| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
MikeLaRonde
Joined: 11 Jun 2001
Posts: 768
|
 Posted: Sun Mar 26, 2023 5:40 am Post subject: |
 |
|
OK, so why then, don't bank accounts pay interest anymore? Or <1 percent at most. All kinds of accounts used to. There was the "NOW" account which paid interest and let you write checks.
Don't think negative rates are coming?
Do you not realize that banning cash sales forces people to have bank accounts? Hardly necessary for most, as direct deposit already took care of that.
For now, The only people outside of "everyone" are the homeless on the street.
The only way to save the banking system as it is, is to reduce the population. Which absolutely has begun, but it won't happen fast enough. And so financial tyranny will unfold in this order:
1. Ban physical cash
2. Negative interest rates to practically force spending and borrowing
3. Central Bank Digital Currency, for total control.
When we get to CBDC, negative interest rates will look attractive. Forget attrition, our money will simply expire if not spent! Like a digital coupon. And of course, coupons can only be spent on certain things. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
vientomas
Joined: 25 Apr 2000
Posts: 2343
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 26, 2023 10:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yet again, a display of reading comprehension issues.
According to the legislator's statement made in the link I posted, no FDIC fees for checking accounts. I interact with people frequently who have only checking accounts and no savings accounts. This stat tends to support my experience: "71% of Americans have a savings account. That leaves nearly a third of Americans with no savings account..." https://www.zippia.com/advice/american-savings-statistics/#:~:text=71%25%20of%20Americans%20have%20a,less%20than%20%245%2C000%20in%20it.
"Everyone" is not paying the FDIC fees. Words have meaning.
I have no interest in discussing with you the other topics you posted. Good day. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MalibuGuru
Joined: 11 Nov 1993
Posts: 9300
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 26, 2023 2:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| vientomas wrote: | Apparently reading comprehension is a lost art. The operative word in "Guru's" post was "everyone". Not everyone has a bank account. For those that do, not everyone has a savings "("investment") account. Many simply have checking accounts which would not be subject to any fees for FDIC insurance according to the statement made in the link. Therefore, to state the cost of FDIC insurance will be a burden on "everyone" is not correct. Words have meaning.
The bottom line is that tax money is not used to insure the accounts. The funds come from fees assessed by private companies against individuals who decided to do business with said companies. I thought conservatives loved small government, reduced taxes, privatization and a free market. FDIC insurance that is paid for by the people who will benefit from it is a perfect example of those conservative ideals at work. What's the problem? |
81% of Americans have bank accounts. They all pay for FDIC Insurance. The other 19% pay also, because it's too expensive to have a bank account |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
boggsman1
Joined: 24 Jun 2002
Posts: 9120
Location: at a computer
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 26, 2023 3:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The one thing that is not clear , and it's bad is the FED facility .. The FED is taking in collateral and paying par for this collateral .So, if a treasury or mbs is trading at $88, and the FED takes it in at par , that means the FED is taking a $12 unrealized loss .. This is a huge number -- the window has been tapped as much as the discount window in 2008. The tax payer will pick this tab up because the Fed is ultimately backstopped by the tax payer ..
It is absolutely ok to challenge the decision to essentially lift the $250000 fdic insurance level.. We've socialized banks and deposit risk by doing this .. I also think idiots like Peter Thiel should be skewered -- it's a federal crime to trigger a bank run.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MikeLaRonde
Joined: 11 Jun 2001
Posts: 768
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 26, 2023 4:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| vientomas wrote: | "Everyone" is not paying the FDIC fees. Words have meaning.
I have no interest in discussing with you the other topics you posted. Good day. |
Whatever you say, hosey cat. Must you really obsess on one detail, while ignoring the big picture? If you're not discussing, then I don't expect you to reply to this post. But naturally, you will read it.
The article you posted contained a LIE! To wit:
| Quote: |
If you’re putting — giving your money to the bank on an interest-free basis in a non-interest-bearing account, there’s no way for them to lower the interest rate any lower and so depositors don’t suffer ... |
No way, really? Hey, don't take it from me. A simple search for "negative interest rates" will find you this from the proverbial horse's mouth:
https://www.imf.org/Publications/fandd/issues/2020/03/what-are-negative-interest-rates-basics
Pay particular attention to the penultimate paragraph:
| Quote: | In practice, banks can charge other fees to recoup costs, and rates have not gotten negative enough for banks to try to pass on negative rates to small depositors (larger depositors have accepted some negative rates for the convenience of holding money in banks). But the concern remains about the limits to negative interest rate policies so long as cash exists as an alternative.
|
Translation: we need to ban cash before we can implement negative interest rates.
