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

  • Gdsamp on 14/07/2023 - 10:53
    +1

    Godspeed

    • Gdsamp on 14/07/2023 - 10:56
      +9

      Too soft, too late under Lowe.

      However as prophesied by The Big Short we will continue to blame these current economic woes on immigrants (see the turning on of the immigration tap by Albanese gov) and poor people (continuing to spend in the face of high interest rates)

      • AustriaBargain on 14/07/2023 - 11:11
        +8

        Will immigrants not be a chief reason why rentals will remain in short supply, driving up rent and land values, and eating into millions of renters and new home buyers pockets over the next three decades? A million Indians will want a million bedrooms to sleep in yeah? Albo would also have announced plans to increase housing supply, except he's turned his home into a rental property while he's in the lodge so why would he want to do that.

        • Gdsamp on 14/07/2023 - 11:46
          +19

          I won't blame immigrants themselves for leaving their shithole countries to live in Australia.
          Australia is quite possibly one of the best English-speaking countries in the world in which to live. One of those reasons is that we have such a diverse multicultural society.
          I will, however, blame the short sighted thinking of current and previous governments, who as you say have failed to implement policies to maintain a suitable level of housing stock, encourage appropriate investment in the market (note: not subsidising losses from bad property investment), and pumping up total immigration numbers (which of course cannot be criticised without seeming racist)

          • AustriaBargain on 14/07/2023 - 11:50
            +8

            @Gdsamp: I don't see how encouraging investment in existing properties helps anyone other than property investors. Someone would have owned them anyway and used a portion of the lower rental income to maintain it in order to keep collecting rental income. Whether the house is worth a million dollars or just $250,000 doesn't matter, whether you can collect $1,000 a week or $250 a week doesn't matter, no one is going to leave a house vacant when there is money on the table. Property investment incentives should only have been available for brand new properties imo, to encourage the industry to build more new properties instead of just inflating the price of properties that would still have existed without incentives. Maybe I'm just too "poor" to understand that growth of personal wealth is the most important thing in the world, even if it means making renters and other first home buyers less wealthy by jacking up prices.

            • 2esc on 15/07/2023 - 09:33
              -1

              @AustriaBargain: Vacant houses? I know of at least 30 within the regional shire i work with no plan to be rented out. Many are on farms that were purchased by an adjoining farm when expanding they dont want the hassle of renters. The street opposite me has several rarely used holiday homes not used in 6 months. There are plenty of vacant homes when you look.

              • AustriaBargain on 15/07/2023 - 09:40
                +1

                @2esc: And I suppose there are 30 jobs in this regional shire too?

          • R4 on 16/07/2023 - 19:42

            @Gdsamp: Agree. Government immigration policy is a joke but that's not the fault of individual migrants as they only move in the system that exists. Criticising immigration is often seen as racist as that means it's hard to debate it - especially with non-white migrants.

            The current migration system is a joke and only big business and the education sector really wants - yet those sectors don't have to provide the housing, services and infrastructure needed for increased migration. We weren't asked and unfortunately both sides of politics want more migration as it pumps up GDP and tax income. Family reunion visas should be abolished (you have to be under 45 to get PR yet you can bring in your elderly parents. That's mental) and all pathways from student visa to PR should be removed. Skilled, experienced migration only, and only after watertight validation of qualifications - I know someone who used to approve visas for the immigration department and she says that 80-90% of Indian documentation is fraudulent.

        • TightLikeThisx on 14/07/2023 - 21:05
          +2

          An aging population is the cause of it all. So we need more tax payers to pay down government debt, fund medicare and contribute to the national ponzi scheme AKA superannuation.

          It's let in more immigrants or locals need to stop pulling out en masse. Given how expensive things are and how much aussies love spending their money on BS I don't see the later happening.

