Thursday, August 25, 2011

"Should banks be a public utility?" No, but I like the idea of a community banking system [VIDEO]

[Congratulations to FRSFreeStates' 100th blog!  You can read him every day at  If you would like to contribute, please email]


I’m a liberal who has no interest in making the federal government any bigger than they already are and actually wants to make it smaller -- the budget and workforce -- and more efficient…but without the irresponsible behavior of our private banking system and without the fact that they can bring down our economy like in 2008.

With their irresponsible behavior and how large and important they are to our economy (they literally have a large part of our entire economy), we have to have a healthy banking system that the banks and consumers benefit from. We need this in order for us to have a healthy economy, and we don't have either right now.

I'm someone who believes in competition not monopoly…whether it’s a private monopoly or a public monopoly. To me, monopolies look like what Microsoft used to look like before it was broken up or what a state DMV looks like today, and to a certain extent, our public education system in America.

If a large organization, private or public, doesn't have enough competition, it’s not going to perform and be as efficient as it should be, because it doesn't have the financial incentive in order to succeed.

This is one of the reasons why I'm not in favor of single payer health insurance where the federal government controls our entire health insurance system like with Medicare or single payer pensions where the federal government controls our entire pension system like with Social Security.

Large organizations, any organization, needs competition in order to succeed, or they get complacent and greedy thinking, “Why do we need to improve our service or even perform a good service? Our customers don't have any other choices to turn to.”

The public education system is an excellent example of this where most of our students are stuck going to certain schools based on where they live and not what's the best school for them, so I'm not in favor of having the federal government taking over the banking system in America or even allowing our states to do so either.

What I am in favor of is leaving our current private banking system private, and even for profit if they choose to stay that way, but regulating it better so they are no longer "Too Big to Fail” as well as providing the private banking system with more competition, similar with my position on health care reform with a public option in the banking system, but not a new federal bank.

What I would do is set up a new federal banking system and in that allow all fifty States, plus the territories, to open up their own public banks that would all be operated independently of the federal and state governments. They would be regulated by the government and be non-profit as well.  Then you could let the consumers decide for themselves what bank they want to use…stick with their current private bank, pick another private bank, or choose a public bank…and let the market and the people decide for themselves and give them the freedom of choice to decide who they do their banking with.

The market is a beautiful thing when you let it operate properly.

Community banking is a great idea to provide more competition in the banking system just as long as you don't end one monopoly by building another…creating less choice in the market and giving people less freedom of choice in where they do their banking…and having maximum freedom of choice instead.


  1. Government isn’t out to make profit, so the program itself won’t get greedy. Sure, crooked politicians game the system in some situations to make a personal gain, but programs like Social Security and Medicare aren’t victims of this greed.

    Our nation would be much better if we just had Medicare for all. Great nations should be able to provide suitable care to ALL of its citizens.

    If you wanted private insurance, you could always opt out. This is actually similar to your banking idea.

    I also don’t see a problem with Social Security…especially since you stop paying for it after you reach a certain income and these payroll taxes usually only hit the people that will use it…this is why poll after poll show a +85% approval rating and no politician will touch it.

    People love Social Security…because it’s a great program. Why eliminate a program The People love?

  2. The DMV and public education as a monopoly? You can’t possibly privatize the DMV hoss…and if you’re one of those nutjobs that are against public ed well…where would you have these students go?

  3. Good idea. I agree with comment about public education. I like ss too. Never thought about medicare for all but sounds like nice idea.

  4. Anytime someone try's to use insults to make their point, is just showing how weak their argument is. Its probably a good thing for you your Anonymous.

  5. Really no corruption or greed in Medicare and Social Security? How about the fact that they both have "Trust Funds" but that both Congress and the Administration can raid them to pay for wars and other Governmental Operations. Your point about all other Developed Nations having Universal Health Care. Its true that they do but most of those countries have Private/Public Systems. @PeopleForPolity

  6. Either way, it would be better than what we have now. People will go to the ER regardless if they have insurance or not. Those costs fall back on the state and firm causing already high health care costs to raise even higher.

    Universal health care would be cheaper all around and corruption could more easily be thwarted. Plus, you could always opt out and get a tax break for having a private option.

    As for Social Security? Again, it works, and people love it. If ain't broke, don't fix it.

  7. FRS- Get used to the insults on this's because they have no substance. And he/she didn't even have anything to add other than calling names.

    And you're absolutely right about public ed and health care. The problem with a government option of ANYTHING is that they don't operate on a "profit", so they don't answer to anyone. It's like the high school kid(our government) that spends all his money, but the parents(the tax payers) keep lining his pockets, despite the fact that they said they'd never do it again. How would a government run bank work? I don't think it could and still allow competition. Again, government doesn't answer to anyone, and has an unlimited budget. What other company has that luxury??

