–Thanks to the rise in rates, credit card interest rates are 20% higher than this time last year. And it means, with current balances, Aussies are paying about $500 million in interest on stuff they already bought. Is it too late to buy into the Visa IPO?

–By the way, today’s Daily Reckoning turned into a rather in-depth look at the fundamental trends in the Aussie economy. If you want the share market news and some trading analysis, we recommend you amble on over to Money Morning. Today’s DR has a big task: to determine Australia’s role in global economy history. If that’s not your style, go straight to the weekend and pass our passionate discussion of the terms of trade.

–But before passion, something more mundane. What is so annoying about the credit card headline?

–Well, it suggests that credit card debt has actually declined. It hasn’t. It’s just growing less fast. This is like those ridiculous announcements that periodically emanate from the bowels of the U.S. Government about the size of the Federal deficit.

–In the months that the deficit grows less fast than the month before, you see headlines like, “Deficit shrinks.” Of course it’s deliberate deception (a lie, if you like). If a tumor grows less fast it doesn’t mean it’s less dangerous. It’s still cancer (nearly all debt is malignant). And growing less fast isn’t really a qualitative improvement.

–The goods news for Glenn Stevens is that high interest repayments on credit cards will eat into domestic consumption. The bad news is that the higher rates actually led to lower repayments according to the latest RBA figures. Repayments in February fell by 7.9% from $18.21 billion to $16.71 billion. That was for the month, by the way.

–You may have felt cheated that we did not spend more time, as we promised, digesting the hard truths published in the Reserve Bank’s Financial Stability Review last month. But one chart did come to mind in light of yesterday’s credit card news. It’s the climb in household interest repayments as a percentage of disposable income.

–Not surprisingly, it’s on the rise. Granted, the combined number includes many older homeowners who are willing to carry higher debt loads later in life. But the simple truth is that paying interest on debt is not a good way to accumulate wealth. Never has been. Never will be. Simply not possible to get rich by spending the bank’s money.

–Let’s put it this way: unless wages rise (something that would probably cause the Reserve Bank to put up rates again), Australians on the margin of the boom will have to use their credit cards to finance essential consumption, and they will pay dearly to do so. Either that, or they will have to reduce consumption. “If we do not discipline ourselves,” the old saying goes, “life will do it for us.”

–But there are congratulations in order. So congratulations Australia! You’re getting a $30 billion raise.

–Reserve Bank economists now reckon that the recent coking and thermal coal deals inked between Aussie sellers and overseas buyers will haul in another $30 billion to the economy this year. That is not the kind of news the RBA wants to hear while it’s busy putting out inflationary bush fires in the economy. But facts are facts.

–Thirty billions dollars in coal and iron ore earnings, where will it go? To producers? To investors? To mining service companies like Walter Diversified Services (ASX:WDS)?

–While you think on that, let’s talk about “terms of trade” for a moment. “Terms of trade” is one of those terms of the trade that gets throw around by economists all the time. But what does it mean?

–The simple definition is this: it’s the ratio between export prices to import prices. If you get more for what you sell and pay less for what you buy, your terms of trade improve. And guess what people? Thanks to this particular moment in history, Australia gets a lot more for what it sells and pays a lot less for what it buys (except for crude oil).

–The chart below is taken from a 2005 Reserve Bank research paper called “Long-Term Patterns in Australia’s Terms of Trade,” by Christian Gillitzer and Jonathan Kearns. If you’d like to read the whole thing, you can find it here.

With main indices down significantly since Jan. 1, a slew of companies – including many financial firms – recently (and gladly) offered to share how much they pocketed from their stake in Visa’s IPO:

• Bank of Hawaii Corp. (BOH) said its net income would jump by $7 million to $9 million in the first quarter, much of which will come from a mandatory redemption of its Visa stock, the Star Bulletin reported.

• National City Corp. (NCC) said it would post a $450 million cash gain from selling about one third of its stake in Visa, BusinessWeek reported.

• West Virginia’s City Holding Co. (CHCO) banked $2.3 million from a partial redemption of its Visa holdings.

• Overseas, federally owned Banco de Brasil took in $207 million from selling a portion of its Visa stakes. Its private sector rival Banco Bradesco (BBD) made $201 million from Visa’s IPO. Both figures are before tax, Business News Americas reported.

• South African bank FirstRand said last week that it received a pre-tax gain of $123 million from its shareholding in Visa, iAfrica reported. Of that, $69 million was from the sale of its Visa’s shares and $54 million is the value of the remaining shares. FirstRand is locked into holding those remaining shares for three years.

• Melbourne-based Australia and New Zealand Banking (ANZBY) reported that it expects to pocket $350 million pre-tax from 50% to 60% of its shares in Visa. Follow Aussie banks National Australia Bank and Westpac are expected to turn a $200 million and $100 million profit, respectively, The Age reported.

• And in China, China Life Insurance (LFC) sunk $300 million into Visa’s IPO. Assuming it bought its shares at Visa’s opening price of $44 a share, that investment is now worth more than $439.5 million at Friday’s $64.46 closing price. Also, China Investment Corp. – the country’s $200 billion sovereign wealth fund – made an undisclosed investment in Visa’s IPO, Today’s Financial News reported.

“It’s not standard practice to say it, but typically big institutions do if they are part of the IPO process and receive allocation,” said Money Morning Investment Director Keith Fitz-Gerald.

Still a Buy?

For its March 19 IPO, Visa’s 406 million shares were originally priced at $44 each – well above the expected price range of $37 to $42 a share. The $17.86 billion proceeds it took in made it the biggest U.S. public offering, shattering the $10.6 billion AT&T Wireless raised in its April 2000 IPO.

Globally, only one deal was larger: The October 2006 IPO of the Industrial & Commercial Bank of China, or ICBC, which raised $19.1 billion – or nearly $22 billion when the over-allotment provisions were fulfilled.

However, $44 was the price underwriters and large-scale investors got in at.

Visa’s shares opened at $59.50 on the New York Stock Exchange (NYX), and traded as high as $65, before closing at $56.50, up $12.50 a share, or 28.41%. The following day, shares jumped another 13.89%.

The initial run-up and continued growth gives the San Francisco-based Visa a market value of more than $52 billion.

And shareholders are still piling on – despite companies publicly declaring they are cashing out – because of Visa’s dominant market position and the growing shift into electronic payments.

“Visa’s CEO has got it together,” Fitz-Gerald said. “He’s targeting Chinese growth and that should go right to the bottom line.”

As far investing in the company, Fitz-Gerald suggests buying in increments to capture safest gains.

“I wouldn’t jump all in now, but there is long term value.”