"CBA suggesting 2x0.25% for the next 2 months, peaking in December at 3.1%"
Most pundits, media hacks and economists who think that 0.25% is appropriate also generally seem to concentrate their reasoning on the effect of interest rate rises on mortgage holders, to the exclusion of nearly all other economic factors. For example, it is rare for savers to even get a mention.
Condensing their economic philosophy into a nutshell, they appear to think that borrowers should get the benefits of savings, not the savers. Believe it or not. They think that people who work hard and save should do so so that borrowers can get the benefit of their hard work and savings, while savers have to watch the real value of their savings dwindle because of high inflation. I suspect that most of these "experts" must be net borrowers.
Now, as far as CBA is concerned, let me see, oh yes, isn't a substantial part of their business to do with mortgages? Oh dear, I wonder if they also claim to be totally unbiased.
It might help to understand how absurd the 0.25%/3.1% opinion is by considering the fact that a maximum cash rate of 3.1% would still be less than half the current rate of inflation.
The dial will need to be turned much further towards savers and away from borrowers before inflation can be controlled. While interest rates are below the rate of inflation then it makes more sense to borrow and spend rather than save. Demand remains high. The inevitable outcome of weak monetary policy is higher inflation for longer.
In other words, there is an ocean of garbage commentary from "experts" who get paid to comment. The most peculiar thing is that the RBA seems to like swimming in this ocean.
(20min delay)