Well if there was no deposit protection scheme, I suspect Anglo would still be a tiny little bank in Dublin, if it still existed. If there was no regulation we would all be very careful about where we put our money.There was a run on Anglo in the early 90s and the central bank stepped in and ensured money was available. Pity.
If there was no government guarantee of Anglo, it would be gone, and would we be any worse off?.
Thats what happens when governments interfer in markets.
The old Irish deposit guarantee (up till 2008) only returned 90% of your money (up to 20k) which was supposed to discourage moral hazard like you suggest. I’m sure we all remember how well that worked.
The ordinary consumer isn’t even remotely equipped to evaluate the financial soundness of a bank. If the world’s financial regulators got caught out and couldn’t spot the dodgy practices over the past decade, what chance do the rest of us have?
The Central Bank is the lender of last resort. It stepped in because that is its function. You might want to figure out how the banking system works before you suggest which bits to dismantle.
No, we’d be better off, but that is a different market.
Yah. We shouldn’t have them interfering in education or health either.
I’ve a question for you. Since the Glass-Steagall act was abolished in 1999 (and reflected around the world), since leverage limits on banks were removed, how much has that removal of regulation cost the economy? Not just ours, you know, all of them. $1 trillion? $2 trillion?
Health and education in this country are very expensive because of government interference.
Fractional reserve banking, a ponzi scheme, was much too blame. Greenspan deliberately keeping interest rates to low. The community reinvestment act also has a place on the podium. Not too mention government back mortgages.
More regulations will just give people a false sense of security and encourage them to take more risks.