          • AustriaBargain on 14/07/2023 - 21:41
            +4

            @TightLikeThisx: If the Coalition encouraged more baby booms 20 years ago with baby bonuses then it wouldn't matter, we'd have a million more home grown young workers. I've met a lot of these migrants from China and they are fine and all, but a lot of them don't give a single damn about Australian culture, and their spouses often don't give a damn about learning English. I don't blame them at all and my grandmother never learned English either, neither of my parents were citizens when I was born here, I just think all things being equal it would have been better to birth more home grown Australians who understand what "tell 'em their dreaming" means and have fondness for classic Aussie brands and such. If we need more people than Indian migrants are better than no one, but surely a million more Aussie kids who would be in their 20s by now would have been better, yeah? But whenever ALP do baby bonuses News Ltd. runs headlines about giving money to poor women, or the Coalition PM says things like "women of calibre" aren't worth investing in, and it turns baby booms into vote losers instead of being seen as vote winning good policy that it is. Plus if we had slowly built up a million extra Aussies over 20 years instead of just opening the flood gates maybe the property market could have reacted a bit better.

            • TightLikeThisx on 14/07/2023 - 22:01

              @AustriaBargain: Baby bonuses can't compete with immigrants on a cost basis. The government makes money on immigrants with visas etc. plus they are productive straight away and don't require financial support (medicare/centrelink. Babies on the other hand are unproductive for 16-18 years and require services.

              All western nations have this problem. Over the past few decades the birth rates in the developed world have been dropping. I hear your point about the erosion of 'aussie culture' but it's the cost for having a population boom (baby boomers) and an increase in life spans.

              • AustriaBargain on 15/07/2023 - 10:18

                @TightLikeThisx: $5,000 per new baby sounds like a bargain then if it really is the tipping point for women getting pregnant just to get the money like News Ltd. suggested last time. Who cares if they spend it on flat screen TVs or whatever else. They could burn the money on a fire, if we got our baby boom to increase birth rate then that's all that would have mattered. We're going to invent robots that will do aged care for free soon enough, certainly within 70 years from now. And if those million Indian migrants settle here, do they not get old? What exactly do you think happens to Indians when they reach older age, the crystals in their palms start glowing and they submit themselves to Carrousel in order to save the government aged care costs and pensions?

            • SydBoy on 16/07/2023 - 10:02
              -1

              @AustriaBargain: lol … so you saying you met lots of migrant from China and lot of them don't give a single damm about Australian culture … but what is that Australian culture and don't give a damm about learning English so why English is something they need to learn ? have you learn Aboriginal language ? if you or anyone who don't give damm about learning Aboriginal language then stop the nonsense …. !

              • AustriaBargain on 16/07/2023 - 10:35

                @SydBoy: I dated an Indigenous man for a few years and picked up some slang, but didn't learn the language, no. I didn't learn my parents native language either. English is the only language I know, sadly. Didn't even learn any languages in school, changed school fairly often and they all taught different languages. Don't get me wrong, I'm kind of partial to Asian men and do want a lot more of them here, but it's true that a lot of migrants here don't really care about Australian culture. Which is fine, it makes sense if a million random Australians went to India you can bet a lot of them would never learn the language or immerse themselves in the local Indian culture, so it's probably natural, totally. normal. But a lot of conservatives who are pro migrant for economic reason are also big fans of conserving Australian culture, and they are also firmly against using money to promote domestic baby booms here. Some of the things conservatives want are in opposition to each other.

          • ninnypoop on 15/07/2023 - 22:39

            @TightLikeThisx: Why you see superannuation as a Ponzi scheme?

            • TightLikeThisx on 16/07/2023 - 08:46

              @ninnypoop: Because new entrants to a super fund pushes up the value of the underlying investments. It is mandated by law that people pay super and it makes financial sense to invest a significant proportion of super into Australian assets.

              • ninnypoop on 16/07/2023 - 08:52

                @TightLikeThisx: But the investments are real and so are the returns.

                • TightLikeThisx on 16/07/2023 - 11:42
                  +1

                  @ninnypoop: So if everyone in Australia tomorrow decided to convert their super balance into cash would everyone on average get back the equivalent, more or less than what they put into the super fund?

