Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Federal Government’

Death To The Bake Sale!

Posted in America, Food, Growing Up, tagged , , , , , , , on May 5, 2012 | 3 Comments »

When I was in school, the bake sale was a fundraising staple.  Whether it was for band uniforms, field trips, or a new suit for the school mascot, kids and parents turned on their ovens, got out their mixing bowls, and cooked the goodies that brought in the nickels, dimes, and quarters of which fund drives were made.

Now bake sales are becoming an endangered species.  In the Montgomery County, Maryland school district, bake sales are barred.  It’s just part of a growing national trend.  Why?  Because we’ve got lots of fat kids in school these days, and school administrators and food services kingpins think cupcakes, cookies, cakes, and pies are unhealthy.  As a result, kids can’t sell “non-nutritious” food in schools anymore.  Of course, as the article points out, what’s nutritious, anyway?  Pop-Tarts, which are allowed, or home-baked carrot cake, which isn’t?

Even more ridiculous, the federal government will soon weigh in on this topic (pun intended).  Uncle Sam will be publishing its “national school nutrition standards for food sold outside cafeterias.”  Just what we need!  More federal employees getting taxpayer-funded salaries to advise us about things that really should be left to parents.  No doubt there are other federal employees to police compliance, and still other federal employees to administer grant programs to award money to school districts for programs to encourage healthy eating, and state and local employees who will write grant proposals and administer the federally funded efforts — all to combat the lure of the humble brownie and kids who can’t say no.

C’mon, people!  Have we really reached the point where our schools are outlawing bake sales, and the federal government is giving us advice on what our kids should be eating?  Is there any facet of our daily lives that is safe from the heavy hand of taxpayer-funded government regulators?

Read Full Post »

A Candidate for Everyone ?

Posted in Books, tagged , , , , , on November 3, 2011 | 1 Comment »

I just finished reading a book written by Hugh Hewitt who is a talk show host on the East Coast and he makes a compelling case as to why Mitt Romney would make an excellent president. The reason I decided to read the book is because I have had friends on both sides of the political spectrum that say they would consider voting for him if he becomes the Republican nominee.

Romney’s business qualifications are impressive especially the work he did while employed at Bain and Company and the amazing work he did building a consensus and basically saving the Salt Lake City Olympics. In fact Hewitt asks Romney if the Bain Way (assembling all diverse view points, pouring over massive amounts of data and sustained argument and counter argument) could be applied to our bloated Federal Government. Mitt’s answer was yes, but said there has to be a common interest in achieving success and it will not work against mindless obstructionism.

So based on business success one would expect Romney to be higher in the polls then he currently is, but the problem as the book points out and makes an effort to refute lies in his stance on cultural issues which are dear to the hearts of most Republicans. If Romney becomes the nominee of the Republican party the You Tube video below will most likely be played over and over again prior to November 2012.

I found this book interesting and definitely worth reading and I would very much consider voting for Romney if he becomes the nominee, the only problem is which Romney will I get on the social issues if I do vote for him ? A portion of the book does dig into his Mormon faith which I found quite hard to grasp, however Mitt’s religious beliefs would not keep me from voting for him if I decide not to vote for the president.

Read Full Post »

Our Nora Desmond-Like Leaders

Posted in America, Politics, tagged , , , , , , , on October 18, 2011 | 1 Comment »

The Congressional Budget Office recently released its statistics on the federal budget for fiscal year 2011.  The results are staggering — and completely inconsistent with the notion that the federal government has engaged in any kind of belt-tightening.

According to the CBO, the federal government spent $3.6 trillion in fiscal year 2011, and racked up a budget deficit of $1.298 trillion.  Those numbers are titanic.  This is an instance where words are a poor substitute for zeros.  $3.6 trillion, written numerically, is $3,600,000,000,000.00.  Our deficit, for the 2011 fiscal year, was $1,298,000,000,000.00.  According to the CBO, in the last three years our federal government has incurred by far the three largest annual budget deficits during the entire time period since 1945.  Each of those three annual deficits exceeded $1,290,000,000,000.00.  In those three years, we’ve added $4,000,000,000,000.00 to our national debt.

Those are figures that should be read with a shrill, rising mental voice, to properly reflect how truly alarming they are.  But, no one in charge seems very alarmed.  Instead, we have Democrats who act like Republicans are forcing our federal government to accept the most draconian cuts imaginable, Republicans who act like they’ve been budgetary hardasses, and a President who is out on another bus tour, kissing babies and eating barbecue and arguing that we should spend even more than we do.

