Given that the U.S taxpayer is funding the recovery, if not the bailout, of financial institutions and banks, are banks and financial institutions doing enough to show their gratitude to the people of the United States, the banking sector's lender -- and investor -- of last resort?
One standpoint argues they aren't, so says economist Richard Felson, and here's what Felson would like to see: In addition to equity stakes in each company that receives taxpayer assistance, the U.S Congress should require the company/bank to pay an annual fee to fund the administrative costs of a bank for low-income citizens and senior citizens.
Felson said a good name for this public bank, a non-profit bank, would be the "United States Society Bank" or "U.S. Society Bank."
This bank would offer free checking, savings accounts, ATM access and other services for the poor and senior citizens, Felson said. There would be no monthly, management, or transaction fees. Further, the bank would pay a modest interest rate on savings and checking accounts, he said, and have branches throughout the United States, particularly in low-income neighborhoods and other areas where private banks don't have branches. All accounts would be FDIC insured.
"Here we have this enormous outlay of U.S. taxpayer dollars to support the banking sector and financial institutions after their gross mistakes and failures," Felson said. "Isn't it time the U.S. taxpayer got something in return? The U.S. taxpayer is the lender. And the first rule of lending is 'the borrower is servant to the lender.' Well, in my view it's high time the banks started serving the taxpayer. Their paying the administrative costs for this non-profit bank for the poor and senior citizens would be one way to accomplish that."
Felson said only U.S. citizens with low incomes, as determined by tax reports, and senior citizens over age 60 would be eligible to open an account at the bank.
Keeping in mind that Congress is not likely to approve a policy the public does not support, it makes sense to find out what U.S. taxpayers/readers think.
In your view, should the U.S. Congress create a non-profit "U.S. Society Bank," funded by banks and financial institutions who received U.S. taxpayer money under the $700 billion bailout bill?
a) Yes. - - It's a great idea. The U.S. taxpayer isn't getting enough under the current plan for the use of tax dollars to bail out the banks and financial institutions.
b) No. - - It's a bad idea. The banks and financial institutions will pay back enough under the current bailout plan, and Americans have plenty of banking options.
c) I'm not sure.
d) None of the above / something else.
**
Let us know what you think.











Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
9-25-2008 @ 8:35PM
hank said...
I'm in favor of giving $85,000,000,000 to America in a 'We Deserve It' dividend. To make the math simple, let's assume there are 200,000,000 bona fide U.S. citizens, aged 18+.Our population is about 301 million counting every man, woman , and child So, 200,000,000 might be a fair stab at adults 18 and up. Now, divide 200 million, 18+ adults into $85 billion - that equals $425,000.00 each!
Yes, my plan is to give that $425,000 to every adult as a 'We Deserve It' dividend. Of course, it would NOT be tax free. So, let's assume a tax rate of 30%. Everyone would pay $127,500.00 in taxes. That sends $25.5 billion right back to Uncle Sam! It also means that every adult 18+ has $297,500.00 in their pocket. A husband and wife would have $595,000.00!What would you do with $297,500.00 to $595,000.00?· Pay off your mortgage - housing crisis solved· Repay college loans - what a great boost to new grads· Put away money for college - it'll really be there· Save in a bank - create money to loan to entrepreneurs· Buy a new car - create jobs· Invest in the market - capital drives growth· Pay for your parent's medical insurance - health care improves· Enable Deadbeat Parents to come clean - or else Remember this is for every adult US. citizen, 18 and older (including the folks who lost their jobs at Lehmann Brothers and every other company that is cutting back) and of course, for those serving in our Armed Forces. If we're going to do an $85 billion bailout, let's bail out every adult U.S. citizen!!As for AIG - liquidate it. · Sell off its parts. · Let American General go back to being American General.· Sell off the real estate. · Let the private sector bargain hunters cut it up and clean it up. We deserve the money and AIG doesn't. Sure it's a crazy idea, but can you imagine the coast-to-coast block party?!How do you spell Economic Boom? W-e D-e-s-e-r-v-e I-t d-i-v-i-d-e-n-d! I trust my fellow adult Americans to know how to use the $85 Billion 'We Deserve It' dividend more than I do the geniuses at AIG or in Washington, D.C..And remember, The plan only really costs $59.5 billion because $25.5 billion is returned instantly in taxes to Uncle Sam.
9-25-2008 @ 9:04PM
Don Bindner said...
Hank, if I were you, I'd spend your dividend on math classes. 85 billion / 200 million = 85 million / 200 thousand = 85000 / 200 = $425 per person.
9-25-2008 @ 10:38PM
Daniel Radakovich said...
I think my answer would be "D"-something else.