                  • ninnypoop on 17/07/2023 - 11:03

                    @TightLikeThisx: Does it not depend on your investments? As it is, I would pull out 115% of what has been paid into my super. In reality Ive put no money in because the super is payed by my employer.

                    I'm confused as to if you think super is a good thing or not.

        • SydBoy on 16/07/2023 - 09:57
          -4

          hope the aboriginal thought the same way as you and kicked off those who forcefully entered the country , torture aboriginal people of the land and today some spend time on Ozbargain talking about immigration…. long-live hypocrisy i guess… !!!!

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_of_Indigenou…

      • Nugs on 14/07/2023 - 11:29
        +4

        "Too soft, too late under Lowe."
        Yes
        .

      • CommuterPolluter on 15/07/2023 - 11:36
        +1

        Nobody blames immigrants. We blame the Government for letting so many in to buffer the property market, balance their budget, and subsidise big businesses.

        • AustriaBargain on 16/07/2023 - 10:38
          +1

          Exactly. We have the technology to rebuild Sydney from scratch on empty land if I really wanted to. We can build nice high density housing, we can build more trains, more malls, more houses. But the will isn't there. Building things costs money and requires effort, and not building them creates more wealth for property investors and home owners. If Australia were a human body we'd probably call this situation a disease or mental illness.

      • R4 on 16/07/2023 - 19:31

        Blaming immigrants is ridiculous but blamed government immigration policy is cool as it's part of the problem.

      • peekabooo on 16/07/2023 - 22:44

        Too slow as well. Inflation in the US is under control with aggressive hikes.

    • OhNoUShiz on 14/07/2023 - 21:57

      Glass cliff.

  • GG57 on 14/07/2023 - 10:58
    +7

    Was Lowe sacked or was his contract not renewed?

    • IMadeYouReadThis on 14/07/2023 - 11:04
      +20

      exactly! He wasn't sacked so a lot of comments about him being sacked are very inappropriate. Lowe made big mistakes - the biggest was going too late and going too slow. They should not have reduced their hikes from 50bp to 25bp and then should not have paused in March.

      RBA has to stop pretending that Australia is different from the rest of the developed nations - the inflation was apparent in the US and UK much earlier and somehow RBA thought that we are different and didn't raise IR until May 2022! That was his biggest mistake… We should have been at at least 4.5% now and should have got there probably beginning of this year but here we are at 4.1 pretending that we are different and don't need to increase rates any further.

      Having said that, I am not expecting miracles here - Bullock was the deputy and supported each of the decision made so I am really not sure whether this appointment will do much.

      • Drakesy on 14/07/2023 - 11:33
        +3

        That's true, Michelle was equally culpable.

        • RockyRaccoon on 14/07/2023 - 12:53

          There in lies the political dilemma that our wonderful treasurer has faced.

          He was critical of the Governor as such, if he changed the direction completely with a new appointee from outside, then he couldn’t blame anyone but himself for the inflation strategies, that many complain about.

          By appointing one already linked to the current strategy, he can continue to say to some degree it’s on the RBA.

      • futureminime on 15/07/2023 - 13:12

        Agree he didn't 'get the sack'. No governor has been head of the RBA for 14 year since it began in 1960. The last 2 did have 10 years each though.

        https://www.rba.gov.au/about-rba/history/governors/

        But there are other factors than 'press the button, take money out, reduce inflation', and we are a different economy to the rest of the world. Just as the US and UK are different from each other. Our housing sector, which is a decent proportion of our GDP is directly tied to consumption which is the largest is one of the most heavily leveraged and we don't have long term fixed rates like the US. We were always going to get hit and I agree we should have started hikes sooner but the size and pacing after that, I don't have enough knowledge about what sectors get hit hardest and how long they takes them to react and adapt.

        Not that I think it would have happened with your numbers, but for argument you go really hard and fast and slap 4.5% increase at the first meeting. You create a lot of bad debt and trash the economy because people just don't have the income to service at that level, and don't have time to shed costs. You need to pace it so that as people cut costs, others can jump in and get loans to give them an exit, even if its at a loss.

