Gemma Weir’s limited understanding (April 28) of market economics is evidenced by her assertion that things happen in the private sector on a ‘whim’.
On the contrary the benefit to the consumer of a competitive environment is that decisions, such as those to close branches, will be taken with due regard to the actions of competitors and the likelihood of customers to change banks as a result.
The nationalised banking system she proposes would not only lift more money out of the pockets of people who are more than happy to use online banking in order to pay for branches where the state deems there is need, but would set innovation back generations.
After all, what impetus does a gargantuan, unwieldy, centralised bank have to treat its customers any better?
The recapitalisation of failed banks that occurred in 2008 was a wholly insensible course of action and one which grossly increased both the actual debt and the budget deficit. However, it was understood to be a once in lifetime action.
A permanently nationalised banking system, not bound by the fear of failure that exists in a market, would fail astronomically and consistently, leaving us all to pick up the tab every time.
Neil Wilson, Belfast BT5