• 4 minutes Will Libya Ever Recover?
  • 9 minutes USGS Announces Largest Continuous Oil Assessment in Texas and New Mexico
  • 13 minutes What Can Bring Oil Down to $20?
  • 16 minutes Venezuela continues to sink in misery
  • 12 hours Alberta govt to construct another WCS processing refinery
  • 3 hours Paris Is Burning Over Climate Change Taxes -- Is America Next?
  • 6 hours Rage Without Proof: Maduro Accuses U.S. Official Of Plotting Venezuela Invasion
  • 3 hours Instead Of A Withdrawal, An Initiative: Iran Hopes To Agree With Russia And Turkey on Syrian Constitution Forum
  • 14 hours Let's Just Block the Sun, Shall We?
  • 4 hours Water. The new oil?
  • 1 day U.S. Senate Advances Resolution To End Military Support For Saudis In Yemen
  • 4 hours Storage will in time change the landscape for electricity
  • 1 day Quebecans Snub Noses at Alberta's Oil but Buy More Gasoline
  • 3 hours Regular Gas dropped to $2.21 per gallon today
  • 2 days OPEC Cuts Deep to Save Cartel
  • 2 days $867 billion farm bill passed
How Tech Is Transforming The Cannabis Sector

How Tech Is Transforming The Cannabis Sector

Cannabis stocks fell into a…

Big Oil Stocks Crash As Crude Prices Tumble

Big Oil Stocks Crash As Crude Prices Tumble

Big oil stocks got another…

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