I’ve got a question to open up for comments. It feels like a dumb question — even a prejudiced one. But I have to ask it.<\/p>\n
Is there something about banking that’s inherently immoral or corrupting?<\/p>\n
I know bankers (“usurers”) have been hated throughout history. But I always figured that was mainly sour grapes and jealousy of anyone who has or controls money. It’s always seemed to me that bankers provide a needed service and one worth paying for. It also seems that banking, as a profession, is one that ought to inspire the greatest trust and trustworthi<\/i>ness. Granted, it hasn’t lately.<\/p>\n
But lately it seems as if everybody — including some of the most capitalistic, entrepreneurial, free-marketeering people I know — speak of bankers in tones normally reserved for baby-rapers, puppy-torturers, and ATF agents. I hear people speak this way not only of Federal Reserve bankers or big corporate-bailout bankers or crooked mortgage lenders (who so richly deserve the scorn) — but of bankers in general, as if banking were a trade so low that even kiddie porn purveyors would consider it beneath their dignity.<\/p>\n
So what’s up with that? It’s not just anger in the wake of TARP. It’s not mere Bernanke-rage. Is it really something about the banking trade itself?<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
I’ve got a question to open up for comments. It feels like a dumb question — even a prejudiced one. But I have to ask it. Is there something about banking that’s inherently immoral or corrupting? I know bankers (“usurers”) have been hated throughout history. But I always figured that was mainly sour grapes and jealousy of anyone who has or controls money. It’s always seemed to me that bankers provide a needed service and one worth paying for. It also seems that banking, as a profession, is one that ought to inspire the greatest trust and trustworthiness. Granted, it…<\/p>\n