The United States Banking Sector

The Bank of the United States was designed to make money and build an economy. It was designed by men like Alexander Hamilton and Robert Morris, but did not benefit the common citizen as much as wealthy investors. Why did a fledgling government need to borrow millions from overseas in order to invest in a “national” bank, to turn around and then borrow the same money back and pay interest on it? The banking system developed by Alexander Hamilton and Robert Morris was prime pickings for speculators, and laid the groundwork for a history of unscrupulous activity regarding our nation’s money supply that continues to this day. The signatures on the Constitution were barely dry before corruption and

Our nation faces many problems, and has for many years. Today’s generations, and especially the mainstream media, seem most concerned with social issues such as abortion and same sex marriage. While these issues are important, our economic situation should receive more urgent attention. Americans are desperate for better days, but lack a meaningful understanding of how our financial system works. Almost 100 years ago, the creation of the Federal Reserve Banking System was instated. One could argue that this system is the base of why we are 18 trillion dollars in debt, and rising. The Federal Reserve Banking System has contributed

The banking industry consists of almost sixty-five hundred banks that are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). Out of these, there are eighty-one substantially large banks in the United States that are publically traded, which is where the market structure and industry information will be based. However, as with the rest of the country, these banks are very concentrated, with the largest banks accounting for over half of the market as well as accounting for the largest amounts of revenue.

The American economy is a complex balance of services, financial, manufacturing, agricultural, and banking industries. For this reason, the U.S. is a global economy, relying upon foreign investments and trade to create and retain wealth. Over the years, America has evolved from farming-based, to industrial, to a services-based economy. As a result, the banking system from its inception has weathered the many growing pains associated with a new government and currency, instituting regulations and a centralized bank to examine the economy, and implement policies intended to offset factors negatively affecting the general financial health of the country.

The Great Recession inflicted abundant harm in the U.S. and global economy; 8.7 million jobs vanished (Center on Budget), 9.3 million Americans lost their homes (Kusisto), and the U.S. GDP fell below what the economy was capable to produce (Center on Budget). The financial crisis was unforeseen by millions and few predicted that the market would enter a recession. Due to the impact that the recession had, several studies have been conducted in order to determine what caused the recession and if it could have been prevented. Government intervention played a key role in the crisis by providing the bailout money that saved those “Too Big to Fail” institutions. Due to the amount of money invested in the bailout and the damage that the financial crisis had on the U.S. population, “Too Big to Fail Banks”, and financial regulation are two of the biggest focuses of the presidential candidates. Politicians might assure voters that change will occur, but is it to late for change to be efficient, are the financial institutions making the same mistakes that led to the financial crisis?

In 2008 America’s financial system was brought to a stand still as decades of negligence and financial decisions caused our economy to sink into the worst recession since the great depression. Cultivating a problem worse than America has seen in roughly a century points one finger not at a particular cause, but a string of events that finally gave way. Now, eight years later our economy is still recovering, and time has allowed us to look back at decades of mistakes to try and connect the dots of the perfect storm that collapsed our financial market in 2008. In 2009 Brookings Institution, one of Washington’s oldest think tanks, concluded there were three causes that resulted in the crisis. Economists Martin Baily and Douglas Elliot stated that the results of government intervention in the housing market, the influences Wall Street had on Washington, and global economic forces were the three main causes of the economic collapse. They believed that a housing bubble inflated when Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, two government-sponsored enterprises, intervened in the housing market. The banking industry was called out to be blamed for years of manipulation of our political and financial systems. Lastly, Baily and Elliot cite the global economy and the existence of a credit boom throughout European and Asian nations. Low inflation and consistent growth throughout the world economy spiked investors’ interest in acquiring riskier investments, which encouraged

History has shown us again, and again that when power is left unchecked it becomes corrupt and out of control, that is the iron law of oligarchy. In the US we saw this happen recently in the 2008 economic meltdown. The banks and corporations should never have been aloud to become "to big to fail," and once they did grow to a point when they were there should have been more government oversight to make sure things did not get out of hand. After the great depression laws were put in place to try to prevent something like that from ever happening again, but we undid those restrictions and ended up in a place eerily similar to somewhere we had been before. In this paper I will cover a brief history of the great depression, and show how the situation in 2008 was all too similar. I will also discuss and analyze the factors that brought us to the tipping point in our most recent economic scare. And finally I will explain why the actions taken by the FED were necessary and kept us from an even more

The financial crisis of 2007-2009 resulted from a variety of external factors and market incentives, in combination with the housing price bubble in the United States. When high levels of bank and consumer leverage appeared, rising consumption caused increasingly risky lending, shown in the laxity in the standard of securities ' screening and riskier mortgages. As a consequence, the high default rate of these risky subprime mortgages incurred the burst of the housing bubble and increased defaults. Finally, liquidity rapidly shrank in the United States, giving rise to the financial crisis which later spread worldwide (Thakor, 2015). However, in the beginning of the era in which this chain of events took place, deregulation was widely practiced, as the regulations and restrictions of the economic and business markets were regarded as barriers to further development (Orhangazi, 2014). Expanded deregulation primarily influenced the factors leading to the crisis. The aim of this paper is to discuss whether or not deregulation was the main underlying reason for the 2007/08 financial crisis. I will argue that deregulation was the underlying cause due to the fact that the most important origins of the crisis — the explosion of financial innovation, leverage, securitisation, shadow banking and human greed — were based on deregulation. My argument is presented in three stages. The first section examines deregulation policies which resulted in the expansion of financial innovation and