        Old link but shows the start of the rate hikes. When NZ next door is starting hard and fast

        https://www.reuters.com/markets/europe/australia-new-zealand…

        Always easy to see mistakes in hindsight. I do think its strange that recession is such a dirty word, and that even if we had inflation of 20% for a year, going to -0.1% for a 2nd quarter like NZ did to enter recession would be such an issue. The bank had to know that the global economy was in a poor state when they flooded the economy with cheap cash to survive covid, putting the burden of keeping the economy afloat on the future consumption of the current working generations. You're not creating new economic activity your just shifting it and hoping. Not saying that's the wrong thing to just that its expected and this period of inflation they made by bringing consumption forward will be balanced against lower activity from everyone mortgaged up to their eyeballs.

      • User102430 on 15/07/2023 - 14:14
        +1

        "and didn't raise IR until May 2022"

        ….which strangely coincided with the elections…. but I'm sure it's just a coincidence /s

    • AustriaBargain on 14/07/2023 - 11:09
      -2

      Is there much of a difference? Not renewing in the middle of an emerging financial crisis is basically the same thing as being sacked.

      • GG57 on 14/07/2023 - 11:32
        +2

        A reasonable difference I would have thought.
        Although the new incumbent has been on the Board for a long time, they will bring a fresh set of eyes to oversee the implementation of the recommendations of the RBA review. It is probably a reasonably conservative choice for the change of Governor.

    • Trying2SaveABuck on 14/07/2023 - 11:29
      -2

      Was Lowe sacked or was his contract not renewed?

      it was not renewed but he made it abundenantly clearly he wanted to stay on

      When this happens in sport ie the coaches/players contract was not renewed when they wanted to stay on….. we just say they were sacked it technically isnt correct but i think it is easier then saying he wasnt given a new contract

      • GG57 on 14/07/2023 - 11:33
        +8

        …it technically isnt correct…

        If someone is employed on a contract basis, and they remain employed until the end of that contract, it isn't a sacking.

        • Trying2SaveABuck on 14/07/2023 - 11:38

          If someone is employed on a contract basis, and they remain employed until the end of that contract, it isn't a sacking.

          Fair i wont dispute you it is just easier then saying Lowe was not offered a new contract

        • AustriaBargain on 14/07/2023 - 11:38
          +3

          Personally whenever a permanent employee doesn't get their contract renewed I've always heard them say that they consider themselves fired from their job. Never heard someone say "Oh honey, my contract wasn't renewed" when talking about a regular job. I guess head of the RBA is no regular job, but surely he was just fired from it all the same?

          • GG57 on 14/07/2023 - 11:40

            @AustriaBargain: I think you are confusing two different types of employment.
            I work with many who are employed on a contract basis, and we regularly see them depart at the end of the contract term.

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

              @GG57: Well the oracle agrees with you, that's good enough for me. I guess a seven year term is pretty different to yearly contracts in any case:

              If an RBA Governor’s term ends and they are not reappointed, it would not be accurate to say that they were “sacked” or “fired” from the position. The decision to reappoint a Governor at the end of their term is at the discretion of the Treasurer. If the Treasurer decides to appoint someone else as Governor, it would mean that the previous Governor’s term has simply ended and they were not reappointed, rather than being “sacked” or “fired”.

              • GG57 on 14/07/2023 - 11:53
                +1

                @AustriaBargain: A seven year term contract isn't different from a six-month contract or a three year contract, etc. It is just the terms of employment.

                So then we move to OP's poll option:

                Lowe Deserved the sack

                Regardless if he did or if he didn't, this isn't directly related to the announcement today.

                • AustriaBargain on 14/07/2023 - 12:00
                  -1

                  @GG57: I still think most people would say that he got the sack, considering he's not an old man, wished to continue serving, and was in the middle of managing a crisis. But you're technically correct that he wasn't "fired" from the job, and that's the best kind of correct.

