The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > People’s Bank déjà vu: a potted history of competition in the banking sector > Comments

People’s Bank déjà vu: a potted history of competition in the banking sector : Comments

By David Richardson, published 22/7/2009

Establishing a 'people’s bank' to provide genuine competition has been mooted by a group of economists.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. All
OK, so was the Commonwealth bank really a failure? Seems we have tried it before and it worked out pretty good.
Now we have the internet, Bpay and ATMs and I reckon that a government run "minimilist" bank would be an excellent idea.
Most of the functions of a bank are done by computers these days. The big 4 are largely daycare for adults (at least at the head offices) and most of the clever stuff is done by vendors with huge profit margins.
To have a fee-free option for my deposits, internet access and ATM access (with fees charged by ATM owners of course) would introduce *real* competition and force the banks to think about efficiency...or maybe just stop rorting the economy with obscene profits which we the taxpayer have propped up.
Real competition is something that all big business works hard to reduce or remove. The Australia Insitute loves big profits despite the damage they do to the economy (economics 101: max utility comes from minimal profits) so I guess it is not surprising that this article is following the party line and falls short of true factual argument.
Posted by Ozandy, Wednesday, 22 July 2009 11:53:24 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The advantage of having a government bank is that when you get ripped off the profits go back to the community.
Posted by nwick, Wednesday, 22 July 2009 12:27:45 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
How does it come to pass that we have the least productive corporate group make the biggest profits? Easy,they create money form nothing.

Each yr we have an average inflation rate of 3.5% .Inflation is the increase in money supply above pop and GDP increases. Where does this extra money come from? Well,we as individuals cannot counterfeit it.The Unions cannot make their own.It is the banks under the auspices of the RBA who create inflation.Inflation has compounding effect and just an inflation rate of 3.5% has depreciated our currency by a factor of 26. $1.00 will buy you the equivilant of 3c 100 yrs ago.

While the wages eventually might catch up,the banks in the meantime make merry by devaluing the general money supply and charging interest on the new money they create.

The whole global system of banking needs a revolution.See http://www.ronpaul.com/ see; paul grignon Money as Debt Youtube
Posted by Arjay, Wednesday, 22 July 2009 9:55:48 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hallelujah, Arjay.

From...

>>.The inflation rate over this period has been 2500%.This means that the banks the only creators of currency have inflated the money supply on average of 26% pa over GDP and pop increase<<

and...

>>Do the sums yourself 2500% divided by 96yrs is a average volume of money increase of 26% pa<<

And...

>>To diminish the value of $1.00 to 4 cents you have to increase the money supply by 25 times or 2500%, correct? Over 96 yrs{ divide 2500% by 96] this represents and annual increase in money supply of 26%.<<

...we have finally arrived at:

>>Each yr we have an average inflation rate of 3.5%<<

I can now rest easy, that you have at least taken on board one important financial concept.

Now, what's all this about Ron Paul?

"If our money were backed by gold and silver, people couldn’t just sit in some fancy building and push a button to create new money. They would have to engage in honest trade with another party that already has some gold in their possession. Alternatively, they would have to risk their lives and assets to find a suitable spot to build a gold mine, then get dirty and sweaty and actually dig up the gold."

http://www.ronpaul.com/on-the-issues/fiat-money-inflation-federal-reserve/

If you prefer to use only gold-backed (or silver-backed) currency, there is absolutely no reason why you cannot do so right now. Convert your dollars into metals yourself, right now. Don't delay.

Thre will be some slight inconvenience converting it back when you need to trade with the rest of the world. But otherwise, there is no need to wait.

The real inconvenience will be that you will not be able to incur debt, which is Ron Paul's real message.

Very noble. Very puritanical. And quite logical, in an idealistic, other-worldly kind of way.

But what might just work for one individual, would be completely unworkable in the whole economy.

There were sound reasons to come off the gold standard, and they still apply.

http://web.mit.edu/krugman/www/goldbug.html

Work through a couple of examples for yourself, rather than rely on YouTube brainrot.
Posted by Pericles, Thursday, 23 July 2009 4:17:34 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy