Posted 3 years ago on Nov. 18, 2011, 4:05 p.m. EST by ruralsupporter
from North Arlington, NJ
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
I read the OWS movement is depositing thier money in certain banks
which they deem trustworthy, such as Amalgamated in California; but
that certain wealthy depositors in the bank are, or in the future
may be, demanding that bank funds be invested in highly risky in-
struments such as mortgage backed securities.
This is going to be a continual problem. At the moment, the
OWS movement does not have enough money to significantly fund a bank with only OWS deposits, so the wealthy investors have more leverage.
I think we should look to trying to gain more control in the near future. We should all agree to put, not only our donations, into one or a very few banks; but also all agree to do all our personal banking at these banks (or credit unions). In fact, we could even start our own bank or credit union. Our combined assets (especially as the movement grows) should be enough to support a bank completely. Once we have enough money deposited, we should make it a rule that the bank provide complete transparency of all its investing activity to all of its members--otherwise, we take out our deposits and go elsewhere.