Credit Unions?

[pastradamus]

I've been a member of a credit union here in Ireland (where it is widespread practice) for a number of years now and have never had even the slightest problem with them, when compared say, to the banks. I love the way that the credit union is owned and run by its members and rather than being paid by a small interest amount on your savings, you are instead paid dividends like an actual shareholder.

What are your opinions on this? I can only speak for Ireland on this issue as I am not familiar with foreign credit unions.

[Die Neue Zeit]

I am for a single public bank at as high a governing level as possible to replace all private financial institutions. On the EU level, I'm for an ECB monopoly in central banking, retail banking, and commercial banking.

However, there can be some decentralization so as to mimick the credit union atmosphere while avoiding the problem of credit unions extracting economic rent from society like typical private banks.

[Rêve Rouge]

I'm also a credit union member. I haven't had any problems with them either. Die Neue Zeit, care to elaborate your views on credit unions? Like the OP, I'm curious on leftist opinions of credit unions.

[Die Neue Zeit]

The dividends paid to credit union members are as much a form of economic rent as dividends paid to bank shareholders.

[pastradamus]

The dividends paid to credit union members are as much a form of economic rent as dividends paid to bank shareholders.
Yes, but CU's are community-based and the members of a credit union are not the billionaires that are involved in private banking shares. They are predominantly working class members of society.

[Ravachol]

I am for a single public bank at as high a governing level as possible to replace all private financial institutions. On the EU level, I'm for an ECB monopoly in central banking, retail banking, and commercial banking.

Obviously because the EU is a structure composed of and under control of the working class, arose as an extension of working class autonomy and is a direct attack on transnational capital! :rolleyes:

Honestly, I cannot see how an ECB monopoly is going to bring us an inch closer to the destruction of Capital and the State or further the communist project. The ECB Governing Council is composed of members of it's Executive Board (which are appointed by the respective leaders of each nation-state) and the presidents of all national banks.

I cannot think of a bigger single gathering of bourgeois scum in Europe than the ones gathered around that table. How any of these serve the interests of the communist project, that is: further the struggle for autonomy against Capital and the state and for the realisation of our own desires as a class, is beyond me.

The only ones believing that this kind of bullshit offers some sort of solution are the most deluded of social-democrats and other reformists.

[Decolonize The Left]

I've been a member of a credit union here in Ireland (where it is widespread practice) for a number of years now and have never had even the slightest problem with them, when compared say, to the banks. I love the way that the credit union is owned and run by its members and rather than being paid by a small interest amount on your savings, you are instead paid dividends like an actual shareholder.

What are your opinions on this? I can only speak for Ireland on this issue as I am not familiar with foreign credit unions.

I am a huge proponent of credit unions, though I can only speak for those in the US, for a number of reasons:
- Credit Unions are non-profit (unlike banks)
- Credit Unions are local, all money which goes in gets loaned to other members only
- Credit Unions provide better service
- Credit Unions have lower rates which are often fixed for a period of time
- Credit Unions often link up with other credit unions allowing you to transfer money for free.

I highly suggest members join credit unions and leave banks for the above mentioned reasons. I tell this to pretty much everyone who will listen as these institutions are safer and more community-oriented. Glad to see this thread - well done pastra.

- August

[pastradamus]

I am a huge proponent of credit unions, though I can only speak for those in the US, for a number of reasons:
- Credit Unions are non-profit (unlike banks)
- Credit Unions are local, all money which goes in gets loaned to other members only
- Credit Unions provide better service
- Credit Unions have lower rates which are often fixed for a period of time
- Credit Unions often link up with other credit unions allowing you to transfer money for free.

I highly suggest members join credit unions and leave banks for the above mentioned reasons. I tell this to pretty much everyone who will listen as these institutions are safer and more community-oriented. Glad to see this thread - well done pastra.

