreaking hotels/motels/rental market.

                The compensation paid to taxi licence owners by Uber is a joke and sets a precedent.

                As in the amount paid or the fact compensation was even paid to begin with?

                No investment aka business comes without risks. The fact they had a monopoly that they abused then cried poor when the monopoly was removed is laughable.

                • greatlamp on 16/07/2023 - 10:37

                  @JimmyF:

                  The ones crying had been the RICH cab owners

                  Not the case for all cab owners.

                  I just don't see how giving that industry over to foreign venture capitalists for free is better for our country. Even if those RICH cab owners didn't drive their own cars. (Not rich compared to the owners of UBER)

                  Again the fact that the taxi industry didn't give good service is irrelevant to the point I'm making.

                  • JimmyF on 16/07/2023 - 13:30
                    -1

                    @greatlamp:

                    Not the case for all cab owners.

                    If you owned a taxi plate, you had the money, so rich enough in this case to be called rich, most plate owners rarely drove. It was a BUSINESS after all, your success shouldn't have been monopolyed in like it was. The gov limited cab numbers, so the monopoly carried on like a monopoly not caring, as who else are you going to use?

                    I just don't see how giving that industry over to foreign venture capitalists for free is better for our country

                    Now that the monopoly has been removed, you're free to start your own taxi service. The taxi industry wasn't handed over to Uber, the laws changed to allow new players in the market. Taxis are still a thing. You're free to order a taxi if you want. They didn't disappear.

                    Again the fact that the taxi industry didn't give good service is irrelevant to the point I'm making.

                    No it is the entire reason your point exists. If the taxi industry gave good service, then companies like Uber wouldn't have had a chance to get a foot hold in the market. So far from irrelevant as claimed. The taxi industry could have cleaned themselves up and put Uber out of business in a heartbeat but they didn't want to.

                    Without the monopoly protection laws, the free market is doing its job.

                    Uber is a horrid company indeed, but it was better than the taxi industry at the time. Now the laws are changed, the free market can do its job again if needed. Uber can be replaced by another company without too many dramas. Users just need to vote with their wallets.

          • Mrgreenz on 15/07/2023 - 21:55
            +1

            @greatlamp: Yes we did, because thats what the greater population wanted.

            The law brought taxi/rideshare into the 21st century.

            Livelihoods of Australian buisness built on protectionism at the expense of the consumer are conpletely irelrelevant.

            • JimmyF on 16/07/2023 - 13:33

              @Mrgreenz:

              Livelihoods of Australian buisness built on protectionism at the expense of the consumer are conpletely irelrelevant.

              Agreed, thats what all these people failed to understand, that the taxi industry was a protected 'business', no matter how bad of service they delivered, no one could replace them legally at the time. So dirty cabs, bad drivers, unsafe cars, cherry picking the jobs was the everyday normal.

              Anyone who booked a taxi back in the day would know the terror of waiting to see if it arrived or if the driver would even take you!

    • JimmyF on 14/07/2023 - 16:51
      +4

      Saying that rates won't go up is an enough of a reason for Lowe to be sacked. If you don't like that - just don't accept that high profile jobs.

      He shouldn't have said it, but either way, it hasn't changed much. People who took out too much debt and are in pain today, would still be in pain in 2024 when he said the rates would go up.

      We outsourced 9 developer jobs last year to India due to lack of on shore applicants

      LOL Lack of on shore applicants or lack of on share applicants at your price point you wanted to pay?

      • azero on 14/07/2023 - 17:06
        -2

        Can't really compete when big banks pay 160K for someone with 2 years of experience.

        Those roles had a budget of 150 - but not for someone without experience. 1 local candiate can easily replace 2 offshore but there weren't many really - and the business didn't want to pay so…

        • JimmyF on 14/07/2023 - 18:36
          +4

          Can't really compete when big banks pay 160K for someone with 2 years of experience.

          So not a lack of applicants in the country then, but a lack of pay to attract the talent.

          and the business didn't want to pay so…

          And there it is…. remember saying this

          We outsourced 9 developer jobs last year to India due to lack of on shore applicants

          It wasn't a lack of on shore applicants, it was a lack of your business willing to pay market rates.

          • azero on 14/07/2023 - 19:55
            +1

            @JimmyF: Not really, Salaries were / are that high due to lack of applicants. Wasnt like that pre covid.

            Even when you pay that high, the quality isnt there. Or else you need to keep looking for months to find a good applicant.

            But the issue now is, when the business realizes that you can get 9 in india for the price of 6 in here, they outsourced everything.

            After starting the outsourcing, they havent hired a single local person.

            They pay around a million per year. A million that would have stayed in Australia. This is for a small company.

            Now the work is low quality, everything takes longer. But the balance sheet is prettier

  • Drpepper666 on 14/07/2023 - 12:42
    +6

    Lowe is copping flack for raising interest rates recently, which is not warranted.

    However he should cop flack for leaving interest rates so low for so long and getting us into this mess in the first place.

    In my uninformed opinion.

    • buffalo bill on 15/07/2023 - 06:40

      No, he's copping flack for fortune-telling; and rightly so.

  • Cluster on 14/07/2023 - 13:08

    Some people think it's unfair to lump everything that goes wrong onto the CEO/leader/etc. Lowe couldn't have foreseen COVID, or the Ukraine-Russia war, etc. He made rash interest rate predictions.

    But if you get paid the big bucks then you have to take responsibility.

    Events goes well: It was my stellar leadership that made it happen. I am fantastic. Now increase my salary and bonuses by 20% this year.

    Events turn out badly: It wasn't my fault. No one saw this coming. It was unprecedented. I generously won't raise my million dollar pay packet this year.

    • jv on 14/07/2023 - 13:14
      +2

      Lowe couldn't have foreseen COVID

      He made that ludicrous comment after COVID.

  • DarkOz on 14/07/2023 - 13:19
    +1

    He should be sacked…but only for raising interest rates too late and too low.

  • soan papdi on 14/07/2023 - 13:25

    My guess is, rate rises will stop before Lowe's last day. He will leave the position with the 'bad name'. Having a new governer allows us to start clean, reputation wise.

  • TheMindsetTraveller on 14/07/2023 - 13:25

    New vision and change can be good, but not under these politically charged circumstances.

    There is, now, almost an implied expectation that the incoming Governor will bend to meet the needs/wants of the government of the day, even if it means a poorer financial outcome overall.

    • MarsTitan on 14/07/2023 - 13:38
      +2

      She has been more hawkish than Lowe. Lowe was a dove in comparison.

      • Ghost47 on 14/07/2023 - 14:31
        +1

        I read that too but wasn’t sure how accurate it was. Good, the last thing we need is someone in the government’s pockets.

  • payless69 on 14/07/2023 - 13:36
    -2

    Ah well, Albo just wanted to do Melbourne a favour and has his chick from there to keep up quotas. He is going to give them Kiwis au passports and open the door to half of East Timor.

  • netjock on 14/07/2023 - 13:52
    +6

    Understand the politics.

    1. They can say blame the last guy (Lowe)
    2. Longer Lowe stays the more likely the people will turn on the government (blaming the last government is getting a bit old considering the 1T debt is debunked, the $19bn surplus when they said would be $1bn)
    3. The new person has a honeymoon period before the public turns on them

    Think all this mess with Yes / No on the voice is well timed to take heat off cost of living? Because the federal government has done nothing at all to help.

    To me it doesn't matter who is in government. They just need to be able to help the people. But it seems like they are all helping themselves.

    • Trying2SaveABuck on 14/07/2023 - 14:10

      This government is useless but if they think changing Lowe will help them….. it will last till the next rate hike or two…. difference is they wont be able to blame Lowe..

    • Gdsamp on 14/07/2023 - 14:15
      +1

      Think all this mess with Yes / No on the voice is well timed to take heat off cost of living? Because the federal government has done nothing at all to help.

      Well i think it's unfortunate that the cost of living crisis has been brewing throughout the voice discussions, and that the RBA was asleep at the wheel, raising rates too slowly too late.
      The government has no excuse for doing so little on cost of living: meaningful policy on this front could have tangible, immediate effects for australians (and in particular, First Nations peoples who are disproportionately, negatively impacted) compared to the nebulous voice proposal that the government (red or blue) can ultimately decide to ignore the advice of.

      • netjock on 14/07/2023 - 16:19
        +1

        Cost of living started last year at the start of the invasion of the Ukraine.

        The rest is just politicians trying to take away attention from from cost of living.

        The $3m super balance super tax
        Cancelling stage 3 tax cuts (the same tax cuts for politicians and billionaires that is so easy to just apply a $9k surcharge)

    • SBOB on 14/07/2023 - 17:17

      Understand the politics.

      I don't agree with many of your comments but this is 100% :)

      The government are fine when the rba takes the 'blame' for cost of living crisis as it's the one getting the headlines every month, and allows the government (whichever is in power) to palm of making actual hard people impacting decisions to change monetary/fiscal policy and spending decisions.

      This just allows them to perpetuate that a bit further by saying "yes, it was their fault, that's why we replaced them" (despite the replacement doing the exact same thing with the exact same limited controls available to them)

  • CurlCurl on 14/07/2023 - 14:10
    +3

    Lowe is the messenger. He announces the boards decision. Yes, I know he is on he is on the board.

  • dogboy on 14/07/2023 - 14:28
    +6

    "What else could he have done" and "they only have one tool to stop inflation" are 2 of the most ignorant and short minded statements I have ever heard. They just have no imagination other than "funnel money from the masses to the banks". How about upping super contributions so the money goes into our future or a special tax that goes to the government to the benefit of all. Nope, just move all the money to the privately owned banks. What a f-ing farce.

    • Trying2SaveABuck on 14/07/2023 - 14:47
      +2

      I have mentioned the super contributions arguement else where i agree with you 100%

      That isnt a power afforded to the RBA …got to look at Albo and Jim for that one…sadly the major and minor parties are all in the banks pocket so it won't ever happen

      But take my upvote imho it is the best way to manage inflation

    • Malik Nasser on 14/07/2023 - 15:48
      +5

      You are confusing monetary policy with fiscal policy.
      The RBA has no say on fiscal policy. You should be directing your indignation to the government based on your assessment.

    • SBOB on 14/07/2023 - 17:13
      +2

      "What else could he have done" and "they only have one tool to stop inflation" are 2 of the most ignorant and short minded statements I have ever heard

      Confusing the powers the rba has, to powers the government has for its fiscal policy is about the most ignorant and short minded statement I have ever heard.

      The RBA can't up super rates, it can't change financial policy or spending criteria.

    • netjock on 14/07/2023 - 22:39

      Just send in the ADF and break down doors at every house

      Taken everyone’s excess savings and hold it until the economy is in a recession

      But then that would just make the government look bad and they don’t want that

      Government loves a simple punch line.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join