It’s as if they are in their own little fishbowl world, as divorced from reality as Nora Desmond in Sunset Boulevard.  Does any rational person think we can continue to borrow more than $1,000,000,000,000.00 a year, largely from foreign investors, without experiencing life-changing consequences to our country and our lifestyles?  If we don’t change course, soon we’ll find ourselves floating face down in the pool, like hapless screenwriter Joe Gillis.

Read Full Post »

The Feds, Below The Mendoza Line

Posted in America, Politics, sports, tagged , , , , , , , , on August 30, 2011 | 2 Comments »

Cristobal Rigoberto (“Minnie”) Mendoza played for the Minnesota Twins in 1970 and hit .188 for the year.  That threshold of futility has come to be known in baseball as the “Mendoza Line.”  If you start the season in a slump and begin to pull out of it, crossing the Mendoza Line and getting above .200 is the first step back to respectability.  If it’s mid-season and you cross the Mendoza Line going in the opposite direction, expect to find a ticket to the minors in your locker.

When it comes to public perception of business and industry segments, lawyers probably set the Mendoza Line.  For whatever reason, most people don’t like lawyers.  In the media, lawyers are often depicted as conniving, duplicitous, arrogant, money-grubbing, and unscrupulous, which are not exactly endearing characteristics.  As a lawyer myself, I think the common characterizations of lawyers are profoundly inaccurate, and I regret that the general reaction to my profession is so negative — but there is no denying the statistics.

I therefore found it interesting that, in a recent Gallup Poll, the federal government crossed the lawyer Mendoza Line and ranked the worst in terms of public perception of 25 different business and industry sectors.  Lawyers were viewed positively by 29 percent of respondents and negatively by 45 percent, for a net score of -16.  The federal government, in contrast, was ranked positively by only 17 percent and negatively by 63 percent, for a net score of -46.

If I were in the federal government right now, I’d be looking for that ticket to the minors.

 

Read Full Post »

Your Landlord, Uncle Sam

Posted in America, tagged , , , , , , on August 10, 2011 | Leave a Comment »

Here’s a discouraging follow-up to a post about Fannie Mae’s enormous roster of foreclosed homes that require millions of dollars in upkeep: our government now owns so many homes it is thinking of getting into the rental business.

According to AP, the government owns 248,000 homes, about 70,000 of which are for sale.  What’s more, officials are expecting even more homes to fall into that category as foreclosures pick up after a brief lull.  So, what to do with so many government-owned houses?  One option is to turn them into rental units.  The acting head of the agency that oversees Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac says changing the homes into rentals may reduce “credit losses and help stabilize neighborhoods and home values,”  because sales of foreclosed homes are, on average, at a 20 percent discount, thereby depressing the prices of surrounding homes.

I think turning foreclosed homes into rental properties would be a ludicrous mistake.  It’s bad enough that the federal government lost its shirt in the mortgage guarantee business and owns hundreds of thousands of unwanted properties — now we are going to hire countless people to try to rent and manage the properties and collect rent checks and security deposits?  And while the below-market sale of a foreclosed home isn’t great for a neighborhood, often living next to a rental home is worse because the renters could care less about upkeep on the property.  Speaking as someone who once lived next to a rental home, I think it is far better to sell the property to someone who will live there and take care of it, even if the sale is at a discount.

Renting just defers the problem.  I’d rather the federal government do whatever it takes to sell its inventory of homes, get out of the home ownership and upkeep business once and for all, and get back to focusing on doing what federal governments are supposed to do — like, say, providing for our national defense.

Read Full Post »

Federal Facebook Follies

Posted in America, Politics, tagged , , , , , , , on April 10, 2011 | 2 Comments »

Does the Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs really need to hire someone to manage a Facebook page for the Department of the Interior, to the tune of up to $115,000 a year?  That’s one of more than 1,000 federal government job openings in the Washington, D.C. area that were advertised in March.

My guess is that most Americans would say that, given our current federal budget deficit and debt issues, the Department of Interior can safely do without someone to set up and supervise a Facebook page.  The fact that the opening is even being advertised for filling suggests that the bureaucrats in Washington, D.C. really aren’t serious about belt-tightening and holding down spending.  The President should instruct all federal agencies to cut their payrolls and consider carefully whether new hires and replacements really are necessary — and if there is any doubt, the new hire shouldn’t be made.

