Banks are indeed run as governments, in my opinion do not count as businesses.
I've worked for insurers, banks, governments, industry, retail and service providers. Only place I've seen departments trying to vigorously spend their budget is banks and government, the rest wants to stay under budget or else they have some explaining to do.
I'm not mistaken allowences, they get a negative income tax. There is an excel sheet in the video, where they clearly show it.
In that quote, the numbers 20,000 and 53,000, and their sum 73,000.
Citation;
4) To complete this catalog of government interference and its trampling of any
vestige of laissez faire, as of the end of 2007, the last full year for which
data are available, the Federal Register contained fully
seventy-three thousand pages of detailed government regulations. This
is an increase of more than ten thousand pages since 1978, the very years during
which our system, according to one of The New York Times articles
quoted above, has been "tilted in favor of business deregulation and against new
rules." Under laissez-faire capitalism, there would be no Federal
Register. The activities of the remaining government departments and their
subdivisions would be controlled exclusively by duly enacted legislation, not
the rule-making of unelected government officials.
Last data Wikipedia show me in 2010 it was around 80.000 pages, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Register, so I was a bit conservative.
I've made a few errors, it's not just financial legislation, but more. The 20.000 needed to be 10.000 in order to comply with the article I got it from, but 20.000 is somewhat accurate if you take the Wikipedia entry into account.
I would love to put my money in a bank that has no safety net. That means that I, as a customer, have a say in what the bank can and can't do with my money. Otherwise it's the government's decision, not mine.
1, if the page contains sensible regulations (like, pay the government money if you want to offload the risk of your bank collapsing and needing to have the savings bailed out).
Sensible is open to interpretation, what might be sensible to you, might not be sensible for me.
So therefore by definition you would benefit from this legislation at the expense of others.
See how this works? With each regulation government is picking winners and losers, best do away with them and let people decide how and where to spend their money.
