MAYBE I MISSED IT, BUT DID CUNA'S "NEW PLAN" ANSWER ANY OF THESE QUESTIONS?
 |
| Looking Over The Horizon... |
1) What does the rapidly shrinking number of credit unions imply for the future of the credit union movement?
2) What does the increasing consolidation of leagues at the state level imply for the future of the credit union movement?
3) What does the apparent political impotence of credit unions at the federal level imply for the future of the credit union movement?
4) What does our inability to define a shared, common purpose imply for the future of the credit union movement?
2 comments:
They did and you missed the answers. Possibly because you were if the field.
Here they are:
1. Not good news.
2. Fewer people Nussle has to worry about coming after his job.
3. A need for Viagra.
4. Credibility to the banker's arguments.
No deck chairs and fewer boats hence the new CUNA motto "every man/woman/child for themselves".
This stuff is getting more laughable every day and CUNA thinks 3 years is about right to affect change????? Guess what Mr. Nussle 3 more years and there will be a lot more pine boxes. Threats to not only small but large credit unions appear everyday. As an example how about the report that the Financial Stability Oversight Council commenting about the lack of oil and inflation threats "as those threats recede, others pose significant risks to financial stability and demand greater attention from policymakers, said Treasury Secretary Jack Lew. Matz (a member of the council) seized on that report (her report) to lobby for more vendor oversight and Interest Rate Risk authorities. Most of the other council members are also Federal regulators. If they get the authority it will inevitably mean more regulation and budget busting expenses paid for by, wait for it, CU's. Another "make work edict" formulated by the people who stand to gain the most from it.
Post a Comment