Proliferation of banks

We continue to hear the problems with the banking industry, and I am somewhat perplexed by what I see in my own backyard.

Count the number of banks from State Line to I-35 along 135th Street. If the banks are hurting as much as indicated, why are they not closing facilities like other businesses do in trying times? Within two miles of my home are three Bank of America locations. Along that same road, one will see several new strip malls that have been sitting idle for long periods of time, and yet we see new construction of similar facilities.

Who is carrying the paper on all of this? Makes you wonder, doesn’t it?

Bill Dufner
Kansas City

Comments

[Engineer]

Marctnts
I will admit that there is a lot about the financial crisis I don't understand, but how is it to a bank's advantage to "hoard" funds? After all banks are not money storehouses, they are institutions that were designed to make money by lending money. In essence they take my money or the Fed's money or someone's money, pay us a low interest rate, and loan it out at a higher interest rate. They must have some cash on hand but they are not making any money on that, except for the part used in their credit card business. But that is just a highly profitable arm of their loan business. They must have assets that can be converted to cash. But hoarding money, why would they want to do that? if the money is handed to them by the government, interest free, they don't lose money by hoarding it, but they don't make money either.

[solomon]

Marctnts,

When we talk to BuddyT reasonably we fail to remember what an idiot he is. Even in this thread today he claims that President Bush, when proclaiming the merits of home ownership, only did so because he was duped by the Democrats.

[Marctnts]

"Those same banks also bought treasuries instead of lending the money because the Democrat bail out was stupid."

If you think for one second that banks used the TARP funds to shore up their balance sheets instead of lending it because of democrats, you're extremely naive. The banks "horded" the TARP funds because they were allowed to by the lack of any real regulations included in the bill.

By the way, the extremely lacking TARP bill was written by the BUSH white house, a REPUBLICAN administration. So, I guess if you MUST blame only one party for the failure of TARP to do what it was designed to do, I'd say your best bet would be to blame the republicans.

[solomon]

Again BuddyT blames Dems for everything. One sided record.

[NoMoreMrNiceGuy]

Screw the banks, a bunch of snivleing welfare mongers. Let them fail and charge their executives with treason.
There should have never been ANY bailout of banks, let them fail like any other risk/reward business.

[BudRog]

Race Card, listen moron, I did not miss the point. Those same banks also bought treasuries instead of lending the money because the Democrat bail out was stupid.

My point was, and is, that banks will have to return to lending to make major profits, regardless of what their short term investments (other banks, t-bills) are!

God get over your arrogant self Race Card!

[solomon]

Once again BussyT misses the point. They spent our money to buy other banks when that is not what the banking bailout was for.

[BudRog]

Not to worry at some point the banks will realize they cannot buy bonds and make profits, they will have to lend again.....

[solomon]

Maybe one of our Kansas friends here can tell us if the three banks mentioned by Bill have always been Bank of America locations.

There are fewer bank entities than in recent years. Large banks have purchased smaller banks. All fine and good in the business world. The part that bugs me is that some of the large banks used the bailout money last year to purchase smaller banks to strengthen themselves, not to loan back into the economy.

[whispering_to_kc]

Why are there so many banks in Overland Park?

Because that's where the money is?