- August

Yeah, absolutely. That seems to run pretty much along the same lines as my own credit union here in Ireland. I decided to set up this thread because I always believed credit unions to fit any left-wing based ideology and I have never seen nor heard of them mentioned here. I also forgot about the money transfer policy which you spoke of August. In my own credit union you can even change a certain amount of money ie Dollars to Euro's for free (the credit union being satisfied simply by the presence of a foreign currency in their accounts).

[pastradamus]

Obviously because the EU is a structure composed of and under control of the working class, arose as an extension of working class autonomy and is a direct attack on transnational capital! :rolleyes:

Honestly, I cannot see how an ECB monopoly is going to bring us an inch closer to the destruction of Capital and the State or further the communist project. The ECB Governing Council is composed of members of it's Executive Board (which are appointed by the respective leaders of each nation-state) and the presidents of all national banks.

I cannot think of a bigger single gathering of bourgeois scum in Europe than the ones gathered around that table. How any of these serve the interests of the communist project, that is: further the struggle for autonomy against Capital and the state and for the realisation of our own desires as a class, is beyond me.

The only ones believing that this kind of bullshit offers some sort of solution are the most deluded of social-democrats and other reformists.

Lets not forget that the ECB is also connected strongly with the IMF and World Bank - who supply finances managed only by the ECB and the state in question (Ireland, Hungary and Greece at the moment) must submit to both the IMF & ECB - putting the struggling states at their mercy.

[Die Neue Zeit]

^^^ The question is about democratic struggles at the EU level, not about nationalistic or local/regional shortcuts.


Obviously because the EU is a structure composed of and under control of the working class, arose as an extension of working class autonomy and is a direct attack on transnational capital! :rolleyes:

Honestly, I cannot see how an ECB monopoly is going to bring us an inch closer to the destruction of Capital and the State or further the communist project. The ECB Governing Council is composed of members of it's Executive Board (which are appointed by the respective leaders of each nation-state) and the presidents of all national banks.

That is the European Central Bank as it is organized at the present time.

[Die Neue Zeit]

I am a huge proponent of credit unions, though I can only speak for those in the US, for a number of reasons:
- Credit Unions are non-profit (unlike banks)

They need to make money in order to distribute surpluses to member.


- Credit Unions are local, all money which goes in gets loaned to other members only

Local currency alternatives to government money are more effective at this localism than credit unions.


- Credit Unions provide better service

True.


- Credit Unions have lower rates which are often fixed for a period of time

Public banking can go lower.


- Credit Unions often link up with other credit unions allowing you to transfer money for free.

True.


I highly suggest members join credit unions and leave banks for the above mentioned reasons. I tell this to pretty much everyone who will listen as these institutions are safer and more community-oriented. Glad to see this thread - well done pastra.

- August

What about banks with no physical branch presence? They give you higher savings interest and charge lower loans interest because of minimal overhead.

[Klaatu]

A credit union is a good example of a Socialist-type of private business. Let's push for more of the same,
in other industries, especially in higher education.

Don't tell Glenn Beck about the nature of credit unions, unless you want to see his head explode :lol:
He hates Socialists, without even knowing what Socialism actually is... He keeps droning on and on about
Nazis, USSR, etc, and does not realize that, these countries were not even close to true Socialism!

[Die Neue Zeit]

http://english.eluniversal.com/2010/11/12/en_eco_esp_venezuelan-financial_12A4721215.shtml


In addition, there will be only universal banking, microfinance banking and money exchange offices. No more commercial banks, thrifts and credit unions, mortgage banks and investment banks.

[Sosa]

I've been a member of a Credit Union for about 2 years now and I love it. I've had many different commercial bank accounts in the past and they cannot compare with the my Credit Union.

[ckaihatsu]

Obviously because the EU is a structure composed of and under control of the working class, arose as an extension of working class autonomy and is a direct attack on transnational capital! :rolleyes:

Honestly, I cannot see how an ECB monopoly is going to bring us an inch closer to the destruction of Capital and the State or further the communist project. The ECB Governing Council is composed of members of it's Executive Board (which are appointed by the respective leaders of each nation-state) and the presidents of all national banks.

