How to cut the big banks down to size
Why? Mr. Fisher argued that megabanks not only threaten taxpayers with bailouts, but that their continuing failure to lend is also thwarting the Fed’s efforts to jump-start the economy by keeping interest rates low. “I submit that these institutions, as a result of their privileged status, exact an unfair tax upon the American people,” he told his audience. “Moreover, they interfere with the transmission of monetary policy and inhibit the advancement of our nation’s economic prosperity.”
Smaller institutions, by contrast, have continued to lend in the post-crisis years, especially to the kinds of modest-size businesses that create so many jobs across the country. According to figures compiled by Mr. Fisher’s colleagues at the Dallas Fed, community banks — defined as those with no more than $10 billion in assets — hold less than one-fifth of the nation’s banking assets. Nevertheless, they hold more than half of the industry’s small-business loans.
Huge banks must be restructured and their access to the safety net scaled back, Mr. Fisher said, because neither regulators nor market participants have proved effective in monitoring risks at these institutions.









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Meh, Obama is 100% in their pockets.
Schadenfreude on January 20, 2013 at 4:50 PM
If you are too big to fail, you are too big.
halfastro on January 20, 2013 at 4:52 PM
Considering what the CFPB is trying to do, and what Dodd-Frank is doing, it seems like the “too big to fail” government is the real problem.
john1schn on January 20, 2013 at 4:59 PM
Probably the best thing would be to have fairly large franchises that handle things on the retail transaction level, that don’t themselves take risks, but just act as brokers for investment and lending, and lots of small investment houses that actually take risks and pay out interest. That way you still get the economy of scale on the retail end, while letting the investment houses go broke as necessary.
Count to 10 on January 20, 2013 at 5:28 PM
The banks are our government.
p0s3r on January 20, 2013 at 5:33 PM
Hardly, though they are making out like bandits brokering all the bonds going from the Treasury to the Fed.
Count to 10 on January 20, 2013 at 5:38 PM
It’s really simple:
When the US Dollar has been devalued to less than $.01 by the continued irresponsible spending, there will be no reason to even have banks. What would you put in the vaults…magic beans???
We’ll have to revert back to a barter system.
landlines on January 20, 2013 at 6:37 PM
Another 2000 regulations ought to pare down the size of the banks.
tom daschle concerned on January 20, 2013 at 6:42 PM
“I submit that… these big banks are interfering with our central planning.”
I submit that you let bad banks fail, even if they are big. Let bankruptcy court sort it out.
AshleyTKing on January 20, 2013 at 7:11 PM