Washington State Joins Movement for Public Banking

Very interesting movement afoot...

Basically, states are proposing public banks, in order to try and lessen the effects of the private banking failures.

Source Article

I was not aware that North Dakota had managed to avoid the crisis with its public banking system:

the Bank of North Dakota has been spectacularly successful. By providing affordable, low interest credit for business expansion, new businesses and students, the BND has helped North Dakota sidestep the credit crisis altogether.

I'll be keeping an eye on this!

the Billmeister

This is interesting. I recently found that the state of Virginia are going to issue their own " states " currency. I'll try to find the info and post it here. But having the banks go public, will be devastating to the privateers.

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
This is interesting. I recently found that the state of Virginia are going to issue their own " states " currency. I'll try to find the info and post it here. But having the banks go public, will be devastating to the privateers.

If nothing else, the competition of state-owned banks could force private banks to lower their rates and fees... and, dare I say it, their bonuses! (I know, I know... how will they ever survive without them!?!)

the Billmeister

p.s.
Yes, I read that about Virginia as well, I would love to see the article again. Thanks.

this truly is the only way the states can survive
the federal reserve makes money from crashes as do their friends
untill a state run system is set up you are at the mercy of the private bankster cartel
good luck and do the public a favour and set this up NOW

xploder

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
This is interesting. I recently found that the state of Virginia are going to issue their own " states " currency. I'll try to find the info and post it here. But having the banks go public, will be devastating to the privateers.

I think it's unconstitutional for the states to issue their own currencies (Article 1, Section 10), although if the currency is issued privately there should be a way around this.

But in any event, whether a bank is private, public, or mutual, it is imperative that we stop using Federal Reserve Notes. All systems of banking reform are for naught if they're tied to a debt-based monetary system.

reply to post by NthOther


Generally yes, it is unconstitutional, but I believe their basis of argument was the 10th Amendment. Something about the privatization of the Federal Reserve, not being a " true " government entity.

This is interesting. With private banking being under the thumb of the US Gov., would individuals of a state have more recourse when dealing with a Public state bank, OR is a mattress bank with a gun near by the better alternative?

reply to post by Surfrat


Anything with a gun involved protecting your investments is always the best policy~

reply to post by Billmeister


What a GREAT idea!!

keep the money in WASHINGTON state for washington state...

:-]

Originally posted by darrman
reply to post by Billmeister

 

What a GREAT idea!!

keep the money in WASHINGTON state for washington state...

:-]

Yes indeed!

A major issue with investment banking is that all the investment goes overseas. If it stayed state-side, the situation would be drastically different.

Let's hope this is the beginning of a new and lasting tendency.

Good luck to all my American friends with this new strategy.

the Billmeister

dont get excited folks

any institution that uses the same old federal Reserve Note
whether, private, public or whatever

is still a slave to the fractional system no matter
what name they hang above the door.

They will have to print their own currency
and this ......

will not be allowed. JFK already tried.

How much do you trust your state politicians with your state banks? ie Calif etc?

Well, I am from Washington State and have been paying taxes here for over 20 years now. I wonder just how much I have paid out to 'private' banks, while now my childrens schools can't even afford to have art or music in their curriculum?

I have to admit that part of the problem is the publics ignorance. I just recently started to understand how this all works. Funny how we only start seeking info when things go bad. Ignorance IS bliss.

I can't believe that ALL the states haven't already had public banking systems in place. But ofcourse, as with anything involving politics, if it makes sense....it isn't done. I imagine too many people running the show have stood to loose too much money or have the hands of the private bankers in too many pockets. I sincerely hope this legislature goes through. Our State is in the midst of very serious financial crisis right now.

I compare this concept to credit unions, only on a larger scale. Anyone who is fortunate enough to be a member of a State credit union (such as myself) knows that they always get the best rates, loans, terms and accounts. You even get mony back sometimes at the end of the year. You see, you are part owner in the bank, so any profit goes back to the members. I think our share this past year was around 100.00.

I just makes SENSE!!!

Originally posted by westcoast
I compare this concept to credit unions, only on a larger scale. Anyone who is fortunate enough to be a member of a State credit union (such as myself) knows that they always get the best rates, loans, terms and accounts. You even get mony back sometimes at the end of the year. You see, you are part owner in the bank, so any profit goes back to the members. I think our share this past year was around 100.00.

I just makes SENSE!!!

