Risky bank debt makes customers safer

Re:Risky bank debt makes customers safer by WanderPanda on Sunday May 28, 2023 @11:02PM (#36110126)

It‘s not a secret that bank equity does not yield the best returns because most of the excess returns that come from the risks taken are siphoned off in form of inflated salaries and „prestige“ (e.g. the most pristine office real estate). I agree that fractional reserve banking can be efficient but only if the incentives are aligned. And this is only the case if the depositors are at risk and forced to choose banks with good track records for their savings to be invested profitably, yet safely (risk/return profile).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Risky bank debt makes customers safer by arcticbull on Sunday May 28, 2023 @11:04PM (#36110140)

> And this is only the case if the depositors are at risk and forced to choose banks with good track records for their savings to be invested profitably, yet safely (risk/return profile).

Barely anyone is qualified to assess the quality of a bank. It's difficult even for auditors. It shouldn't be your uncle's responsibility, it should be the responsibility of regulators.

That's really nothing to do with fractional reserve and more of an assessment of the US banking system.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Risky bank debt makes customers safer by monero-xmr on Sunday May 28, 2023 @11:27PM (#36110317)

You have a presumption that experts should be believed. However the roots of my own success are based on ignoring “experts”, from my college professors to my bosses, until I was so successful that I became the “expert”, and others started listening to me. The concept of “expertise” is bullshit.

If something is difficult to understand, even for so-called “experts”, that is a sign of severe dysfunction. All topics can be distilled into simplistic understanding. Once you speak in academic gobble-dee-gook you are done for.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Risky bank debt makes customers safer by arcticbull on Sunday May 28, 2023 @11:36PM (#36110376)

> You have a presumption that experts should be believed.

Yes, my guy, I happen to believe that people who know what they're talking about should be listened to. I suspect you won't find this controversial. The world is far too complex for anyone to be sufficiently competent in every field.

> All topics can be distilled into simplistic understanding.

Simply false.

> Once you speak in academic gobble-dee-gook you are done for.

lol.

This would be a good candidate for a Reddit-like 'flair' concept so I wouldn't waste my time responding to someone who doesn't believe in the concept of people who know what they're talking about.

[ Parent | on HN ]