Post by account_disabled on Mar 15, 2024 22:38:19 GMT -5
Since the end of the Second World War there have been many changes in the assignment of the roles of the State and the Market in the regulation of different economic sectors. The first and most important was the liberalization of international trade. But the list of regulatory changes that have been made to decide what should be public or private is very extensive. Privatizations of public companies, liberalizations of regulated or monopolized sectors such as telecommunications or different forms of transportation, structural reforms of labor markets, the reduction of barriers to the creation of the internal market in the European Union, etc., are also examples of this tendency to “leave everything to the market.” as possible and assign to the State what is necessary.” Y, What has happened in the financial sector? It is interesting to observe the assignment of roles to the State and the Market in the financial sector because two totally opposite developments have occurred.
On the one hand, there has been unto evolution similar to that of other sectors, in the sense de let consumers, users and companies decide freely y that State intervenesga exclusively en those areas where your role is absolutely necessary such as consumer and investor protection, antitrust policies, the requirement for transparency and audits, etc. Eastto evolution has occurred en la majority of activities of the Finance system, but not in the bank. Today, the part of the financial system that is not banks functions fundamentally under market discipline and only with State interventions that do not interfere in the free BYB Directory decisions of companies and users. However, The regulation of banks has gone in the opposite direction, in the sense of increasing the role of the State in business decisions and preventing competition in banking activities. This has led to The banking sector is today the most intervened and protected sector of all the economic sectors in all the countries of the world, once the communist countries abandoned State intervention in the production of goods and services.. But now the opportunity opens up to change the regulation of the banking system in the sense of reassigning the roles of the State and the Market.
Hitherto The excessive intervention of the State in the banking system has had a justification: to avoid the consequences that arise from the fragility of bank money. The growing accumulation of anti-market regulations is justified because most of the money we use now – bank deposits – are not actually money, but “promises” to repay money. And crises arise when banks cannot keep their promises. The bank uses the money of your clients pto lend it o invest it, and the difference between the interest rates on these investments and the returns on deposits has until now been their fundamental source of income. Cash withdrawals have a certain regularity and this allows banks to normally respond to depositors' demands without major complications. But the problem arises, not only when the banks are insolvent, but long before, when they are not able to quickly convert their investments or loans into money. As happened in March of this year in the caso from some US regional banks. In the past, the consequences.
On the one hand, there has been unto evolution similar to that of other sectors, in the sense de let consumers, users and companies decide freely y that State intervenesga exclusively en those areas where your role is absolutely necessary such as consumer and investor protection, antitrust policies, the requirement for transparency and audits, etc. Eastto evolution has occurred en la majority of activities of the Finance system, but not in the bank. Today, the part of the financial system that is not banks functions fundamentally under market discipline and only with State interventions that do not interfere in the free BYB Directory decisions of companies and users. However, The regulation of banks has gone in the opposite direction, in the sense of increasing the role of the State in business decisions and preventing competition in banking activities. This has led to The banking sector is today the most intervened and protected sector of all the economic sectors in all the countries of the world, once the communist countries abandoned State intervention in the production of goods and services.. But now the opportunity opens up to change the regulation of the banking system in the sense of reassigning the roles of the State and the Market.
Hitherto The excessive intervention of the State in the banking system has had a justification: to avoid the consequences that arise from the fragility of bank money. The growing accumulation of anti-market regulations is justified because most of the money we use now – bank deposits – are not actually money, but “promises” to repay money. And crises arise when banks cannot keep their promises. The bank uses the money of your clients pto lend it o invest it, and the difference between the interest rates on these investments and the returns on deposits has until now been their fundamental source of income. Cash withdrawals have a certain regularity and this allows banks to normally respond to depositors' demands without major complications. But the problem arises, not only when the banks are insolvent, but long before, when they are not able to quickly convert their investments or loans into money. As happened in March of this year in the caso from some US regional banks. In the past, the consequences.