Also, without getting into the politics of this subject, just the practicalities — there is no majority consensus in Congress, much less the House to move any sort of bill like what is being proposed forward. The Republicans absolutely will not go for this, being a restraint on the free market. The Democrats are splintered amongst Progressives like AOC who have the benefit of liberal constituencies, and more moderate Democrats who unseated Republican incumbents in traditionally red or purple districts in a blue wave and can’t be seen as straying too far left. Of course, it’s too early to tell how the 2020 election will shake out, but I doubt either party will come out with much of a mandate to reform the banks. Timing is everything in politics, and the missed opportunity was back in 2009-10.
I also agree that if legislation ever made it into law to cap interest rates, the banks could simply refuse to lend to riskier clients, which would exacerbate the problems for people with bad credit and potentially cause a huge liquidity problem for a large percentage of the population.
The idea of offering banking services at post offices isn’t exactly a new one. When USPS stopped being an MS option, there was a huge (or at least feigned) outcry about how they were shutting down an important service to the financially underserved. So let’s assume people with riskier credit profiles are turned away from traditional banks, then the banks get to select and retain higher quality clients. If the USPS, being a government agency and presumably empowered by new law to act as a bank, can’t deny service to these same risky customers, then it becomes a bank of last resort, and their clientele will be much higher risk than those of traditional banks, and I’m not sure taxpayers or their representatives are willing to bear that risk with a potential bailout.
I could go on, but I need to get some sleep.
(truth be told, my record would probably be 1-1-1 if I actually answered)