          • Trying2SaveABuck on 14/07/2023 - 11:49
            -2

            @AustriaBargain:

            Personally whenever a permanent employee doesn't get their contract renewed I've always heard them say that they consider themselves fired from their job. Never heard someone say "Oh honey, my contract wasn't renewed"

            exactly the end result is you wont be working for the organisation anymore

            most people would consider that getting sacked if they wanted to continue employment

            @GG57 is technically correct but im speaking colloquially - on any 'office documents' it would just say he ran out his contract

            i think some ppl take gramma and said things a bit too seriously online

    • Top G on 14/07/2023 - 21:22
      +2

      Lowe was a typical scapegoat. He doesn't really care, accumulated a slush fund of millions and 7 years is a good run. Doesn't have any further political ambitions as such so being used as a sacrificial lamb, while ugly isn't unexpected.

      Will be on the board of directors for a few corps while chilling on a cabana in Hawaii.

  • GordonD on 14/07/2023 - 11:05
    +5

    If she didn't have exactly the same ideas about what basis decisions should be made on, and what decision should be, she wouldn't have been in the position to replace him. That's how areas of expertise that are based on belief and bodies like the Reserve Bank Board work. They perpetuate the dominant ideas by marginalising and excluding anyone who thinks differently. Nothing has changed.

  • AustriaBargain on 14/07/2023 - 11:08
    +1

    Perhaps Bullock has a secret mandate to preserve the housing bubble.

    • orangetrain on 14/07/2023 - 12:10
      +2

      Perhaps RBA has a secret mandate to preserve the housing bubble. FTFY

      • AustriaBargain on 14/07/2023 - 12:16
        +2

        I wouldn't even mind the housing bubble so much if I only my family owned like 10 properties bought at the start of the bubble.

  • Drakesy on 14/07/2023 - 11:08
    +19

    He has had no choice but to up interest rates to try bring inflation down.

    He also had the benefit of foresight in knowing how the NZ inflation rate was reacting some 6 months before Australia's inflation started to go to the moon yet chose to sit on his hands and do nothing.
    He also had the audacity to suggest interest rates weren't going up until 2024, advice that home buyers took as gospel and overleveraged themselves.
    He also was in charge of the RBA in times of record low inflation - literally has missed the goal of 3% inflation for the last decade.

    Now i know there's a lot of variables at play but even the average joe could see that NZ and even other parts of the world had overheated property markets and that increasing interest rates earlier and faster was the only way to keep them in check. He waited too long and was forever playing catchup.

    Now the Murdoch media is castrating him for raising it too high, when only now we're living in times of reasonable interest rates.
    Property here is cooked and the record low interest rates have everything to do with it.

    • GG57 on 14/07/2023 - 11:35

      I agree. The NZ economy has always been a good indicator of what may happen in the short term, as it reacts quicker / has shorter cycles than other larger economies.

    • freefall101 on 14/07/2023 - 12:14
      +2

      IMO there was too much of a focus of not going into a recession, which Australia has managed to do but NZ has not. They were so focused on that soft landing and just assuming most of the issues with inflation would fix themselves.

      Granted, the government is more to blame for housing being a mess. The way they have a hands off approach to housing is just insane when trillions is tied up in it. States promise community housing and deliver bugger all, the federal government just pumps purchasing instead of supporting building new houses under the increasing demand will get more houses built, despite years of evidence that it doesn't work.

      • RockyRaccoon on 14/07/2023 - 13:04
        +4

        Only issue with what you have said, is that states also added by pumping up the market, with stamp duty reductions, - effectively a gift, that just meant new buyers got to bid with the extra, which is exactly what another new buyer was doing.

        No new houses, just more profit for the seller.

    • caitsith01 on 17/07/2023 - 11:59

      Don't forget how he publicly proclaimed that rates wouldn't go up much while his LNP mates were still a chance to cling to power before the last election, then immediately started jacking them up when Labor won power. Arguably he left rate rises too late because he wanted to protect the former government in the lead up to an election and has harmed the economy as a result. Not even remotely surprising that Labor would want to replace him.

