Share the article
twitter-iconcopy-link-iconprint-icon
share-icon
Financial RegulationNovember 3 2008

America’s deep divide

As US regulators and government work together to increase liquidity and help stabilise the economy, mixed opinions abound on just how much public money should be used to alleviate the problems stemming from the country’s banking sector. Writer Jane Monahan.
Share the article
twitter-iconcopy-link-iconprint-icon
share-icon

As the financial crisis in the US, considered the worst since the Great Depression of the 1930s, causes panic in global markets and fuels recession in the US, the debate of the country’s government and regulators has shifted. The debate used to be how much banks should be regulated, and what new bank regulations are required. But now it is how much bank liquidity and capital needs to increase to unfreeze wholesale banking markets, restore confidence and start the recovery of the ­system.

However, as the country holds crucial presidential and congressional elections, it is an indication of how much bankers and regulators have lost the public relations battle. It seems that politicians, the popular press and the electorate, in contrast, are still focusing on what caused the crisis, as well as calling for greedy, reckless and incompetent bankers to be punished.

To continue reading, join our community and benefit from

  • In-depth coverage across key markets
  • Comments from financial leaders and policymakers worldwide
  • Regional/country bank rankings and awards
Activate your free trial