In 2000 in my US Senate primary[D] run in OH I proposed a federal credit union for use for/by the elderly, poor, and temporary /seasonal workers, given their special needs and abilities and problems. This is perfectly possible, desirable, and would not require any expenditure of funds beyond those willing to invest in such. All it requires is the passing of a law to allow such to exist...there could be several organizations in that field who could compete for the business and relieve the pressure on the more traditional forms of banking and S&Ls to cover that area/those segments of society.
In my experience the term non-profit is a dangerous one to use for any endeavor involved with money handling.
We had a system[and it was used in other countries] where there was a "Postal Bank" for use by people to create savings and checking programs out of extant post offices and it wound up being inefficient, counterproductive, and usually abandoned. So I have to disagree with Richard Felson's proposal, but not his goals. The added costs tacked on to establish this "Society Bank" by his proposal would be added burdens on the taxpayer which are simply not needed. Credit unions are perfectly good establishments with their own insurance already in place, with the capacity for making profits for their shareholders[i.e. their customers] and this is the logical way to achieve it. It merely requires an expansion of the idea of who may belong to a credit union, and frankly these days it seems to be nearly anybody can...and allowing the establishment of them for other criteria than just being in the same industry/locality.
9-26-2008 @ 6:35AM
diann said...
I don't personally believe in the bail out. I don't think the higher ups
should get paid for their screw ups. I think they ned to learn a lesson.So be it being the hard way.
we screw up nobody pays for us.AS far as a recession or depression,if you already poor you would never know it anyway. Only the rich would feel it.And maybe it's time some of the mighty come down to Working man Joe or Jane level.
9-26-2008 @ 11:47AM
gccms said...
Say No To Wall Street Bailout!
Trillion Dollar March
September, 27 2008 10:AM
Capitol West Lawn, DC
http://truemajority.wiredforchange.com/event/index.jsp?event_KEY=479
9-26-2008 @ 2:56PM
Jamie Brower said...
First of all, I can't believe our government would bail out AIG. AN INSURANCE COMPANY! The same people you give a premium for piece of mind, while they give you some bulls#@t about why they can't pay out for your losses. As far as the Wall Street traders and bankers and speculators, the only thing I would do to bail those clowns out is to hold the window open as they jump. What caused this whole subprime mortgage mess is the fact that people who knew they couldn't afford to pay the ridiculous asking price of these homes lied on their mortgage applications and the banks were too lazy to verify it. Unfortunately, the government are going to bail out these millionaire financial CEOs because of their bad judgement and business sense, but at the same time let the working-class homeowners sink. This bailout will only give the financial more incentive to take bigger risks, without having to take a loss, because the government would come to the rescue(at the taxpayers expense, of course). I say, let the stock market crash. Maybe it will knock these guys down a notch or two.
9-26-2008 @ 6:58PM
bmaddigan3 said...
WOE To them, ---->>> Wall St.
The sins (PRIDE & GREED) of the fathers,
Visited Upon the children (Us)
Coupled with a Lot
of 'SELF' Exalting & DECEPTIVE practices
= our Present financial, RED/Black HOLE...
9-26-2008 @ 8:34PM
george lesh said...
wouldn't that figure be $425.00?
9-26-2008 @ 9:15PM
ed1305 said...
The Government needs to reduce spending, and they can start by firing all of the people involved in overseeing the stock market and banking industry. It wouldn't hurt to purge the ones in charge of manipulating the Federal interest rate to "control" the economy to prevent recessions and depressions. The whole bailout is as desperate and disorganized as the decision to invade Iraq. The plan seems to be to buy a large amount (if not all), of the bad debt in the financial community, and then hold those assets until we can sell them to help pay for the bailout. Some have said we might MAKE money! Surely nobody really believes that. Who in the government is going to manage those assets, determine their value, and sell them. I'm sure the answer is to outsource those dirty details and just collect the money that comes rolling in. Well, except for the cost of paying the outsourcers. If anyone thinks that the government can do ANYTHING cost effectively, they just aren't paying attention. And no, they can't run a bank either. Any company that had the problems that the government has would do some serious housecleaning. Layoffs of 25% are quite common in troubled businesses. This bailout should be the catalyst that galvanizes the American people to demand more from our government, and demand they do it with far less spending, and a far smaller workforce.
9-27-2008 @ 10:18PM
Sherry said...
I as does my husband feel we should not be responsible for others bad businesses decisions and bad debts. I am a heart patient which is inoperable and recently was involved in a auto accident which totaled my car, now I have no automobile and I have to accept it.
We are responsible and pay our debts as all should do, and I feel others should account for there own actions not the innocent people like my husband and I having to bail out the bankers and lenders as well as the people whom buy what they cannot afford and live beyond their means.
Wake up people you should be responsible for yourself or your company, not me. I am without a car, will you buy me one and take care of my needs?????????