Talk:Credit union
| This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 Archives |
|---|
[edit] confusing statistics
This article is filled with contradictory statistics, and does not read well in the country examples section. I`m going to edit if there are no objections,
non-verbatim examples,
- Canada has the largest per-capita credit union usage in NA, 1/3 of the population 11.5m people
- The united states has 43% of economically active people enrolled, 89m
- The Caisse Desjardins North Americas largest and has assets of 111b
- The US Navy Credit union is the worlds largest credit union with assets of 35b and 3m members
Caese (talk) 17:21, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
[edit] Not-for-profit status and the need for a surplus
"credit unions ... must turn what is, in economic terms, a small profit (i.e. "surplus") to be able to continue to serve their members."
Why is an economic profit necessary? The references don't seem to explain this. Also, this sounds incorrect as no firm *needs* to earn economic profit -- in fact, perfect competition demands that economic profit is zero. This needs to be explained. If this was not the intended meaning, then clarification instead is needed. Furthermost (talk) 00:30, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
- A surplus is necessary to build capital because credit unions cannot issue stock. They can only build capital through retained earnings. Capital must be sufficient to allow a cushion for the bad years so that members can continue to be served. The appropriate level of capital depends on the particular credit union. Is this the kind of information needed in the article (although probably expanded and written better)? 72Dino (talk) 01:25, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
-
- Thanks 72Dino for the thoughtful response. Yes, I agree with you that retained earnings are desirable as a buffer, but this can be achieved without economic profits being made. Keep in mind that return on equity does not have to be paid out to shareholders to be realised, where in this case the credit union’s member depositors are its ‘shareholders’. (My main point is that I hope people are mindful of the distinction between economic profit and accounting profit.) - Furthermost (talk) 23:22, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
[edit] difference between this entity and fractional-reserve-banking
I'm sorry, i don't see it. it's the same system of institutionalized fraud. it's like the debt-slaves are wishing for a nicer collar. Credit-unions, so called, still create money out of nothing, and inject it into the banking system to multiply and make the bankers richer and richer. The issue is not banking "costs", the problem is that ALL money is created as an interest-bearing-debt, out of thin-air. All Money, has to be returned to the banks, with interest. and so they are the rullers of us all.
These newly dubbed banks are nothing but one more layer of the fraud. I think it's sad.
There is not a word in this entire article about CreditUnions being exactly the same as regular-fractonal reserve banks. The ONLY difference is the name. not even the holding structure. not really even the for profit incentive. really sad. governments should create money WITHOUT debt. that's the solution I am waiting for the sheeple to voice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.126.57.10 (talk) 16:34, December 18, 2011
- The key difference between credit unions and fractional reserve banking is that of ownership. Perhaps you would prefer something like JAK Members Bank? Gobonobo T C 00:00, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
