vinyard
09-30-2006, 08:01 PM
Ultimately, if this recent bill is defeated in any way it will come down to the significant pull of the US banking industry. Small and mid-sized banks made a significant lobby against the bill and with good cause - banks maintain much better profitability if they don't have to *ever* look at the source of wintdrawals or deposits of an account. Having to review every checking account of every customer proactively will, indeed, have a financial impact on the banks. One of the basic principles of economics is that these costs will likely be passed to the consumer. What does that mean for the average American? Who's to say? But one thing it could result in is the widespread rollback of free checking which is now a staple in most of America. There was a time where this was the limited to college freshman and people with otherwise substantial holdings at a bank. Then WaMu offered it as a "loss leader" for future business followed by FirstChicagoBankOneChase and then smaller banks fell into line. What if reviewing these transactions and keeping an updated master list proves expensive enough (or more accurately Banks can make the case its so expensive) that free checking becomes threatened? Think some reps in Blue America might change their tune? Might start listening to reason about taxation and regulation?
And then on the other end it takes precisely one international bank to say "bug off we like money too much" for this bill to be a clusterfuck. PS already holds all player money in the Royal Bank of Scotland. If them, or another, reputable, profit-minded bank, were to become the holding place for *individual* player accounts would the US be able to police them? And would't US banks raise a huge stink if there their trillions of dollars in overmingly mundane transactions annually with a major foreign bank were put at risk over an industry whose entire value will likely be capped at 20 billion?
And then on the other end it takes precisely one international bank to say "bug off we like money too much" for this bill to be a clusterfuck. PS already holds all player money in the Royal Bank of Scotland. If them, or another, reputable, profit-minded bank, were to become the holding place for *individual* player accounts would the US be able to police them? And would't US banks raise a huge stink if there their trillions of dollars in overmingly mundane transactions annually with a major foreign bank were put at risk over an industry whose entire value will likely be capped at 20 billion?