Sign North Dakota Banking RFP Now

Industry sign banking north dakota rfp now

In Los Angeles voters had the opportunity to vote for and against the creation of a public bank. That's right, a bank owned and operated by the government, in this case the city government of Los Angeles, that would compete with private banks and offer services that private banks often don't offer or under different circumstances. The measure was not passed but 43% of the voters were in favor. The people who pushed it, who want a public bank, didn't really have enough time. It needs more education. And this is, however, a very good beginning. I want to also mention that the head of the Los Angeles City Council, Herb Wesson, supported this effort and that's an important support to get. What's at stake here is important also for everyone to understand. The United States already has public banks. The most famous is in North Dakota which has had a public bank, owned and operated by the state of North Dakota, for over a hundred years. It has been attacked by private banks who fear the competition, but both Republican and Democratic governors and legislatures in North Dakota have beaten back every single effort to get rid of the public bank. That's how popular it is. It takes the money that is paid in taxes, and fishing licenses, and motor vehicle fees, and instead of giving it to a private bank (typically one of the giant banks in the United States) it goes instead into the state bank. In other words, state money is going to be used by the state bank which then makes loans available on good conditions to state businesses and state residents. It's a public service. And that's what I'd like to mention about this important issue. A public bank holds the private banks to a standard. The private banks now have to do as well as that public bank, or nearly so, otherwise their condition of existence is removed. Why have private banks if they cannot or will not do for the public what the public bank does? It's a good way to hold them to account. It's a good way to measure how well they're doing, number one. Number two, public banks don't have to make a profit. If they do, whatever their profit is goes back into the state governments income because it's part of the state, and that means the state government doesn't have to raise taxes as much as it otherwise would. That's made the Bank of North Dakota quite popular. And if it doesn't make profits it's because it can offer loans on the basis of lower costs then a private bank would charge, which is good for all the borrowers who are the majority, not the lenders, who are the minority. Get the picture? And finally, a public bank can make loans for what society needs even if it isn't so profitable. A private bank, for example, will fund luxury housing because it's very profitable. A public bank might instead support public housing, low cost housing, rent low housing. You get the picture? Because we need it in society and therefore the public bank does what we all need rather than what the private bank does, which is driven by the profit of the investors and the shareholders etc.. Very important that Los Angeles put it on the ballot. Very important that 43% of the people supported it first time out. Keep at it. And this kind of thing will happen not only in Los Angeles but in the other cities that are copying it, and that are learning from what's going on.