- May 20, 2009
- 144,934
- 67,549
- 2,330
Is there any difference between the Mafia and how the IMF handled Cyrus?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Is there any difference between the Mafia and how the IMF handled Cyrus?
It was, in the end, a good solution. It was the closest to a free market solution (though hardly one) yet offered by the EU.
Deposits are a liability of the bank. The first 100,000 was protected through deposit insurance. They are now being protected. If you had more, you're at risk. Rather than governments bail out everyone, they're only going to bail out those under the cap. What's wrong with that? Let them fail.
Cyprus is an offshore banking have for Russian oligarchs, tax evaders and money launderers. Why would German taxpayers want to bail them out, given that everyone knew the banks were bust months ago.
It was, in the end, a good solution. It was the closest to a free market solution (though hardly one) yet offered by the EU.
Deposits are a liability of the bank. The first 100,000 was protected through deposit insurance. They are now being protected. If you had more, you're at risk. Rather than governments bail out everyone, they're only going to bail out those under the cap. What's wrong with that? Let them fail.
Cyprus is an offshore banking have for Russian oligarchs, tax evaders and money launderers. Why would German taxpayers want to bail them out, given that everyone knew the banks were bust months ago.
It was, in the end, a good solution. It was the closest to a free market solution (though hardly one) yet offered by the EU.
Deposits are a liability of the bank. The first 100,000 was protected through deposit insurance. They are now being protected. If you had more, you're at risk. Rather than governments bail out everyone, they're only going to bail out those under the cap. What's wrong with that? Let them fail.
Cyprus is an offshore banking have for Russian oligarchs, tax evaders and money launderers. Why would German taxpayers want to bail them out, given that everyone knew the banks were bust months ago.
So you think it's okay to arbitrarily confiscate someone's wealth without notice if it exceeds 100,000 euros? Why does it matter whose money it is, or how much they have? What if next time the limit is 50,000 euros, or 20,000, what then?
It was, in the end, a good solution. It was the closest to a free market solution (though hardly one) yet offered by the EU.
Deposits are a liability of the bank. The first 100,000 was protected through deposit insurance. They are now being protected. If you had more, you're at risk. Rather than governments bail out everyone, they're only going to bail out those under the cap. What's wrong with that? Let them fail.
Cyprus is an offshore banking have for Russian oligarchs, tax evaders and money launderers. Why would German taxpayers want to bail them out, given that everyone knew the banks were bust months ago.
All true.
Banks typically like doing business with people who maintain deposits far in excess of the insured minimum, so that may change and not for the better for the banks
And if we're letting entities fail, why not let the Sovereigns fail? Let Greece do a real free market workout, no? It reminds me of how Goldman Sachs and Chase got bailed out but Bear Stearns and Lehmann went bust
It was, in the end, a good solution. It was the closest to a free market solution (though hardly one) yet offered by the EU.
Deposits are a liability of the bank. The first 100,000 was protected through deposit insurance. They are now being protected. If you had more, you're at risk. Rather than governments bail out everyone, they're only going to bail out those under the cap. What's wrong with that? Let them fail.
Cyprus is an offshore banking have for Russian oligarchs, tax evaders and money launderers. Why would German taxpayers want to bail them out, given that everyone knew the banks were bust months ago.
So you think it's okay to arbitrarily confiscate someone's wealth without notice if it exceeds 100,000 euros? Why does it matter whose money it is, or how much they have? What if next time the limit is 50,000 euros, or 20,000, what then?
Deposit insurance was for up to 100,000.
When you deposit money in the bank, you are lending money to the bank. If the bank fails, then it liquidates its holdings and pays back as much as it can to those with varying rights in the capital structure. Deposits are insured up to a certain amount so those below the cap are made whole. Amounts above it are not and are subject to the bankruptcy liquidation process like any other enterprise that goes bankrupt.
This is how it's supposed to work. Tea Party people were outraged that banks were bailed out. Well, this is what happens when banks aren't bailed out. Creditors, ie depositors, lose.
I see your point but even the Fed had little to do with radio, movies, home appliances, automobiles and supporting industries hitting the saturation wall in very rapid succession. The Oakies and Arkies had their trucks and cars to take them out to the vineyards of CA before the crash and those were some fairly poor people for that time.I don't believe that the stock market in the 20's was a genuine bubble. You had 2 transformative technologies: electricity and mass production. There might have been some slight froth, but I no longer believe that the 20's stock market was a speculative bubble that HAD to burst. The Federal Reserve strangled the economy nearly to death, that's what brought the market down
This is a tongue-tip taste of the facts that the Monopoly Media try to hide from people : that the economic and financial crises are very much worse than they appear. The Banksters in Europe are so desperate that they are starting to manipulate the governments they control into directly stealing the saving deposits of their "customers"!! In essence, the banks are stealing the saving deposits of the people who bank with them, and putting the loot into their own vaults!!Different faces but the same old story is being replayed in a small part of the Euro-zone, Cyprus, and that story is one of the Cypriot banking crime syndicate gambling with depositor funds on the debt markets, this time it's Greek bonds, yes, these master-eds of the universe used depositor funds to pile into soon to go bankrupt Greece because of the high yields they offered so that the bankster's could bank bonuses on the basis of fictitious profits -- as illustrated by the fact that they have dumped an infinite pile of losses (Greek Bond's ) onto Cypriot tax payers, far beyond anything that any other Euro-zone member has had to face to date....