I recognize that refraining from hiring one Facebook editor isn’t going to solve our spending issues by itself, but as I often tell Kish (to her disdain) every little bit helps.  A big part of our federal budget challenge is changing the culture of spending inside the Beltway.  Telling the bureaucrats that their hiring budget has been cut and that they will be held accountable for unnecessary hires is a good first step.

Read Full Post »

One Sick Country?

Posted in America, tagged , , , , , on November 20, 2010 | Leave a Comment »

A recent report by the federal Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) concluded that in 2009 approximately 20 percent of American adults had some form of mental illness.  That comes out to 45 million Americans.  The report states that 11 million of those people had a serious illness.  Women reported a higher incidence of mental illness than men, and adults 18-25 reported the highest level of mental illness of any age group.

The SAMHSA numbers are an estimate based on responses to questionnaires given to representative samples.  The overall “any mental illness” statistic purports to include only people who have a “diagnosable mental, behavioral, or emotional disorder,” excluding developmental or substance abuse disorders.  The study’s determination of mental illness in adults was based on modeling the survey participants’ responses to questions on “distress” and “impairment.”  The report suggests increases in the unemployment rate had an impact on the 2009 statistics.

I recognize that many Americans struggle with mental disorders, but I seriously doubt that 1 in 5 Americans has a true diagnosable mental illness.  I suspect that many government studies are structured to produce a result that reveals a problem that needs to be resolved through increased funding and more government-payroll jobs.  The comments of the SAMHSA administrator in response to the 2009 survey results, quoted in the link above, certainly reach that conclusion — that there are many Americans who need help and treatment that aren’t getting it, and through “health care reform” and federal legislation they can get such treatment.

Read Full Post »

Two Worlds, Two Sets Of Rules

Posted in America, Politics, tagged , , , , , , , , on September 11, 2010 | Leave a Comment »

The Washington Post has done some good reporting on the amount of taxes owed by Capitol Hill staffers, White House aides, and other government employees.  All told, federal employees owe $1 billion and Capitol Hill employees owe $9.3 million.  In the Obama Administration White House, 41 aides owe $831,000 — or about $20,000 per person.

I recognize that there are lots of Americans who owe taxes — but they aren’t getting paid by other taxpayers, nor do they have a hand in establishing and enforcing federal law.  The Post story linked above notes that a Republican Congressman has proposed legislation requiring that any federal employees who owe back taxes be fired unless they enter into a payment plan (and presumably comply with it).  Surprisingly, only eight Republicans have co-sponsored the bill, and no Democrats have done so.  Why not?  Is it really so unreasonable to insist that employees who get paid from the federal till meet their obligations to pay their taxes to the federal government?

This is the kind of story that drives the average American crazy.  We hear so many politicians talk about raising taxes, or expanding the number of IRS agents to increase tax collections, and then we learn that congressional staffers and other federal employees are ignoring their own obligations.  Before Washington looks to us for more money, let’s collect the $1 billion owed by the folks drawing a federal paycheck.

Read Full Post »

Reflections On A Political Flier (II)

Posted in America, Ohio, Politics, tagged , , , , , , on May 5, 2010 | Leave a Comment »

My post earlier this week on a political flier left on my doorstep and why it reaffirmed my view that we should keep as much governmental power as possible at the local level got an interesting response.  State Rep. Marian Harris, who represents our district in the Ohio House of Representatives, took the time to leave a comment. Rep. Harris will be opposing Anne Gonzales, the candidate who left the flier with the handwritten note by our front door.

I appreciated Rep. Harris taking the time to leave a comment, and in case some readers missed her comment I think it is worth reprinting in full:

Rep. Marian Harris

“Let me share my attempts as an elected official who believes her first obligation is to the residents of her district – to get to know them, to hear their concerns and suggestions. Ever since I took office in January of 2009, I have held monthly Town Hall meetings and weekly “coffee hours” throughout my district. We publicize these meetings in the weekly papers, through emails to those who have contacted my office, through monthly newsletters – even through robo calls, which I personally dislike. I strongly believe in giving constituents the opportunity to share their thoughts with me. I’m sure had you known of these meetings, you would have attended.

Well, the number of people who do attend is disappointingly low. It’s frustrating to hear people complain that government doesn’t listen and when there is an opportunity – well they don’t take it. I, too have, been going door to door, and people are amazed that a State Representative is knocking on their door! That’s my job. So should you want to talk with me or meet with me, call my office at 466-4847 – my door is ALWAYS open!!”

