“The Bank of North Dakota: A Model for Massachusetts and Other States?” — Response to the May 2011 Report by the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston

Last week, the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston (FRBB) released a report titled “The Bank of North Dakota: A Model for Massachusetts and Other States?”  The report confirms that the Bank of North Dakota (BND) is a prudent, well-managed financial institution that serves in partnership with community banks as an effective economic backstop to credit contractions. . . .

Read more here.

6 Responses

  1. […] Dakota has the nation’s only state-owned bank… and incidentally a 3.3% unemployment rate. So why don’t we in Wisconsin?  Follow the […]

  2. This is a great discussion, it show that there maybe a way out of the mess we are in.

  3. Nice article. I didn’t realise that Dakota has the nations only state owned bank?

  4. […] Why are you assuming the entire $14.3 trillion has to be repaid? When has that ever happened in all history. One place to start increasing revenues would be to stop borrowing from the richest 1% of Americans and corporations and resume taxing them at the same levels they paid 40 years ago. As far as cutting spending, how about cutting the American Empire in half and put the Pentagon to work building high-speed rail (freight and passenger) in the Homeland along with universal internet from Maine to Maui. North Dakota figured out some of the financing in 1919 when it began doing business as the State Bank of North Dakota. “The Bank of North Dakota: A Model for Massachusetts and Other States?” — Response to the … […]

  5. risk making myself look naive here, but here goes. Before any nationalised banking system was put in place, (if that were to happen) would capital controls not have to be put in place as well?

    As Wall Street seem to be not too fond about any notion of a state controlled bank, if there are no capital controls, won’t capital simply flee the US looking for a place where there are no state controls?

    I understand that before 1971, any countries that had holdings of dollars could demand the equivalent of those dollars in gold. However, as the US hadn’t anywhere near enough gold to do this anymore, Nixon stopped this and effectively ended any restrictions on the inflows and outflows of capital,

    As that way of doing things is reliant on the quantity of gold and unlikely to be re-introduced again, wouldn’t it be a better idea to simply tax capital and permenantly keep a proportion of it in the country? Especially the money dealt with in the currency markets in which hundreds of billions of dollars are gambled with every week?

    Say, if possible, you taxed the money used in the currency markets at 1 percent and assume that money amounted to $1 trillion a week (I believe this to be an underestimate). The amount per year would be $52 trillion, and at 1 percent tax (if my math is correct) would mean that $520 billion stops in the US every year for investment in hospitals, schools and infrastructure.

    This may well not be necessary, but there is a possibility if, without capital controls, much finance would simply leave the US, causing massive damage to the economy.

    Good idea or rather naive?

  6. […] Quote: Originally Posted by FiscalSanity Todd & Steel, Setting the correct tax rate isn't a science, it's an art. Set it too low and your bond holders get nervous about the countries ability to raise enough revenue to meet all it's obligations, even if everyone else loves it. Set it too high and you stifle economic growth, which in turn leads to falling tax revenues and bond holders getting nervous. Problem is, we're dealing with human perception here on all sides of the issue, and those change constantly. Right now cutting taxes very far is going to make our deficit situation even worse, and our bond holders are already getting jittery. However, raising the income tax rates themselves is just as bad an idea. About the only thing you can do with the tax code to boost revenues right now is to eliminate loopholes and start treating capital gains as ordinary income. Anything else is too likely to result in the bond market hitting us with higher interest rates, which would in turn make our ability to repay our debts even more in doubt. Like it or not, we're only a financial mistep or two from being in Greece's position, so we can't afford to make many more mistakes. I'm assuming when you use the term bond market you're referring to a private bond market. Am I wrong? Is there a way of constructing an economy without private bond markets? What is your impression of the state of North Dakota doing business as the State Bank of North Dakota? “The Bank of North Dakota: A Model for Massachusetts and Other States?” — Response to the … […]

Leave a Reply to Leroy Sylvania Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: