Ah, bankers made it big over the decade, the fat-cat variety anyway. Those too big to fail, that is; all sorts of littler (and some not so little) banks failed.
Who are these bankers? Well, they are those Ben loves to help. Evidently, so does Obama despite his 60 Minutes little bit of rhetoric. Supposedly, bankers are the heart of the economy which doesn't exist, by the way. How? Oh, they move the money, thereby causing trickle down to the mere citizen.
By the way, did they stage their heart attack in order to screw the taxpayer? Why are they necessary?
Those are a couple of a very large set of good questions that could be asked.
So, bankers began their role as the bean counter and money exchanger. In the former role, they provided some type of security, except the bad guys were always good at riffling the safe. Too, what they took in and gave out was very much fluid (money, itself, an issue) due to political exigencies. Ben knows all about these issues. In the latter role, the banker learned how to play off differences (a type of arbitrage) between their clients and their monies. Also, they excelled at leveraging using that which is described by the grand old notion of multiplier effect (ultimately, we were all gab standard'd). Again, this thing is central to Ben's history.
So, in various ways, bankers became central. Yet, they lost their honesty. It became more important to get hugely monied so as to allow enormous bonuses and to support lavish lifestyles. The lowly saver was sacked way back. Remember, it was more important to allow the best-and-brighest a loose leash.
Not only are they central, some are considered too big to fail.
Have we lost sight of the utility aspect? Did we allow ignorance of near zero to eclipse a proper evolution of the function?
12/02/2010 -- Banking is a utility (but we also need plumbers - a few, not an army).
04/16/2010 -- Rotten to the core. Does not have to be!!