• 4 mintues Texas forced to have rolling brown outs. Not from downed power line , but because the wind energy turbines are frozen.
  • 7 minutes Forecasts for oil stocks.
  • 9 minutes Biden's $2 trillion Plan for Insfrastructure and Jobs
  • 13 minutes European gas market to 2040 according to Platts Analitics
  • 47 mins Simple question: What is the expected impact in electricity Demand when EV deployment exceeds 10%
  • 21 hours Biden about to face first real test. Russia building up military on Ukraine border.
  • 2 days Trump punches back at Fauci and Birx's revisionist history (aka lies)
  • 2 hours America's pandemic dead deserve accountability after Birx disclosure
  • 3 days The coming Cyber Attack
  • 7 hours U.S. and Chinese investors to buy Saudi pipelines , $10 Billion deal.
  • 18 hours Create a new law "Postericide" to prosecute and imprison Climate Change "Deniers"
  • 2 days New Chinese Coal Plants Equal All those in U.S.A
  • 2 days Goldman Betting on Cryptocurrencies
  • 4 days New German Study Shocks Electric Cars: “Considerably” Worse For Climate Than Diesel Cars, Up To 25% More CO2
  • 5 days Beware the Left's 'Degrowth' Movement (i.e. why Covid-19 is Good)
  • 6 days Forecasts for Natural Gas
U.S. Oil Production Is About To Climb

U.S. Oil Production Is About To Climb

U.S. oil production is likely…

Why Has President Biden Sidelined Natural Gas?

Why Has President Biden Sidelined Natural Gas?

President Biden’s huge economic and…

Why Large Banks Shouldn't be Broken Up

The logic of cutting down huge institutions could mean splitting the largest ones into several pieces. Yet banks do not always come in easily divisible parts. Such a move could amount to eradicating the largest banks rather than splitting them up — and eradication is both politically unlikely and potentially disastrous for the economy. In short, if the resulting parts of a divided bank cannot turn a profit, the split-up may prompt the very bailout it was trying to avoid.

Another fear is that American money market operations would move to larger foreign banks, which would have a newly found competitive advantage. If a financial problem arose, we would either bail out the foreign banks or rely on a foreign central bank to protect our own interests. Neither option seems appealing.

Even if a breakup went well, the incentives for the new, smaller banks would be unhealthy. Those banks could make mistakes or take on bad risks without being punished very much in terms of capitalization or revenue, because of their legally capped size. Even if they made big mistakes, these banks would probably be pushing on the frontier of maximum allowed growth. Eventually, the competitive process would cease to make these banks tougher or smarter or leaner, and we would just be cultivating another kind of banking system where bad or irresponsible decisions don’t lead to financial failure.

For the full article click here.



Join the discussion | Back to homepage



Leave a comment
  • OzHouse Alt News on February 14 2012 said:
    There is only one split that matters - splitting gambling banks from deposit banks. This way when the gambling bank goes bust it will not take down everyone else's money.

    http://ozhouse.org

Leave a comment

Oilprice - The No. 1 Source for Oil & Energy News