![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
steepholmIt's ironic that the banks are now squealing about how "more regulation" will stop them lending to business and individuals (though no one seems to know exactly why it should).
Why ironic? Because, whereas regulation is usually portrayed as getting in the way of the operation of the free market, and indeed that's the impression they're trying to give today, in this case the point of regulation (to separate the retail and investment arms of the banks) is to allow a free market to come into being. At the moment, we have no free market in banking, because the banks are effectively underwritten by the taxpayer and cannot fail. Under the proposed system that will no longer be the case. What they're protesting about, in fact, is the prospect of being forced to live under capitalism.
Why ironic? Because, whereas regulation is usually portrayed as getting in the way of the operation of the free market, and indeed that's the impression they're trying to give today, in this case the point of regulation (to separate the retail and investment arms of the banks) is to allow a free market to come into being. At the moment, we have no free market in banking, because the banks are effectively underwritten by the taxpayer and cannot fail. Under the proposed system that will no longer be the case. What they're protesting about, in fact, is the prospect of being forced to live under capitalism.