I’m sure it is frustrating for officials like Rep. Harris to seek voter feedback and not get it.  (It will be interesting to see whether that changes as the November election draws near, incidentally.)  In any case, Rep. Harris’ response proves the point I was trying to make.  Local and state government officials are closer to the voters and, as such, are more likely to be responsive to our views.  What faraway federal official would read a humble, little known family blog and leave a comment?  I’ll keep an eye out for the next meeting Rep. Harris hosts in the New Albany area and try to take that opportunity to give her an earful.

Read Full Post »

Reflections On A Political Flier (I)

Posted in America, Ohio, Politics, tagged , , , , , , on May 2, 2010 | 1 Comment »

The other day when I came home I found a political flier tucked under the mat on our front doorstep.  It was a flier from Anne Gonzales, a former Mayor (and current Vice Mayor) of Westerville.  Ms. Gonzales is running unopposed in Tuesday’s primary for the Republican nomination for the 19th District of the Ohio House of Representatives, a district that includes New Albany.  Her opponent in the fall will be Marian Harris, a Democrat who is serving her first term in the General Assembly.

The flier from Ms. Gonzales was signed “Sorry I missed you.  Anne.”  That simple message got me to thinking about government, and why I believe that the seemingly never-ending intrusion of the federal government into areas previously reserved for state and local governments is a bad thing for us all.  Ms. Gonzales was going door-to-door to meet her potential constituents, no doubt tell them a little bit about herself and then listen to what they had to say.  If I had been home I could have given her an earful about any topic of interest to me, should I have chosen to do so.

When local candidates go door-to-door and hear what their potential constituents have to say, they may or may not agree with those sentiments — but at least they know what their constituents think and can consider those honest views when they vote.  When was the last time your home was visited by a federal bureaucrat, Senator, or Representative?  Given that lack of personal contact, is it any wonder that the officials in our federal government frequently seem so out-of-touch with what real people are thinking?  When federal elected officials interact principally with the many members of their staffs, campaign consultants, pollsters, lobbyists, and other elected officials, with an occasional highly controlled “public appearance” or “town meeting” with a carefully selected audience thrown in, they clearly are not likely to have a good sense of the views of average Americans.

We obviously need the federal government to do certain things, like protect the country and establish uniform, non-discriminatory, nationwide rules to govern certain aspects of American life.  But we should all be mindful of the federal government usurping authority in areas that properly should be handled by local and state government, like public schools, police and fire protection, local roads, libraries, zoning, and the encouragement of economic development.  Those are areas where knowledge of the specific needs of the locality are of paramount importance.  In addition, state and local governments can serve as creative, small-scale “laboratories of democracy” that may develop new and better approaches to long-standing problems.  If every jot and tittle of American life is the subject of nationwide edicts from Washington, D.C., the possibility of such creative experimentation will be quashed.

I’m sorry I missed Ms. Gonzales, because it would have been interesting to talk to her.  In any case, her willingness to stop by reinforced my view that we are better served by a less intrusive federal government and by greater reliance on local and state governments who, from time to time, can get an earful from their friends and neighbors.

Read Full Post »

Making Hard Budget Choices: A No Doubt Boring Look At NHTSA

Posted in America, Politics, tagged , , , , , , , , , on February 6, 2010 | Leave a Comment »

The President recently released his budget proposal for 2010.  It is a complex, difficult proposal to grasp, contemplating trillions of dollars in spending and trillion-dollar deficits extending, unbroken, into the foreseeable future.

One of the problems for American taxpayers is that the federal government is so large, so sprawling, and so unwieldy that it is virtually impossible to be an informed citizen.  There are too many agencies performing too many functions and producing too much information.  The recent Toyota safety problems, however, have brought NHTSA — the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration — into focus for me.  I therefore thought that NHTSA might be a good candidate for a closer look at the federal budget, on an individual agency level.

NHTSA is a federal agency that focuses on motor vehicle safety.  Its NHTSA Fiscal Year 2010 Budget Overview, in PDF form, is available here.  The Budget Overview indicates that the total proposed budget would be $867 million, of which $237 million would go to Operations and Research, $4 million would go for the National Driver Register, and the lion’s share — $626 million — would go to National Traffic Safety Grants.  In short, more than 70 percent of NHTSA’s budget doesn’t go to figuring out problems like those that have led to the Toyota recalls.  Instead, it serves as a fund transfer mechanism, where money comes in from the federal taxpayers and then is doled out to states and municipalities through grants.

