Socialized banking: Modest proposals for the new economy

Each U.S. taxpayer now owns a $1,785.71 ownership share in the banks of America, calculates New York Times columnist Clyde Haberman (check his math). So would it be too much to ask for an end to ATM (automatic teller machine) fees?  How about a moratorium on executive bonuses? A-and another thing:

Why not forbid any bank receiving taxpayer money to purchase naming rights to sports stadiums and arenas? Citigroup is handing the Mets something like $20 million a year to call their new stadium Citi Field. Surely, the Mets do not need Citigroup’s money — not to mention yours — to keep failing to make the playoffs.

(Corporations bought naming rights to days, months, and years in one of David Foster Wallace’s novels, if memory of the reviews serves.)

(My favorite proposal, from I forget which obviously unhinged left-wing blogger: Treat bank executives like customers who declare bankruptcy, and make them prove they’ve taken a basic course in finance.)

[Bank recruitment folder, Finsec]

6 thoughts on “Socialized banking: Modest proposals for the new economy”

  1. Hey, here’s a really wild, crazy, and even more innovative, bold, new idea! How about *privatized* banking? How about eliminating government-supported organizations like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which enforced loan-making policies based on social/political goals and the whims of corrupt politicians, rather than sound free-market business practices? How about putting banks and their stockholders back in charge of (and taking full responsibility of the risks for) deciding who can be trusted to receive loans? Think that’s crazy? Very well, then. How about (just to be fair, of course) *socializing* Futurismic magazine the same way you suggest for the banks? After all, many of the people who submit stories to your web-mag did not grow up with the same advantages and education as others, so they may be unfairly discriminated against (by those greedy capitalists at Futurismic) when having their science fiction story submissions reviewed. Obviously, the solution is, and must forever be, more government regulation and oversight! Someday, the people of this great country will no longer sit still for Futurismic’s cold, unfeeling rejection of stories with too many grammatical and spelling errors, incoherent plots, and/or cardboard characters. Bad spellers and bad writers deserve at least a fair chance! That’s all we, the people, are asking for! Nay, we demand it! Let’s redistribute the payments for the stories in your publication and let’s spread the acceptance letters around! In fact, with my plan, we can give an improved chance of acceptance to 95% of the public, while reducing the odds of acceptance of stories from your best/most-successful 5% of authors — just the top 5%, so hey, if that isn’t you, don’t worry about it! Those among the greedy, unfeeling, top 5% of your authors are obviously unfairly hogging Futurismic website! And remember, this is not a handout, it’s a hand up! It’s building up all authors, from the bottom up! Trickle-down authorship is a failure! Do we want eight more years of this kind of rule by the editors of Futurismic? The time for change is now! O-Ba-Ma! O-Ba-Ma! …Oops, sorry about that. I got carried away once the chill starting going up my leg.

  2. A quick correction: I shouldn’t have referred to Futurismic as *your* web-mag, Mr. Marcinko, since I understand that you are not its owner/editor or an official staff member. I should have said *this* web-mag.

  3. And ok, to continue… please replace all/most of the other *your* references with *this*. Sorry about that.

  4. I’m just glad nobody overreacted.

    “And [in] Alaska we’re set up, unlike other states in the union, where it’s collectively Alaskans own the resources. So we share in the wealth when the development of these resources occurs.”
    –Sarah Palin

Comments are closed.