    • Trying2SaveABuck on 14/07/2023 - 11:21
      +2

      Where did the PM & Treasurer 'announce' that Michele is a woman aside from using female pronouns?

      if you took 20 seconds to click the clink there is a video attached to it it is literally the 1st or 2nd sentence the PM says….

      • [Deactivated] on 14/07/2023 - 11:31
        -1

        lol

        The PM said that she's the first woman to lead the RBA.

        I await your response to the 2nd query

        • Trying2SaveABuck on 14/07/2023 - 11:35
          +4

          The PM said that she's the first woman to lead the RBA.

          so does the teasurer….

          I await your response to the 2nd query

          why mention it? what does being a women have to do with the job itself? and let alone why mention it twice both Jim and Albo to me it is embaressing in 2023 see giving a 'women a top job' as something is used as a political positive.

          I would have more respect if he named her and said CV is xyz

          if you cant understand why it cheapens the appointment then fair enough personally i do i wouldnt be the only one

          • [Deactivated] on 14/07/2023 - 11:58

            @Trying2SaveABuck:

            I would have more respect if he named her and said CV is xyz

            More respect for whom?

            if you cant understand why it cheapens the appointment then fair enough personally i do

            You're right, I don't understand why you think it 'cheapens the appointment' - she has the credentials to back the appointment so why should a few words from the PM/Treasurer take anything away from her appointment being with merit?

            • Trying2SaveABuck on 14/07/2023 - 11:59
              -2

              @[Deactivated]:

              You're right, I don't understand why you think it 'cheapens the appointment' - she has the credentials to back the appointment so why should a few words from the PM/Treasurer take anything away from her appointment being with merit?

              becuz it is 'sexist' ….

              if she was a male would the PM said this is the 9th 'male' to lead the RBA?

              if the answer is No then it is why it cheapens it

              When Lowe was appointed he was the 8th govenor not the 8th male govenor.

              the fact the PM and teausurer hammered the 'female' part in both their speeches cheapens the appointment and honestly speaking makes them look sexist

              ppl talk about ingrained racism and sexism this is prime example of it

              • [Deactivated] on 14/07/2023 - 12:05
                +1

                @Trying2SaveABuck: So, yet another member who types out an OP however

                cbf explain(ing) it

                Why bother posting at all?

                • Trying2SaveABuck on 14/07/2023 - 12:06
                  +2

                  @[Deactivated]:

                  Why bother posting at all?

                  becuz it is abundantly obvious and disgusting and you seem to be the only OP who doesnt understand why it is sexist?

                  if you dont call out sexism/racism then your probably a sexist or a racist yourself

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

                    @Trying2SaveABuck:

                    it is abundantly obvious

                    why you included 2 paragraphs in your OP to point out your perceived 'sexist' take on the appointment of the first female RBA governor

                    • Trying2SaveABuck on 14/07/2023 - 14:45
                      -2

                      @[Deactivated]: It was sexist and i mentioned it my question is why are you so triggered? Are you a sexist? Do you not think women should get jobs like the head of RBA?

                      Or do you think casual sexism should be acceptable from our leaders?

                      Or do you hate women? If so have you ever been violent to a women? - as it seems like thebtype of behaviour someone who is so triggered by somethibg like this would do?

                      • [Deactivated] on 14/07/2023 - 15:04
                        +1

                        @Trying2SaveABuck: Whoa - a lot to unpack there but unsurprising.

                        What's your stance on equal pay for women’s sport again?

              • ForkSnorter on 14/07/2023 - 14:56
                +4

                @Trying2SaveABuck: Your rant is missing the point of the PM's comment. She is the first woman to lead the RBA in its 63-year history, and that is significant and worth mentioning. If you think it's sexist to mention that, I don't understand your way of thinking at all.

                • Trying2SaveABuck on 14/07/2023 - 15:38
                  -2

                  @ForkSnorter: of course you're all entitled to your opinion…..