For purposes of this posting I am going to assume that every cent allocated for Operations and Research and the National Driver Register is used for important federal government purposes.  (This is undoubtedly a generous assumption, because $96 million of the funds budgeted for Operations and Research and the National Driver Register are identified, in Exhibit II-2 of the Budget Overview, as being for “administrative expenses.”)  What about the grants, though?

It turns out that there are eight different grant programs, as well as administrative expenses for these programs, which in 2010 is budgeted for $25 million.  To get more information about the grant programs, you need to go to the NHTSA Fiscal Year 2010 Budget Estimates, which also are available in PDF form here.  According to page 48 of the document, some of the programs are designed to “encourage States to increase seat belt usage” and “child safety seat and child restraint programs.”  These programs include the Seat Belt Performance Grant Program, which is budgeted for $124.5 million, the Occupant Protection Incentive Grants, which is budgeted for $25 million, and the Child Safety and Booster Seat Grants, which is budgeted for $7 million.  In all, more than $150 million in grants go for seat belt-type programs.

Another $139 million is budgeted for Alcohol Incentive Formula Grants, which are designed, according to page 48 of the PDF’d document, to “to encourage States to adopt incentive grants to states for the implementation of effective programs to reduce impaired driving and its tragic consequences.”  The largest grant program, the Section 402 Formula Grants budgeted at $235 million, is intended, also according to page 48, to “support State highway safety programs designed to reduce traffic crashes and resulting deaths, injuries, and property damage,” and under that program “[a] State may use these grant funds only for highway safety purposes; at least 40 percent of these funds are to be expended by political subdivisions (i.e. communities) within the State.”

When you get to the listing of “Anticipated FY 2009 Accomplishments” for the NHTSA grant programs, at pages 51 and 52 of the PDF’d document, you see things like placing a “national media buy” for the “Click It or Ticket” seat belt program and the “Drunk Driving.  Over The Limit.  Under Arrest” program and the participation of all 50 States in those programs.

These NHTSA grant programs help to explain why cutting the federal budget seems to be so difficult for Members of Congress.  One could legitimately conclude that the federal government doesn’t really need to encourage States to have safer roads; one would think the States themselves could and would conclude that is an important goal.  One also could conclude that people really don’t need to be reminded to wear seat belts or that drunk driving is illegal and will be punished.  If individual States or local governments are having significant problems with drunk driving, for example, they can develop and fund their own programs, targeted specifically at the problem areas.

These NHTSA grant programs cost more than half a billion dollars, including the $25 million in administrative costs at the federal government end.  (There also will be costs, of course, at the state and local government end, as those entities hire government workers to design programs that comply with federal regulations, make grant applications, and then themselves administer whatever funds are received from the federal government.)  Yet if Members of Congress voted to eliminate these programs, in order to realize some significant savings, during their next campaign they risk being on the receiving end of attack ads that use those votes to argue that they are in favor of drunk driving, or against seat belt use or children using child restraint seats.  The malign images of those potential ads probably flash through their minds when the budget is discussed, and they take the path of least resistance and vote against any cuts in the grant programs.  The end result is that nothing gets done, federal spending never decreases, and our budget deficit and national debt holes get deeper.

No one supports drunk driving, unsafe roads, or reckless child-rearing activities.  But if we are going to get our federal budget under control, hard choices have to be made.  I think a good start would be to get the federal government out of the grant-making and TV ad-buying game and let States and local governments make their own decisions about how best to enforce existing laws on traffic safety, seat belt use, and punishing drunk driving.  $626 million in savings may not seem like a lot of money — at least, not to a Member of Congress faced with trillions in federal spending — but it is a start, and every little bit of savings is needed if we are going to turn around our deeply troubling budget predicament.

Read Full Post »

Saying No To California

Posted in America, Ohio, Politics, tagged , , , , , , , on January 4, 2010 | Leave a Comment »

I’ve posted before on the ongoing fiscal problems in California, which faces massive budget deficits (see here and here, for example).  Predictably, the politicians responsible for running the state have been unable to summon the political fortitude to make the combination of spending cuts and revenue increases necessary to balance the state’s budget — even though the state has taken $8 billion in federal stimulus dollars and shamelessly employed the most brazenly bogus gimmicks to increase revenue for this year.  Equally predictably, California is now turning to Uncle Sam for help.  California is asking the federal government to eliminate the “unfunded federal mandates” that apply, to guarantee California’s debt instruments against default, and to increase Medicare reimbursements, among other things.

