2 ms·
My point is pretty easy to follow. The quote, that is the title of this comment thread (we're discussing a specific thing here, the quote in question, mind you
by CPLX 2y ago
My point is pretty easy to follow.
The quote, that is the title of this comment thread (we're discussing a specific thing here, the quote in question, mind you, not which banks are good and bad) was a whole lot more applicable in the past than it is today.
Yes, sure there are small banks. But if you walk around any major city or drive around any major residential area, nearly all the banks you see (and in reality, nearly all the banks people actually bank at) will not be a match for the main point this quote is making.
That's because the banks that nearly all of us interact with now, are so large, and so politically connected and interwoven with our core financial structures, that it's actually impossible for almost anyone living to have a bank at their mercy due to the amount of money they owe the bank.
So the quote, once widely understandable and applicable, is slowly starting to make less sense to the average reader.
Which is kind of interesting.
- kjs3 2y agoJust in my suburb of a major city, within, say 5 miles of me, physical banks that aren't the top 5: a bunch of small banks (Southstate, Cadence, MemberFirst, FirstCitizen, OZK, Unity National, Southern First, First Horizon, City National, Hyperion), at least 6 credit unions (usually considered 'small banks': Delta Community, Navy Federal, Emory, Associated, American Postal, Peach State), banks that are 'small but something else' (BestBank (bought by First Citizen I think), associated with Kroger, Woodforest National associated with Walmart) and 4 regionals (Truist, Synovus, Regions, Ameris (which is a rollup of 4 or so small local banks around here)). How do they stay in business I wonder since noone sees them and noone banks there? What was your point again?