COMMENT
The thieves in Washington dont have to raid the banks directly as they are doing quite well devaluing our savings and our retirement by rendering our dollar weaker with each passing day.
I and millions of other Americans are witnessing our hard earned retirement dollars disappearing in relation to buying power at the same time the lying government and media keep telling us we have low inflation.
As the vermin in office can manipulate the CPI using any products or services which will serve their purpose they have hidden the huge loss in American wealth for the average citizen.
Yes, don't forget that a lot of reasonably honest businessmen need to have deposits of more than 100,000 euros in the bank.So you think it's okay to arbitrarily confiscate someone's wealth without notice if it exceeds 100,000 euros? Why does it matter whose money it is, or how much they have? What if next time the limit is 50,000 euros, or 20,000, what then?
1. "In the Roaring Twenties, the New York stock market, especially, was a bubble, fed by the fraudulent notion that permanent growth was assured,...As soon as the market turned, it came down hard. Forced sales of the pledged stocks accelerated and broadened the plunge.
a. Eventually, governments inflated the currencies by flooding the private sector with borrowed money.
b. ... increased demand... starts to push prices and wages higher, but in currency of deteriorating value. This practice has stalked and haunted the world ever since.
2. This is essentially the trade-off that our civilization has made: Destitution will be spared all but a few people, but savings, investment, and the quest for security will be an endless treadmill on which he who earns and tries to accumulate wealth is in a constant race with the deterioration in the buying power of the currency in which he measures his wealth.
3. Bubbles occur in almost every area and are corrected eventually. The great housing bubble of 2008 was created in part by the desire of the Clinton administration to promote family home ownership (and befriend the building-trades unions and the residential real-estate developers).
a. ...almost the entire banking sectors of the United States, the United Kingdom, and much of Western Europe and Australia was saved from bankruptcy only by government intervention.
4. The core of the conundrum is that capitalism is the only economic system that works, because it is the only one that is aligned to the almost universal human ambition for more. It is a myth that people really want to share (other than to a limited degree for charitable reasons; among close-knit groups such as families and some associations; or in over-arching emergencies such as serious wars and national disasters).
5. But it is in the nature of capitalism to incite people to foolhardy risks, causing economic calamity with broad collateral damage. And then only government can address the resulting crisis. This is not because governments have any aptitude to do so in general, politicians and government officials are even less competent than lions of finance and captains of industry. But the government has the power to legislate, enforce laws and control the money supply.
6. The federal government debt of the United States has increased by 70% in four years compared to what it was after the first 232 years of independence up to the installation of the current administration in 2009.
7. [Which brings us to] Cyprus, a haven for financial fugitives and scoundrels, has gone to the front of the line: a collapsed banking system that the government proposed to salvage by taxing bank deposits (an inordinate number of which belong to crooks from other countries). That is the deposits would vanish in taxes rather than to pay for the banks bad loans. The people revolted this week, and the government deserted its own measure, making the negative parliamentary vote on it unsuspensefully unanimous.
8. The Cypriot finance ministry adopted Plan B and went to Moscow to offer the banking system and natural resources of Cyprus to Putins gangster state...
9. This charade has gone on so long, and with such affected solemnity, that few seem to realize what volcano most countries are sitting on. Even relatively strong countries such as Germany have reached for the nearer cookie jars, like securitizing debt with pensions. Arizona has sold its state capitol, and is a tenant there. As a distinguished and witty economist (Herbert Stein) famously said, If something cant go on, it wont.
From the National Post
Under the Volcano: How the Charade of Cyprus Obscures Bigger Danger to Economy - The New York Sun
Debt and deficit meaningless?
Austerity a terrible idea?
Re-electing a failed administration?
Your savings and IRA are safe?
The Constitution will protect you?
In very, very short:
Just what do you think is going to happen here?
Thank you, Becki.Welcome to USMB, numan.
So I guess, on a wing and a prayer, maybe we'll be okay.
I doubt we will see direct seizures of deposits in the U.S.
The Federal government doesn't need to to this. With QE^Infinity and ZIRP, the value of savings is being destroyed in order to subsidize deficit spending and debt for the benefit of Big Government and its cronies.
So you think it's okay to arbitrarily confiscate someone's wealth without notice if it exceeds 100,000 euros? Why does it matter whose money it is, or how much they have? What if next time the limit is 50,000 euros, or 20,000, what then?
Deposit insurance was for up to 100,000.
When you deposit money in the bank, you are lending money to the bank. If the bank fails, then it liquidates its holdings and pays back as much as it can to those with varying rights in the capital structure. Deposits are insured up to a certain amount so those below the cap are made whole. Amounts above it are not and are subject to the bankruptcy liquidation process like any other enterprise that goes bankrupt.
This is how it's supposed to work. Tea Party people were outraged that banks were bailed out. Well, this is what happens when banks aren't bailed out. Creditors, ie depositors, lose.
when WA MU got resolved the governemnt decided to make all depositors whole regardless of size mostly at the expense of bondholders thus setting a precedent much like the one in the auto industry that says don't worry! And then of course the whole FDIC insurance BS also says don't worry where you throw your money.
And of course with phony accounting rules you could not figure out where your money would be safe if you tried.
Liberal government is a disaster wherever it is!!