|
Splitting larger companies down into smaller companies would mean more failures, but none that would need to be bailed out as a systemic risk.
In my utopia, there'd be a hard limit to employees/revenue as a share of gdp (like 0.1%)/etc for companies and corporations before they'd need to be split into autonomous pieces.
Less efficient, sure. Efficiency of company structure really shouldn't be a goal unto itself, though, or else we're headed to a single, global monopolist...
These banks getting bigger will, over time, have more confidence. All history points toward there then being an opportunity to exploit up to and beyond the limits of reason. Then they'll be back in their current position, but an order of magnitude bigger, with more at stake should they be allowed to fail.
Huge financial monoliths are the doom of this model for society.
__________________
"I do not agree that the dog in a manger has the final right to the manger even though he may have lain there for a very long time. I do not admit that right. I do not admit for instance, that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America or the black people of Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to these people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher-grade race, a more worldly wise race to put it that way, has come in and taken their place." - Winston Churchill, 1937 --{ORLY?}--
|