Exactly, here in eastern Canada, one of the largest financial institutions is a Credit Union, and it is one of the major reasons we have come through this crisis virtually unscathed. (fingers crossed)

I understand the mistrust of government expressed by certain posters, but I think that Wall Street's record is far worse than any politician, if that is possible!

the Billmeister

Exactly, here in eastern Canada, one of the largest financial institutions is a Credit Union, and it is one of the major reasons we have come through this crisis virtually unscathed. (fingers crossed)

My understanding is that in Canada you must provide a real deposit for a home mortgage. Not accounting tricks or 110% loans on houses with no income check. I feel that your mortgage practices (common sense) is what saved Canada. Not whether a bank is private or public.

Just how does a public bank prevent the state government from over spending? Comparing North Dakota with the industrial states is not quite fair. Just how many services does its state provide to its citizens? Just how big is their public infrastructure as opposed to California?

At first glance it may seen that a public bank will have lower costs but once running this may change. Think unions and state retirement plans. The state would likely have to provide the same deals to its bank employees. Isn’t that part of the looming problem now?

Originally posted by samkent

My understanding is that in Canada you must provide a real deposit for a home mortgage. Not accounting tricks or 110% loans on houses with no income check. I feel that your mortgage practices (common sense) is what saved Canada. Not whether a bank is private or public.

You are quite right, and in fact, the regulations have just become more stringent. One major difference with the Canadian system is that the interest of the mortgage is NOT tax-deductible, and we cannot take out a bigger mortgage to buy a boat or a car (for example).

I apologize if I was not clear, but we DO NOT have any public banks in Canada, the example I used was of a credit union, of which you become a member and which a percentage of the profits are shared among all members. (In fact, I was not aware that public banks even existed before reading this article!)

Just how does a public bank prevent the state government from over spending? Comparing North Dakota with the industrial states is not quite fair. Just how many services does its state provide to its citizens? Just how big is their public infrastructure as opposed to California?

I quite agree, but I also believe that simply having the public option as an available actor will force the private sector to adjust its rates and practices.

At first glance it may seen that a public bank will have lower costs but once running this may change. Think unions and state retirement plans. The state would likely have to provide the same deals to its bank employees. Isn’t that part of the looming problem now?

The article argues that the fact that the public banks work under strict, non-bonus related conditions is the reason that they can offer their services with more interesting conditions. I don't think that good retirement conditions are the issue, as these are often part of privately managed mutual funds. But, then again, I may be wrong.

But again, the fact that the public bank exists, does not oblige the citizens to choose it as their financial institution, they offer similar services, under different conditions, and ultimately, the client decides where they want to put their money.

the Billmeister

But again, the fact that the public bank exists, does not oblige the citizens to choose it as their financial institution, they offer similar services, under different conditions, and ultimately, the client decides where they want to put their money.

Correct. There may not be enough depositors to run the system at the break even point. When was the last time you heard of a government closing one of its branches? They would likely run it at a loss because it’s a public service.

The article argues that the fact that the public banks work under strict, non-bonus related conditions is the reason that they can offer their services with more interesting conditions. I don't think that good retirement conditions are the issue, as these are often part of privately managed mutual funds.

They may not pay bonuses but they also may not fully fund their retirement plans either. That’s a big problem for many states.

reply to post by samkent


Ah... I see what you mean, and you make a very valid point!

I would still encourage people to take their money out of banks and put it into credit unions, it's one step in the right direction.
Of course, since the U.S.A. has bailed-out these huge private institutions, it may be in your interest to leave your money there and hope that they pay you back somehow... but, if current trends persist, I definitely would not hold my breath.

the Billmeister

Originally posted by NthOther

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
This is interesting. I recently found that the state of Virginia are going to issue their own " states " currency. I'll try to find the info and post it here. But having the banks go public, will be devastating to the privateers.

I think it's unconstitutional for the states to issue their own currencies (Article 1, Section 10), although if the currency is issued privately there should be a way around this.

But in any event, whether a bank is private, public, or mutual, it is imperative that we stop using Federal Reserve Notes. All systems of banking reform are for naught if they're tied to a debt-based monetary system.

The Federal Reserve Systems, Inc. is a wholly owned, operated privately controlled entity who is independant from The US Federal Govt whereas the states can move forth to protect themselves from a larger threat in the Federal reserve. States can in order to put pressure on the US Federal Govt to light a fire under it's tails.

The end of The Federal Reserve is imminent as it is no longer a question of how but when, this is real change we all can believe in. The ultra GOP will try and say that this is a "Govt takeover of the financial industry" my reply to that "When the private financial industry has continually become the problem what do we do?".