                  Albo and Jim treated it different to if it was a male ….that is the textbook definition of sexism spin it anyway you want i didnt like it and i dont appreciate people who think ingrained sexism is 'ok' - i personally dont you do not have to agree with me but i explained my position bcuz i was asked too not becuz im 'ranting'

                  kind of speaks loads that you think its 'fine' to highlight the governor is female - she is not a 'female governor' she is just 'the governor'

                  similar to when ppl said Obama is a 'black president' no he is just 'the President' - until ppl start thinking this way we will always have racism/sexism in society and i personally wont stand for it, but it is clear we got a long way to go based on the repones from you and the other op

                  • ForkSnorter on 14/07/2023 - 15:56

                    @Trying2SaveABuck: What if a child won the Nobel prize for physics? Would mentioning that they are “the first child to win a Nobel prize for physics” be ageist?

                    By the way, I thought it was historic when Obama became the first black president, I think it was a massive achievement for racial equality.

                    • Trying2SaveABuck on 14/07/2023 - 16:10
                      -1

                      @ForkSnorter: no disrespect but it is because you are a racist…… or have been thought a level of racism is 'acceptable'

                      Obama was the 44th predisent of the United states like Trump was the 45th and Biden the 46th…… - when it say it like that you take race out of it see how it is better

                      as for your comment about the child probably why would it them being a 'child' be important or matter assuming you win a NP you generally have to do something amazing.

                      • ForkSnorter on 16/07/2023 - 10:07

                        @Trying2SaveABuck: But mentioning she is the first woman is "sexist' according to you. So mentioning that someone is the first child to win something should be ageist if we apply the same logic.

                      • ForkSnorter on 17/07/2023 - 07:39

                        @Trying2SaveABuck: Calling Obama "the 44th president" is of course natural in normal contexts. But it is not racist to say that he was the first black president. Because this is merely a fact. It is not racist to think or say that being the first black American president was a massive achievement for racial equality. Because this is a fact. Information itself is not racist. Facts are not racist. You have a bizarre way of thinking. I hope you don't see too much information in your life because it might trigger you and you might go off on a rant.

                  • [Deactivated] on 14/07/2023 - 16:08

                    @Trying2SaveABuck: Another fair chunk of personalised victim-hood yet again …. what does racism have to do with the new governor's appointment?

                    Wishing you well on sorting out all that stuff.

                    • Trying2SaveABuck on 14/07/2023 - 16:11
                      +1

                      @[Deactivated]: 'sexism' not racism - i dont think youre going to change your opinion you seem hell bent on ranting but not actually listening to the reply

                      have a good day regardless

              • chriise on 14/07/2023 - 21:09
                +2

                @Trying2SaveABuck: I think it's condescending.

    • El-Rhi on 14/07/2023 - 11:22
      +5

      It is literally the first thing the PM said in his announcement

      • [Deactivated] on 14/07/2023 - 11:34
        -2

        Poor grammar in the OP

    • Crow K on 14/07/2023 - 11:24

      Yeah, OP's wording struck me as strange as well. I'd be interested to see what the answer is.

      • Crow K on 14/07/2023 - 11:29
        +8

        nvm, I found the sentence. "Michelle will be the first female governor appointed since the RBA was founded in 1959".

        I see it more as noting a historic occurrence (e.g. at the end of the Tour de France a few days back they announced so and so was the first Canadian to win a stage) than virtue-signalling or it's-because-she's-a-woman-everyone. But I have no doubt others will draw different conclusions.

        • [Deactivated] on 14/07/2023 - 11:35
          -1

          It's the following paragraph that clears up any confusion

        • Ghost47 on 14/07/2023 - 15:08
          +2

          "Michelle will be the first female governor appointed since the RBA was founded in 1959".

          Wow, much woke. /s

          • Crow K on 14/07/2023 - 15:35
            +1

            @Ghost47: (monocle pops out of eye, spits out brandy) A wo-wo-WOMAN??? Working with numbers?? Men's money numbers???

    • maverickjohn on 15/07/2023 - 16:06

      I don't know about cheapening the appointment but when women are fighting for parity. I'm not sure if they want it to be made into a big deal they want it to just be normal practice.
      I do think her resume fulfils the portfolio and is a basis of how every role is acquired.

