Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

America will soon see a wave of bank mergers?

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 451 posts

Re: America will soon see a wave of bank mergers?

#141

Post by kevinventullo »

mint2 wrote: post #122
Invictus0 wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's because high yield bank accounts are a phenomenon of the last 6 months and retail by and large hasn't got the message yet. 0.01 is not likely to last forever, and the TBTF banks are losing deposits.

Walked by a chase branch, they had some advertisement for a 4% cd. So Apparently the big banks are starting to feel the account drain. Also brokered cds from the likes of Wells Fargo and similar can be 5%. Big banks definitely are starting to feel it

CD’s are not the same thing as demand deposit accounts. They’re less liquid than treasuries.

Re: America will soon see a wave of bank mergers?

#142

Post by JohnFen »

lockhouse wrote: post #86
gonzo41 wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kinda makes sense for the government open a commonwealth bank of sorts and allow people to hold deposits against the government directly. Cut's out a layer of rent seeking markets.

Hard disagree, the federal government already has too much power. Giving them that sort of access and direct control over personal financial assets would be widely abused. The government and those who work for them are not your friends. The power you give them can and will be abused and will never be returned to the people without great difficulty and probably bloodshed.

> The government and those who work for them are not your friends.

Neither are corporations. Both will abuse you. The difference between the two is that you have at least a chance of altering how government works, but you have no chance with a corporation.

Re: America will soon see a wave of bank mergers?

#143

Post by toomuchtodo »

bradleyjg wrote: post #129
oarsinsync wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People want zero risk, demand deposits that pay interest. There’s no business model that can provide that. > It would be perfectly possible for a business to provide zero risk demand deposits—-but the business would have to charge customers for its custodial operations rather than making money by writing loans That was true when we lived with 0% interest rates. Now, there’s no reason why a narrow bank couldn’t take…

> stick them in with the fed providing 4% interest Where is this risk free return coming from? You are just saying in more words that the government should give the people what they want.

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/ben-bernanke/2016/02/16/the-f...

Re: America will soon see a wave of bank mergers?

#144

Post by JamesLeonis »

prasadjoglekar wrote: post #39
wesapien wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You guys should be flipping cars when bank execs didn't get jail time for the financial crisis

That was what Occupy Wall St and Tea Party movements were. Remember that? Before each of them got infested with social-issue parasites of each pole, both were populist reactions to financial injustices.

Occupy was suppressed by the entire police state, coordinated at the federal level under the FBI and DHS [0].

[0]: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/dec/29/fbi-co...

Re: America will soon see a wave of bank mergers?

#145

Post by candiddevmike »

ehvatum wrote: post #128
skeeter2020 wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well you now have JP Morgan Chase with almost 2.5 TRILLION dollars in deposits, and the current regulators have essentially punted on this issue to the next administration. If they have a liquidity crisis the western world will essentially end.

> If they have a liquidity crisis the western world will essentially end. Already had one in 2008. Thankfully, our currency’s value is notional and the fed can print more until such time as the bank run ends.

Are we still waiting for the 2008 bank run to end then?

Re: America will soon see a wave of bank mergers?

#146

Post by 20after4 »

piva00 wrote: post #65
gorbachev wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That will never happen in our lifetime. Democrats can't do it, because Republicans will never cooperate with a Democratic Party president. Republicans can't do it, because they will continue to nominate a culture warrior whose only job is to fight wokeness, so they aren't even interested in it. This thing will keep escalating, relatively slowly, until it finally crosses the line and even the Republicans will figure o…

My guess is that it will take a lot more than that, the USA needs to have a political system less reliant on boatloads of cash. Campaigns are spectacles, not political debate, spectacles are great entertainment but are very poor to foster any discussion around hard topics and solutions. America's love of a good show made even politics like a big sport, team red and team blue against each other, fighting tooth and nai…

And we aren't even moving away from this, we're moving farther and farther into it.

Re: America will soon see a wave of bank mergers?

#147

Post by mensetmanusman »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #7
Mistletoe wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SQUIRE: When America was in its earlier days, we had a - kind of a populist suspicion about big banks. SMITH: So states looked for ways to support and protect local banks. SQUIRE: A lot of states passed what were called branch banking laws, which made it illegal to operate a bank out of more than one building. It's hard to imagine it now. And so every little town in America had its own local bank. https://www.npr.org…

I feel like they could bring back that law and it would not make a difference because there is not much reason to go inside a bank.

If they did pass this law, hyper loop would definitely be built so that banks across the states could still be the same building.

Re: America will soon see a wave of bank mergers?

#148

Post by discardedrefuse »

allie1 wrote: post #76
lvl102 wrote: post #45

People simply got used to not getting paid interest for their deposits. Bank business model needs to change or there will be new business models where deposits are fully guaranteed. That’s probably what the crypto people should have done but sadly they are too stupid (and greedy/scammy) to take on the traditional model.

There are exceptions. Ally bank has been paying reasonable yields on deposits, being a digital bank with lower operating costs. The bank model works, it’s the “too big to fail” model that is broke. The one upside of TBTF banks is you forfeit any deposit earnings to get “insurance” on the full amount.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but the reason banks like Ally are able to offer high-yeild savings account is because they are using your money to invest in (something like) a government money market fund. Take SPAXX, it currently has a 4.5% yield. Ally is only giving you 3.75% and keeping the rest.

Re: America will soon see a wave of bank mergers?

#149

Post by [deleted] »

nonethewiser wrote: post #28
passwordoops wrote: post #20

I've said it before, I'll say it again - "too big to fail" should be recast as "too big to exist" I'm not sure what the best solution is here, but making the big banks even bigger is not it. This is just going to make the banking system more concentrated and no concentrated market is good for anyone. Least of all because the past decade+ has set the precedent that the banks will be bailed out... If they're big enough

> This is just going to make the banking system more concentrated More concentrated. More highly regulated. Closer to being absorbed by the state. I'm not saying that's necessarily going to happen someday. But that is the direction it is (and has been) moving.

[deleted]

Re: America will soon see a wave of bank mergers?

#150

Post by nilptr »

brianmcc wrote: post #29
nonethewiser wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is just going to make the banking system more concentrated More concentrated. More highly regulated. Closer to being absorbed by the state. I'm not saying that's necessarily going to happen someday. But that is the direction it is (and has been) moving.

Also closer to absorbing the state. I'm not a tin foil hat person, but corporations growing larger than nation states just doesn't seem remotely far fetched. Which corporation will be first to sit at the UN table?

A corporation and a monarchy aren't all that different. I dunno why people think the idea of a corporation being the state is so wild.
Post reply on HN