What’s interesting about the linked story is not that California has its hand out to the federal government — after all, with so many big banks and car companies and mortgage companies and other entities getting bailouts, why shouldn’t states join in the fun?  Instead, what is interesting is the rationalization of California politicians about why the federal government should bail out California, too.  California is the economic engine for the entire country, one of them says, and therefore it is in the national interest to help California get out of the ditch.  Another complains about federal regulations that impose costs without providing funding.

Has California looked in the mirror lately?  In reality, California’s penchant for extreme “environmental” regulations and ludicrous “consumer-friendly” laws have imposed enormous costs on doing business, which is one of the reasons so many companies have fled the state.  Those regulations are classic “unfunded mandates.”  And, those regulations have affected commerce in other states, because businesses that want to sell a widget to the California market don’t want to build one set of widgets to sell in California and another to sell in the other 49 states.  Rather, those businesses build one product that complies with California’s draconian regulatory regime and costs more for everyone else as a result.

I like California and have many friends there, but I think the state should be forced to deal with its crisis without getting federal bailout cash.  California’s current problems are entirely self-inflicted.  Any state that has 9,223 former state employees earning state pensions of more than $100,000 per year (to cite only one example) has been poorly governed and still has cutting to do.  If the fiscal crisis causes California legislators to finally realize that California residents who want to attend California’s colleges will have to pay a bit more, that state workers will have to take salary cuts and receive leaner benefits packages and be laid off, and that the state should take a hard look at some of its regulations and laws that have driven away employers, then the fiscal crisis will have served a salutary long-term purpose.  Americans in states like Ohio should not have to subsidize the bad management and profligate spending that has characterized California politics for decades.

Read Full Post »

Bank Failures And A Salutary Example Of Federal Regulation

Posted in America, Family, The Economy, tagged , , , , , , , , , on November 14, 2009 | Leave a Comment »

Yesterday the FDIC announced the failure of three more banks, bringing the total number of bank failures this year to 123.  The 123 failures this year compare to 25 failures last year and three failures in 2007; there have been more bank failures this year than in any year since 1992.  The cost to the FDIC fund for the failures this year has exceeded $28 billion, and is one of the reasons the FDIC is looking to banks to prepay fees to help cover bank failure costs over the next few years.

The FDIC website has lots of information about the bank failures, including a list of all the institutions that failed this year and a guide for depositors who wake up to find that their bank has failed.  If you review the list of bank failures, you will note that they occur in week-long intervals.  That is because the FDIC typically announces bank failures on a Friday, after determining whether a healthy bank will assume some or all of the assets and liabilities of the failed institution.  The weekend then allows the FDIC to sort things out, so that commerce can proceed and accurate information can be made available to all affected parties the following Monday.  This weekend no doubt will see hectic activity at the offices of all three failed banks.

Conservatives often complain about government regulation, but I think the FDIC, its role, and the calming effect of federal insurance of bank deposits should be regarded as an inspired example of the salutary role federal regulations can play under the right circumstances.  Messy bank failures are, for the most part, handled quickly and discreetly.  As the story about funding linked above indicates, the regulated banks that benefit from the FDIC’s guarantees pay fees to defray the costs of the regulatory regime to the government.  And, the reality of federal support and insurance has had a calming influence on depositors that has avoided the panicky runs on banks that were seen during the Great Depression (and memorably depicted in It’s A Wonderful Life).  Without such insurance and depositor confidence, how would consumers react to alarming news stories about a dramatic spike in bank failures throughout the nation?

Of course, the fact that banks are failing says something negative about our economy, but it mostly says something negative about the bankers who ran the banks.  The traditional stereotype of the conservative, cautious, boring banker has long since been overtaken by extraordinarily aggressive practices by banks in their residential and commercial lending areas, in their issuance of credit cards and other forms of consumer credit, and in their general business operations, growth plans, and mergers.

Grampa Neal, who epitomized the traditional conservative model of a hard-headed banker who wanted collateral and protection before he made a loan, would no doubt cringe in horror at the lax practices of modern banks.  If the current crisis causes banks to return, even slightly, to more conservative lending practices that reject hyper-risky loans, that would be a good thing.

Read Full Post »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,086 other followers