I have long thought that the most useless, non-value added, profession in our country has been that of a banker. Think about it, we deposit our money to be kept safe and we are charged for it. I remember back in the day when we were actually paid for it.
What else do we go to banks for? Loans. Debt to income ratios my sixth grader can calculate. What possible reason can there be for any bank to trade its paper away to another bank or financial institution? The is a shell game and a Ponzi scheme and always has been.
I know bankers and invariably the executive level bankers seem to think it is quite funny that the government sanctions them with a license to steal.
I am not saying to totally eliminate the private banking system. But I do suggest a public option. This could be the Federal Reserve Banks having a banking relationship directly with consumers and businesses. Lets face it. In tough times, people want to know their money is safe. And there has never been a case of a Federal Reserve bank failing. And in cases where commercial banks can't or won't provide needed services, the Federal Reserve bank can do it for them.
When the banking sector fell apart in 2008, the government should have nationalized the banks for a year or two to bring it back to life, and prosecute those responsible. Thankfully, the banking system brought itself out of the recession all on it's own. However, some of the same issues are present and could cause another collapse in the future. Banks are still focused on high risk investments, rather than providing safe home loans to people that once qualified. I'm not saying they should go back to the sub-prime mortgage days, but people with good jobs and ok credit are being denied homeloans. The American Dream is dying at the hands of the banks.
It's the evil, soulless, corporate machines that caused the financial crisis. It was their cynical, lying, two-faced manipulation that caused people to lose their homes....Knowing they were. You cannot trust those people once their true intentions are already apparent. It's been widely known the banking industry is an untrustworthy sector. At least we could have a proper elected officials, voted in by the people, to run, manage, regulate the country's economy for the good of the people. Just like Sweden did long ago for the same reasons. Those who argue against it, and say it's causing government intrusion...The sanctimonious 1% arose from letting that happen.
As a small business person I think that it is galling that the banks are now making of previously unheard of profits while ignoring credit for the small business owner and at the same time borrowing money from the Federal Reserve Bank. The economy cannot get off the ground unless I as a business owner can hire young people, train them the basics - like how to be on work on time - and send them out to the work force. I cannot hire people because while the economy is getting better there is not enough money I the till to hire people. An employee is the most expensive expense a small business can have. There must be a source for lending and SBA isn't it. We need traditional banking of inventory and payable financing and well as capital expansion. The Government must fill in the need. Stop loaning money to the banks so they can make billions more and at the same time creating a class of wealthy people that will hold on to their wealth forever. How about some choices? I was pleased to see that my Alma Mata is offering credit cards.
For sure universities that have huge endowments can establish banks and well as a Federal Government. This nonsense about student loans. Students are the best investment that a person the government can make. The loans should be repaid by the student tax refund going forward. That simple. Never have to write a check again. And credit cards: can't the Federal Government issue credit cards for everyone and the limit of the card based on the tax refund ? If Harvard, MIT and BU can offer credit cards at 7% why can't the government offer them at 9%.
In a general sense, yes the banks should be nationalized, however there has to be a good policy for nationalization. Banks in general should have their money and credit functions separated and the money generating part given under a nationalized Federal Reserve. In other words, the government should not nationalize the banks outright but ought to nationalize the part of the banks where money is generated out of thin air: the fractional reserve system. Right now, private banks, end up creating the money supply inherently through the use making loans without 100% deposits backing up the loan along with charging interest. Instead the government should have sole ownership over the creation of money and the banks should have 100% backed deposits. So now banks can still exist but the money creation of the government can be increased or decreased with better control and also the newly made money bears no interest and could be immediately spent on sectors of the economy that have too much supply or too little demand and/or spent on infrastructure projects. If Nationalization is to occur, the policy must be clearly formulated and give benefits to the citizenry.
One of the bad things about the free market is that personal monetary interest does not always align with the best interests of the country. In fact, sometimes they go the opposite way. If banks refuse to lend and, instead, hoard money, so top employees and CEOs can add another million to their stocks and salaries, then the U.S. should step in and stop it, before too many Americans suffer from the bank's actions.
Nationalization of the banks is the only solution that seems to be available to the government in light of recent events. Those leading the banks of today have proved themselves unable to run their banks the right way, taking insane amounts of long term risk to make more money in the short term. In a normal business this would be fine, the company would just go bankrupt and the world would move on but since the banks have become to big to allow to fail without dragging down the entire world with them, something needs to be done. The government either needs to moderate the banks practices, or at least break them up so they are not such a large monopoly.
Even though our economy is in trouble, I don't think the answer is to nationalize banks. I think that would send a message of instability. In addition, I think it would panic some people enough for them to pull their money out of the banks. It would also send a message to other countries that we are unstable. I think there is room for more regulation, but not nationalization of the banks.
Nationalizing the banking system will not help create prosperity in the United States. Although the banks of the U.S. have behaved miserably and performed terribly the correct course of action is to keep them alive as private corporations. At the same time there needs to be a return to the strict banking regulations that existed for decades after World War II.
Banks should remain in the private sector, but they should not be allowed to get loans from the public to fix their mistakes, unless they are prepared to change the way they handle their business. We should not be required to bail them out, especially when they continue to payout big salaries and bonuses that they cannot afford.
I think we are past the nationalized bank solution. We are headed, full steam, into a globalized banking system. The same people that own the central U.S. reserve bank are essentially upgrading their platform.
In any business connected to the government, there is corruption to some extent. And, with the government being the only watchdog in banking, the corruption will be undoubtedly worse.
It is true that the federal government could have purchased many banks outright for less than it provided them in bailout funds. However, with an ever-increasing national debt, dubious trade practices around the globe, and incredible waste expected in government programs, the federal government continually proves it is not any better qualified than the bank executives that are currently failing to serve the public. The federal government already has the power to compel banks to stimulate the economy with measures, such as a moratorium on foreclosures. If only it would make such incentives a requirement of receiving bailout funds. Another creative solution might include providing money directly to citizens, who would delight in paying their bills and consuming goods and services, thus stimulating the economy from the bottom, instead of the top. Among the options for alleviating the current financial crisis, nationalizing the banks is the most drastic and least sensible course of action.
First, the current financial crisis exists, in most part, because of the banks. Nationalizing banks is not the solution to our problem. If we wish to actually solve our country's financial problems, it starts with spending. The government needs to curb spending. Secondly, we need to end the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve is no more federal than Federal Express. This private bank is exploiting the American people and robbing us of our wealth, by manipulating financial securities for personal profit. To solve our problems we need to "end the fed".
I believe that we should make banks more liable for for fraudulent practices. But if we nationalize them we are asking for more trouble. To nationalize banks that would be the same as basically converting them into a government agency. And when we do that we are asking for more problems because any time the government has their hands in anything it gets out of control with spending.
We are a nation built on the premise of a free market, capitalistic system. Even though there are problems and the system is not perfect, it has served us well for hundreds of years. There is no reason to turn to socialism just because we are going through a rough season. The government runs enough of our lives inefficiently without adding one more thing.
I believe that the regulation of banks should be tightened. It is obvious that when the regulations were relaxed in recent years, that the banks would take advantage of the situation. It caused a near catastrophe, and we are still not of the woods yet.
Putting big banks on taxpayer life support does nothing other than award reckless investing and spending. Its awarding companies for failing, which is not American. Banks that fail should fail, and people that lose money should collect the FDIC insurance. Period.