Comments on: Three disturbing trends in commercial banking

By: AlkalineState

AlkalineState — Thu, 15 Mar 2012 19:41:28 +0000

No offense, but never trust a writer named “Papagianis” when it comes to banking. Have you SEEN the condition Greece is in?

By: a2plusb2

a2plusb2 — Wed, 14 Mar 2012 20:39:21 +0000

The article: “… by big banks and government bureaucrats”.
I know progressives who want to delete “big banks” from that sentence. My question: what would our banking, lending, economy and freedom look like if (Washington-level) government bureaucrats and only government bureaucrats were in charge of it?

This is, after-all, the government that thinks loaning money to Solyndra provides a good return on money lent.

By: GMavros

GMavros — Wed, 14 Mar 2012 18:53:19 +0000

OH, THEY EVEN CHARGED ME A $35.00 SERVICE FEE FOR CORRECTING THEIR MISTAKE. SHOOT THEM ALL.

By: GMavros

GMavros — Wed, 14 Mar 2012 18:45:23 +0000

BREAK THEM UP, BREAK THEM UP, THEY ARE GANGSTERS.

I’ll never forget the day JP Morgan-Chase told me that my small business account was not big enough for me to see the branch manager. I was there to demand an explanation as to why my business checking account was suddenly in the red, when I had a balance of a few thousand the day before, had made no charges or withdraws, in fact I had only made a very large check deposit from my client. It turns out the night before they had double posted this large check and to fix it, they charged it to my account, which went into the red, since my client’s check needed two days to clear. All my funds were held up for five days, and no one there was able or even wanted to help me.
MY WORKING CASH HELD UP FOR THEIR MISTAKE, AND THEY REFUSED TO RESOLVE IT.
THESE ARE NOT BANKS, THEY ARE GANGSTERS.
KEEP YOUR MONEY HOME, ONCE YOU GIVE IT TO THE BANKS YOU ARE AT THEIR MERCY.

By: whyknot

whyknot — Wed, 14 Mar 2012 15:09:48 +0000

I have all my money in a mattress and I sleep well at night

By: txgadfly

txgadfly — Wed, 14 Mar 2012 14:12:25 +0000

Modern big “banks” are simply another transfer system to empty the pockets of the weak and fill the pockets of the strong, all systematically reinforced by the power of Government to privatize profits and publicize losses.

To fix the mess, Government guarantees must be withdrawn from large banks, and limited to consumer deposits, as originally intended. Government has taken trillions from ordinary citizens and given it away to “banks”. Bring back Glass-Steagall and do it now.

If you listen to large organization lobbyists, the USA will fail as a political entity. Time for an intelligent statesman at the helm. But the closest one to that is Ron Paul, anathema to big Wall Street and to Israel and to the big militarists. And a rigged political system.

By: McGriffen

McGriffen — Wed, 14 Mar 2012 13:41:57 +0000

Feel free to add reason # 4: increased regulatory costs, which can be regressive pending the size / scope of the institution. Regulatory costs hit them all, especially the ones who managed capital, were prudent lenders & had no use for the TARP money (therefore, those bankers took $0.0 TARP money).

New institutions are, or were not, chartered since the OCC / others were onerous on placing restrictions on the uses / deployment of capital (another thought to add).

By: thegovtmule

thegovtmule — Wed, 14 Mar 2012 12:48:08 +0000

Allowing the government to keep so much control over the big banks will only invite more risk taking for profit since they will expect to be bailed out again when things go bad.

The government needs to do what they did to Ma Bell – break these banks up into smaller entities to foster competition. They also need to replace the seperation between community banking and investment banking they dismantled when they revoked the Glass-Stegall act – that’s what lead to the mortgage crisis.

By: breezinthru

breezinthru — Wed, 14 Mar 2012 12:29:04 +0000

I switched my banking from a Wall Street bank to a credit union. I pay all my bills online, i get a better interest rate, my money gets reinvested in my neighborhood, and no one is getting fat.

By: deLafayette

deLafayette — Wed, 14 Mar 2012 11:50:38 +0000

Let’s make one thing clear. Those “assets” are not just those of the bank but also those of its customers …

They can leave that bank as easily as they arrived. It’s mostly a question of value-for-money, meaning that customers obtain the service that they seek.

Quite frankly, all that money concentrated in just five banks is nonetheless asking for trouble. Should it ever come … the fit hits the shan.

Furthermore, how many of those banks hav Investment Banking arms? For instance, Merrile-Lynch is now part of Bank of America …