Slideshow ‘Who needs FDIC deposit insurance anyway’: Comments of the week

  • February 22 2018, 10:00pm EST
8 Images Total

Readers weigh in on the idea of using banks to effectively ban assault rifles, slam a pot-banking proposal, opine on social media strategies and more.

On calls for California to create a central bank to solve the pot-banking problem:

“Yeah, who needs FDIC deposit insurance anyway. Let's Cali to insure deposits! So many moving parts and most of it reliant on government to help (which all but guarantees failure).”

Related: A solution to California’s pot-banking problem: Its own central bank

Content Continues Below

Another reader weighs in on the idea of California launching a central bank for the cannabis industry:

"A Socialist government running a bank for the sole purpose of circumventing federal law. What could possibly go wrong."

Related: A solution to California’s pot-banking problem: Its own central bank

On Democratic lawmakers requesting documents related to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's fair-lending office losing its enforcement powers:

“The CFPB has proven not to be an objective judge of discriminatory lending practices especially using flawed statistical models rather than looking at actual files. Each file is unique--some borrowers are strong in some credit factors and weak in others. Lenders must weigh strengths against weaknesses. It has been their practice to fine as many lenders as possible by abusing their federal power. it would be good if …”

Related: Dems demand fair-lending docs from CFPB's Mulvaney

Agreeing with an op-ed that argues banks should not be called on to solve America's debate over guns:

“Using the banking system to implement policy lacking legal guidance is government intervention at its worst.”

Link: Call for bank crackdown on gun sales is deeply misguided

Content Continues Below

Another reader affirms that banks should not try to ban assault weapons:

"Glad to this article pointing out the flaws of creating de facto government entities by using private firms. I am absolutely for better control of these type of weapons, but making something difficult to buy through normal channels will just drive those determined to obtain these type of weapons underground or simply to use cash which is not as easy to trace or detect. Lastly the actions regarding crypto currencies is much the same as not being able to buy Lottery Tickets on a credit card."

Related: Call for bank crackdown on gun sales is deeply misguided

On examples of community bankers using social media to share their personal views:

“Being a part of the community, including the social media community, is simply part of being a ‘community’ bank. Far too many are ignoring social media or locking it down in their bank out of fear. Don't fear, get educated and connect with your customers where they are gathering.”

Link: The perks and pitfalls of speaking out on social media

On a story about the history of credit card activation as a strategy to reduce fraud:

"Another 'old-school' method works just as effectively. It's called PIN, but the global card networks and the banks choose to ignore it altogether except when the banks want to protect their own money in their ATMs. When the merchants money is at stake, they'd prefer to use chargebacks and PCI to shift the cost of fraud to merchants rather than stop fraud altogether!"

Related: This old-school method for foiling card fraud has stood test of time