I cannot think of a bigger single gathering of bourgeois scum in Europe than the ones gathered around that table. How any of these serve the interests of the communist project, that is: further the struggle for autonomy against Capital and the state and for the realisation of our own desires as a class, is beyond me.

The only ones believing that this kind of bullshit offers some sort of solution are the most deluded of social-democrats and other reformists.




How any of these serve the interests of the communist project, that is: further the struggle for autonomy against Capital and the state and for the realisation of our own desires as a class, is beyond me.

The only ones believing that this kind of bullshit offers some sort of solution are the most deluded of social-democrats and other reformists.


Jesus, I thought they were about to do a group hug and press all of their lips together in the center for an infomercial...!

People! In banking you're *customers* and *consumers* at *most*, supplying your paychecks to be used as raw material for large banking interests. Snap out of it!!

[Dean]

I am for a single public bank at as high a governing level as possible to replace all private financial institutions. On the EU level, I'm for an ECB monopoly in central banking, retail banking, and commercial banking.

However, there can be some decentralization so as to mimick the credit union atmosphere while avoiding the problem of credit unions extracting economic rent from society like typical private banks.
First off, you're not proposing a model that is applicable to a money-less system (not a criticism, just a point of reference for my response). That is, there will still be money held in banks and therefore also expansive money, or capital. Why, then, should we restrict one of the few petty-capitalist industries which provide for working-class investment?


The dividends that credit unions provide are not of the same magnitude as the surplus value that accumulated capital provides. While capital can routinely provide annual expansion well over 50%,* I doubt that credit unions can even match 5%. Inflation rates average something like 2%. But that rate of inflation needs to be understood as rent, specifically, rent which favors those who own specific kinds of assets.

Further, I'm not sure what value an aggressively centralized system can have. I keep seeing a lot of communists talk about centralization, but as I see it, the communist programs themselves are consistently models of decentralization. Why shouldn't banking follow a similar direction in a proto-socialist regime?

*I haven't researched this particular fact much yet, but a cursory search of stocks shows that its not impossible to acquire returns of 160% (that is in addition to your investment!) over a year on financial capital: http://www.google.com/finance?client=ob&q=NYSE:TTM


http://english.eluniversal.com/2010/11/12/en_eco_esp_venezuelan-financial_12A4721215.shtml
I'm not sure that the Venezuelan model is an example of what we should desire as communists.

[Die Neue Zeit]

First off, you're not proposing a model that is applicable to a money-less system (not a criticism, just a point of reference for my response). That is, there will still be money held in banks and therefore also expansive money, or capital. Why, then, should we restrict one of the few petty-capitalist industries which provide for working-class investment?

The labour credit system would be computerized and have an appropriate mix of centralization and decentralization, no?


The dividends that credit unions provide are not of the same magnitude as the surplus value that accumulated capital provides. While capital can routinely provide annual expansion well over 50%,* I doubt that credit unions can even match 5%. Inflation rates average something like 2%. But that rate of inflation needs to be understood as rent, specifically, rent which favors those who own specific kinds of assets.

I think this was covered in classical economics (before Marx) as the concepts of minimum profit and maximum profit, as well as maximum wage and minimum wage. The worker needs to cover his subsistence on one end, while the capitalist needs to cover inflation on the other. How the wage and profit is determined between the two ends is another story.

"NY brit expat" over at Daily Kos uses classical economics before Marx to justify some form of socialism. She has a blog on this relationship:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/5/28/736259/-Classical-Economics:-Thompson-and-the-case-for-Cooperativism


Further, I'm not sure what value an aggressively centralized system can have. I keep seeing a lot of communists talk about centralization, but as I see it, the communist programs themselves are consistently models of decentralization. Why shouldn't banking follow a similar direction in a proto-socialist regime?

I'd have to go into all the theoretical debates in information technology about the pros and cons, each, of centralization and decentralization. One pro for centralization that stands out is the reduction or elimination of redundancy.