[olezip]

This looks interesting. I wonder if this “socialist” bank is better than credit unions? Credit unions have not suffered the losses of commercial banks that have been corrupted by government regulation, oversight, and schemes.

Is the state owned bank really socialist or is it simply fiscally conservative because of its responsibility to husband the resources of a financially successful state?

[goldstategop]

Its not really socialist. Its just a state-owned business and is run like any other business. It doesn't follow socialist principles - if by such principles one means wealth redistribution. That's never happened in North Dakota. Its more akin to Canada's Crown Corporations - public companies that are expected to be profitable and yet also responsible to their true shareholders - the public.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find only things evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelogus

[VRWCmember]

It isn’t really a socialist bank at all. It is a state-owned bank. If the bank had taken over a privately run bank or the entire banking system in the state, THEN you would have a socialist bank. This is simply a state-run bank that serves primarily as a bank for other banks, and a bank that provides the state its financial services at rates probably more favorable than would be offered by commercial banks.

If other states were to try this approach, it would probably be detrimental to the banking industry in those states as it would move state accounts and loans out of the private sector banks and into the new “state” bank.