4 ms·
Which pointed out that regulating the banks is mostly pointless. They always find loopholes. The only sensible regulation is to make sure that banks never gets
by _0w8t 4y ago
Which pointed out that regulating the banks is mostly pointless. They always find loopholes. The only sensible regulation is to make sure that banks never gets too big to fail. This way a bankruptcy will be mostly inconsequential even if the government insures deposits.
- blitzar 4y agoI think this is my point - If Credit Suisse went bust, it is the biggest regulatory failure in banking. The regulations in switzerland are no different to any other bank in the world, likely they were more stringent requirements to hold larger quantities of capital and mark-to-market more instruments on their balance sheet. > make sure that banks never gets too big to fail Well the regulators just took two too-big-to-fail banks and merged them ...
- mpweiher 4y agoBanking used to be very heavily regulated. With good reason. During the early 80s (neoliberalism, Reagan, Thatcher, Kohl, etc.) regulations were relaxed and banking deregulated. The first big bank crisis + bailout (Savings and Loan crisis) followed a year later. Banking is not a regular industry, for a bunch of reasons.