I like the bank of the backyard burial PVC pipe. I would rather just pay to have the convenience of checkwriting and debit card usage, with the banks NOT using fractional reserve banking.

Exactly, and unlikely to ever occur until the economy crashes and hits bottom and people realize exactly what happened

I wonder if the Libertarian candidate would do anything of substance to fix the banking system

so much ...wrong here ..
Funds in savings and transactional type accounts are Guaranteed .Through FDIC( Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation) Paid for through FDIC Assessments ( think premiums) paid by banks based on several criteria or NCUA funded similarly . They were part of the original Glass Steagall . The FDIC doesn't receive any tax dollars; instead it's funded by the premiums paid by banks and thrifts for insurance coverage on deposits. Its deposit insurance fund is really just an accounting entry with the Treasury Department. I am in the Credit Union world and think that a separation of commercial and investment banking is a good thing . Two very different products .

Why should the government guarantee savings accounts and not the inventories of shoe stores? Everyone knows that when you lend someone money, you might not get it back. Even in the best of times, ships sink and everyone loses when the cargo goes down. For that insurance was invented in the coffeehouses of London. A story from 19th century America is that the clerks of the Chubb company were wringing their hands because one of their insured ships was reported lost. Caldecott Chubb replied, "If there were no losses, there would be no premiums." So, savings accounts (like shoe inventories) could be insured, but not "for free" at the public expense.

How about slavery, women voting, or the president and vice president coming from the same party?

How is an "income" (per capita) tax any different from any other?

What your forgetting is that "commercial banking" is Your savings and checking account...risky ventures would endanger them, I would think that your local savings a loan, the bank you have your checking with would respect that.
Investment banking is taking risk...as in enter at your own...it's understood.

Is this an endorsement of Trump?

Meanwhile-
Iceland jails nine bankers for crimes related to the 2008 economic crash.
Deceit and pretense- lending money for the purchase of shares in the bank ....
The banks caused the Iceland economy to collapse. Government let the banks go bust after they failed.

In the U.K. the rest of Europe and the US
much the same happened with banks being fined for market manipulation, money-laundering and mis-selling mortgages, shareholders lose but the chiefs still get their bonuses.

1. http://icelandmonitor.mbl.is/news/pol...
2. http://www.blacklistednews.com/Icelan...

and-
The new award of the economics Nobel Prize
is relevant, especially as it relates to performance measures and employee bonuses-
these are generally bad and do not correlate with owners/ shareholders interests. The banking industry is a prime example 'global economics is driven by the incentive packages given to top banking executives'. That is they exaggerate risk by rewarding success, while there is no penalty for failure.

1. http://www.businessinsider.com.au/nob...
2. https://mises.org/blog/2016-nobel-pri...

Too little, too late. Repeal the federal reserve act and the 16th amendment. Government must not authorize banksters creating legal tender from nothing to enhance their own power and wealth. Banks should compete in a free market, not amass power and wealth in a government granted cartel.

Today's banking system is totally intertwined with government and is a hotbed of cronyism and corruption. Neither the Republicans nor the Democrats have the slightest interest in a return to free-market banking. The best hope for a market solution lies in the rise of high-tech innovations such as Bitcoin.

I don't know what he means, but my thought is if the gov't is going to guarantee financial instruments like bank accounts and bonds, it should be clear which ones it guarantees and back only those. Until 2008 money market funds (MMFs) paid slightly more than money market accounts (MMAs) b/c the former were not insured by the FDIC. It was the same with agency bonds vs Treasuries. But when things turned to worms, the gov't stepped in. Before that I had read about them being tacitly backed.

I'm probably reading too much into it to think he saying make a clear wall between things insured and not insured.