    And if other countries had such great health care systems...why do 10's of thousands of people EVERY YEAR flock here to have our DR's take care of their issues? Why are liberals(Pelosi's district to name one) already looking for waivers to get out of having to go under Obama care?? So it's good enough for me and you...but not them?

    And PFP...SS IS BROKE. It's on it's way to insolvency. (Look at the CBO predictions). You have got to be kidding me. The only people that love it, are the people that are depending on it. Of course they're gonna "love" it. It's free to them! I love free stuff too!! But retirements should be privatized. I should be able to "opt out" of SS if I want. We have this thought in our heads that government should be responsible for us...and I don't get it.

    I don't see how these ideas are so far fetched and worthy of insults?

  8. And universal health care is going to cost us more. That has already been reported. 5.8% increase as opposed to a 5.7% increase without it.

    So this talk of "saving money" is absurd and has been dismissed.

    And how do you plan on maintaining the level of QUALITY when you add the entire country on the tab, expect Dr's to take pay cuts (because everybody isn't contributing) and don't add any new tax payers??

    It's not health care you're's just getting everyone on the tab. I can't stand the thought of allowing to government to control over 1/6th of our nations economy.

    Believe it or not, our health care system is the best in the world and isn't broke. It needs "tweaking" but not a government take over.

  9. You're missing the point. The point should be what's better for The People. If other firms can't compete, well tough; make a better product or else keep it the way it is as long as its better...which it would be if the firms couldn't compete.

    And Social Security isn't broke yet and completely viable. It is sustainable to past 2030 and all we need to do is reform it (there are many ideas...raise the age for one...that would completely right the ship, which we have plenty of time to do).

    And again, people love it, so why get rid of it. It's 85+ percent approval suggests its not just the people on it that like it.


    People like knowing they can live above poverty when they can no longer work nor care to.

    This is all not to mention that those old people that didn't save, those costs would have to be absorbed by the state and firms raising costs for everyone. This is a similar fallacy with the current health care system.

  10. What's better for the people is competition. That's how this country was built.

    And where are you getting this "85%" approve of SS....Curious.

    And people "not saving" or that "no longer care to work" are not my problem. Nor should they be. Let me ask you...who's fault is it when you don't save enough money??

    And I'm not saying we should shut it down immediately...but phase it out. Allow those that want to have their own plans, do it. Maybe people would be a bit more responsible with their money if they knew it would impact them in retirement....there's a concept!

    You are taking way personal responsibility and creating a society of dependents. Eventually, you are going to phase out the producing class as everyone will be moved over to the dependent class. It won't make sense to work if government is doing everything for you, will it??

  11. Well the government would just provide even more competition driving prices to an actual true equilibrium where consumers could actually spend and fuel the economy.

    A quick google search will reveal the awesome approval rating of Social Security. The People want it so why not just reform it? That is the point a democracy, no? That's why politicians won't touch it: because their constituents want it.

    The problem with people that can't work anymore and haven't saved is that it actually does become your problem. Those costs get absorbed elsewhere raising the cost of health care.

  12. I should say health care and other well as taxes.

  13. Social Security could pay every last penny to every last person of their benefit for the next 25 years! And SS hasn't contributed ONE CENT to the deficit! People love SS because it works bub. AlwaysRight? AlwaysWrong.

    And how dare you criticize the viewers of this site. They read you and respect you. You do more trash talking than anyone. Maybe you should have some respect.

    Granny Liberty

  14. Sounds like someone needs their nap!!

    And have you picked a death date yet?? Because I plan on living longer than 25 years, how about you? And I'd love to see where you're getting your numbers....please share!

    And other than having a view you don't agree with...when have I been disrespectful?

    Again, I was the one called the "troll" and DS was also called a "Nutjob", so save your "respect" talk for the liberal voices on here that can't stand having another point of view in their faces.

  15. AR, 25 years leaves a long time to reform a program that hasn't affected our nation in a negative way...and a program The People love.

    And, as with any site, you will have comments with strong opinions. I wouldn't generalize all of our viewers because you don't agree with certain comments.

    I have yet to see a blatantly disrespectful comment yet.

    The point of the site is so that everyone can have an opinion...let's all respect that.

  16. This is a good site. Dont listen to that alwaysright saying otherwis./

    Granny Liberty

  17. Actually, by him allowing me to chime in once in a while...he's only allowing for openness and debate.

    It's good to get out of your comfort zone. And PFP isn't going to stop posting because of some right winger.....