"If my answers frighten you, stop asking scary questions!" ... from Pulp Fiction, I think. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MalibuGuru
Joined: 11 Nov 1993
Posts: 9300
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 28, 2023 2:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| boggsman1 wrote: | The one thing that is not clear , and it's bad is the FED facility .. The FED is taking in collateral and paying par for this collateral .So, if a treasury or mbs is trading at $88, and the FED takes it in at par , that means the FED is taking a $12 unrealized loss .. This is a huge number -- the window has been tapped as much as the discount window in 2008. The tax payer will pick this tab up because the Fed is ultimately backstopped by the tax payer ..
It is absolutely ok to challenge the decision to essentially lift the $250000 fdic insurance level.. We've socialized banks and deposit risk by doing this .. I also think idiots like Peter Thiel should be skewered -- it's a federal crime to trigger a bank run.. |
It seems to me that the run was inevitable. More importantly, you could say he warned his people with legitimate knowledge and concern |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
boggsman1
Joined: 24 Jun 2002
Posts: 9120
Location: at a computer
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 28, 2023 9:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| MalibuGuru wrote: | | boggsman1 wrote: | The one thing that is not clear , and it's bad is the FED facility .. The FED is taking in collateral and paying par for this collateral .So, if a treasury or mbs is trading at $88, and the FED takes it in at par , that means the FED is taking a $12 unrealized loss .. This is a huge number -- the window has been tapped as much as the discount window in 2008. The tax payer will pick this tab up because the Fed is ultimately backstopped by the tax payer ..
It is absolutely ok to challenge the decision to essentially lift the $250000 fdic insurance level.. We've socialized banks and deposit risk by doing this .. I also think idiots like Peter Thiel should be skewered -- it's a federal crime to trigger a bank run.. |
It seems to me that the run was inevitable. More importantly, you could say he warned his people with legitimate knowledge and concern |
Days after triggering a run, he pleaded with the FED to save them .. Is that ok with you? Socialize the losses, and protect billionaires? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MalibuGuru
Joined: 11 Nov 1993
Posts: 9300
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 29, 2023 1:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| boggsman1 wrote: | | MalibuGuru wrote: | | boggsman1 wrote: | The one thing that is not clear , and it's bad is the FED facility .. The FED is taking in collateral and paying par for this collateral .So, if a treasury or mbs is trading at $88, and the FED takes it in at par , that means the FED is taking a $12 unrealized loss .. This is a huge number -- the window has been tapped as much as the discount window in 2008. The tax payer will pick this tab up because the Fed is ultimately backstopped by the tax payer ..
It is absolutely ok to challenge the decision to essentially lift the $250000 fdic insurance level.. We've socialized banks and deposit risk by doing this .. I also think idiots like Peter Thiel should be skewered -- it's a federal crime to trigger a bank run.. |
It seems to me that the run was inevitable. More importantly, you could say he warned his people with legitimate knowledge and concern |
Days after triggering a run, he pleaded with the FED to save them .. Is that ok with you? Socialize the losses, and protect billionaires? |
The Trump crew don't disagree with you. We loathe the billionaires. We want a return to free enterprise and free markets. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
coachg
Joined: 10 Sep 2000
Posts: 3550
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 29, 2023 6:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| MalibuGuru wrote: | | We want a return to free enterprise and free markets. |
You may be a true conservative, but Trump is not. He is a populist.
Coachg |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vientomas
Joined: 25 Apr 2000
Posts: 2343
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 29, 2023 8:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| MalibuGuru wrote: | | boggsman1 wrote: | | MalibuGuru wrote: | | boggsman1 wrote: | The one thing that is not clear , and it's bad is the FED facility .. The FED is taking in collateral and paying par for this collateral .So, if a treasury or mbs is trading at $88, and the FED takes it in at par , that means the FED is taking a $12 unrealized loss .. This is a huge number -- the window has been tapped as much as the discount window in 2008. The tax payer will pick this tab up because the Fed is ultimately backstopped by the tax payer ..
It is absolutely ok to challenge the decision to essentially lift the $250000 fdic insurance level.. We've socialized banks and deposit risk by doing this .. I also think idiots like Peter Thiel should be skewered -- it's a federal crime to trigger a bank run.. |
It seems to me that the run was inevitable. More importantly, you could say he warned his people with legitimate knowledge and concern |
Days after triggering a run, he pleaded with the FED to save them .. Is that ok with you? Socialize the losses, and protect billionaires? |
The Trump crew don't disagree with you. We loathe the billionaires. We want a return to free enterprise and free markets. |
Bullshit. You want oil to be held at $40 a barrel, and also want a free market for oil? Can't have it both ways. Without the government subsidies given to oil companies, gas at the pump would be waaayyyy more than it is now. Government subsidies to corporations is not a "free market". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
|
Search
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Register