By allowing banks to become “too big to fail”, the failure of one leads to massive repercussions for the entire economy. In a contrasting environment where many small institutions exist, the implosion of one bank will not have this far-reaching, catastrophic impact. In recent years, reforms have taken place that limit a company’s ability to be “too big to fail”. In the aftermath of the financial crisis of 2008, measures to revitalize the financial system included the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protect Act of 2010, named after U.S Senator Christopher J. Dodd and U.S Representative Barney Frank. The Act aimed to increase regulation and transparency in an industry that had so clearly lacked them and minimize future risk in the

In 2008, the United States went through one of the most significant economical period in history. The housing market and banks started to fail and people were unable to pay off their loans on the houses. This lead to a giant need for government intervention in determining which investment banks and corporations were worthy of being considered “too big to fail”. If they were in this category, the government would supply them with the funds necessary to not go bankrupt. Most of the time, the corporations would put this money towards consolidating their balance sheets, rather than solving the problems. This paper looks in depth into the 2008 financial crisis: the course

The banking crisis of the late 2000s, often called the Great Recession, is labelled by many economists as the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. Its effect on the markets around the world can still be felt. Many countries suffered a drop in GDP, small or even negative growth, bankrupting businesses and rise in unemployment. The welfare cost that society had to paid lead to an obvious question: ‘Who’s to blame?’ The fingers are pointed to the United States of America, as it is obvious that this is where the crisis began, but who exactly is responsible? Many people believe that the banks are the only ones that are guilty, but this is just not true. The crisis was really a systematic failure, in which many problems in the

Leading central banks around the world assisted in regaining the financial system and bringing the economy back to good terms at the peak of the financial crisis. Together they helped stop the financial system from upturning, and with tremendous effort, helped reestablish financial and economic stability. The United States’ central bank is known as the Federal Reserve, and they are accountable for making sure the country’s financial system functions effortlessly. During the crisis of 2007-2009 the Federal Reserve was passive and did not take the lengths necessary to help stop or slow down the upcoming crisis. Throughout this paper I will discuss what steps were taken and what steps should have been taken to help the United States during this time of financial instability.

In late 2007, America was hit with the most significant blow to its finance sector since the Great Depression. Upon careful retrospection of the nations economic policy since the Great Depression, many discovered that slowly but surely, America had been setting itself up for the “perfect storm” all along. Without question, it was evident that due to deregulation, excessive accumulation of debt (especially in the form of over leveraging), greed, treacherous decision-making, and obscure practices between financial institutions, America’s economy was brought to a screeching halt. While facing the impending failure of the country’s powerhouse banks, the federal government was forced to intervene, saving some banks, while merging or leading others to their demise. Additionally, the United States Department of Treasury was faced with rectifying the lack of credit available to fuel commerce, both business and personal. After jump-starting the nations cash flow with government assistance packages, the government introduced reform to oversee and limit corporations that are deemed “too big to fail” hoping to ensure that no such economic downturn should arise in the future.

These sources claim that financial irresponsibility and a money markets without boundaries leads to a toxic environment for the economy of the United States. While some analysts may dispute this claim with idea that todays economic issues are due to “the lack of fiscal supervision of the U.S government” (Natl. GPO. 2), it is easy to see that many of the same attitudes obtained by U.S citizens in The Great Crash of 1929 are very similar to those that caused the housing bubble leading to the financial crash of 2007 (natl. GPO.2). Among these specific ideals is the one that is most advertised in the United States, buy now and pay later. This controversial statement has been the central viewpoint in many studies regarding the growing debt of the United States. This viewpoint that eventually lead to the housing market crash in 2008 (Wilfred, 39) is also seen in the financial decisions of recent college graduates who are defaulting on their loan payments (Natl. GPO. 1). The decision that many Americans make while pursuing the “American Dream, are the same decisions that are keeping them from achieving it” (Reich.132). The story line seems to be inevitably repetitive; years of prosperity are followed by years of “fiscal irresponsibility” (Wilfred, 241). This

Date: May 2011 Disclaimer This publication has been prepared as a general overview of the Banking Industry in Australia and does not constitute and is not intended to constitute financial product advice as defined under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cwth). Nothing in this document should be construed as a recommendation or statement of opinion intended to influence a person in making an investment decision. The information is made available on the strict understanding that the Australian Trade Commission (Austrade) is not providing professional advice. While all care has been taken in the preparation of this publication, Austrade expressly denies liability for any loss or damage of any nature (including but