  • tsunamisurfer on 14/07/2023 - 11:17

    Lowe was right.

    • People need to economise.
    • People need to live with others if they can't afford housing.

    Unfortunately people get triggered by advice especially when its from someone on a higher income like its invalid.

    If people are hanging their hat on Lowe's statement about no interest rate rises until 2024, I hope all RBA governors in future learn from this and refuse to give any predictions to the market.

    Mortgagees who went into the market based on that statement are beyond stupid.

    • jv on 14/07/2023 - 11:24
      +14

      Lowe's statement about no interest rate rises until 2024

      He should have been sacked when he made that statement.

      • AustriaBargain on 14/07/2023 - 11:38
        +3

        He's lucky we the people didn't literally sack him.

      • tsunamisurfer on 14/07/2023 - 12:02
        +1

        Can you explain why an RBA governor should be sacked on the spot for making a prediction?

        • jv on 14/07/2023 - 12:09
          +21

          It wasn't a prediction, it was a misleading statement from someone in a position of influence.

          • tsunamisurfer on 14/07/2023 - 13:08
            +2

            @jv: So you only want statements from people of no influence?

            Or you want no statements whatsoever that may be with hindsight deemed as misleading from someone in that office?

            • jv on 14/07/2023 - 13:13
              +3

              @tsunamisurfer:

              So you only want statements from people of no influence?

              That's not what I said.

          • burningrage on 14/07/2023 - 14:06
            -1

            @jv: Are you aware banks are also as influential as RBA? You may recall many years ago (During Kevin Rudd's reign) RBA dropped interest rates but banks didn't drop the rates in tandem with RBA.

            Banks make their rates determination based on their own assessment of the economy, with or without RBA. How do you think they come up with fixed interest rates? Those in the know should realize by now most people don't win with Fixed Interest Rates because they have their own predictions.

            Not long ago I think 2-3 months ago, Banks said the rates are already peaked and will go down next year. What if they are wrong?

            Should they be sacked as well if their prediction didn't come to fruition? I honestly think their prediction is as good as yours. The only difference is they have more time analyzing the economics than us because they got nothing else to do in life other than that.

            • jv on 14/07/2023 - 14:22
              +3

              @burningrage:

              Are you aware banks are also as influential as RBA?

              Nah, nowhere near the airtime that the RBA gets each month…

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

              @burningrage:

              How do you think they come up with fixed interest rates?

              Actuaries.

          • gromit on 14/07/2023 - 23:26

            @jv: No it was a prediction, the press turned it into a promise/statement of fact.

            • jv on 14/07/2023 - 23:26
              +2

              @gromit:

              No it was a prediction

              Obviously, he was not very good at his job then…

              • gromit on 20/07/2023 - 08:45

                @jv: He made a bad prediction based on the info he had. I think most people thought it was bad at the time. making a bad prediction based on data isn't a reason to sack someone.

                • GG57 on 20/07/2023 - 11:20

                  @gromit: He wasn't sacked.

                  • gromit on 20/07/2023 - 11:29

                    @GG57: never claimed he was. simply responding to JV's claim that it warranted sacking.

        • freefall101 on 14/07/2023 - 15:10
          +8

          This wasn't something he just randomly said, this was part of forward guidance in an attempt to stimulate the economy when it really didn't need stimulating. He wasn't just making a statement, he was signalling to the economy as part the RBAs of managing economic policy. It is a strange thing for the head of the RBA to ever do and that he got it so massively wrong shows how inept it was.

          He also didn't just make a prediction, he kept doubling down on it. It was in Feb 2021 he first made the statement (not his personal prediction, mind you, it was "the boards" prediction), in Feb 2022 he was still saying the markets were wrong and that we might by the end of the year. In May 2022 we had a rate rise.

          He's a senior figure who killed trust in the RBA. He should have gone ages ago, the same as CEOs get sacked when they completely botch things up. It's a signal to whoever follows to be better.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join