Jaa I can see your rationale, however having a implicit guarantee on deposits distorts the market. Have you noticed what happened to the american housing market with Fannie and Freddie Mac with their implicit govt backing?
It's nuts. That rationale is no better than putting your money into a company you have little confidence in, but no worries the taxpayer will pick up the tab later. Confidence in your business has to be earned, then you profit from it. The only shambles out of this, is the total lack of regulation around these finance outfits who lent long and borrowed short, Gaynor has been going on about it ad nauseum in the Business Herald.
The RDGS should be scrapped very shortly.
I think the big banks were paying pretty high premiums to be in the scheme, but let's remember it was enacted in extraordinary times.