Fred wrote: > Nationalized banks would also make the economy more stable in the future. > Nationalized banks would take fewer risks during an expansion, in order to > avoid debt induced bubbles, that inevitably burst and cause so much > hardship. For example, there would be no more housing bubbles; instead, the > overall housing policy objective would be to make decent affordable housing > available for all. With housing more affordable, mortgages would be more > affordable and less risky.
I agree that "nationalization with haircuts" makes a lot of sense. But the above is extremely unlikely to happen. S&Ls were nationalized at the end of the 1980s, but then they were denationalized. That's the usual pattern seen historically and as far as I can see those mainstream folks who advocate nationalization are also advocating denationalization after things are cleaned up. More likely is denationalization and improved regulation. -- Jim Devine / "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante. _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
