<< <i>Bank deposits are insured by the FDIC to $250,000 per account.
The banks themselves are much safer now. We went through the financial crisis and everything was fine for depositors.
No depositor lost a penny in an insured account. >>
only because trillions in bailouts covered the FDIC's underfunded butt. Don't for a minute believe Americans or congress will stand for trillions more the next time. TBTF banks remain on the edge and in reality some are insolvent, only to be protected by approved, false accounting and the FED sucking up their toxic assets. Just another can being kicked down the road. At some point the FED becomes toxic.
It will be interesting to see if that FDIC protection applies when account holders are included with all the other creditors when it comes time to properly write down the bank's debt.
Speaking of bailouts, keep an eye on the $1 Trillion in student loans, half of it owed to our favorite uncle. Unfortunately, "Uncle" is just a nickname for the shrinking 43% who pay federal income tax.
"How many times can a man turn his head and pretend he just doesn’t see?” - Bob Dylan
I saw a news story somewhere on the interwebzz the other day that the FDIC was thinking of removing protection from deposits held in foreign branches of US banks.
I can't find it now maybe someone else has seen it?
<< <i>I saw a news story somewhere on the interwebzz the other day that the FDIC was thinking of removing protection from deposits held in foreign branches of US banks.
I can't find it now maybe someone else has seen it? >>
The banks themselves are much safer now. We went through the financial crisis and everything was fine for depositors.
No depositor lost a penny in an insured account.
Every time a banker fails to be held accountable and is bailed out, it makes it just a little bit harder for the average working American to make it. Worse yet, the bailouts continue at a crazy rate of $85 billion a month. This greatest wealth transfer in the history of the world is nothing less than complete and utter theft from the people who spent their lives working in real jobs and saving a bit here and there for their old age.
There was no financial crisis other than for a few tbtf bankers. The real result of these bailouts is that we all lost, whether our insured accounts "lost money" or not. Since the corruption of FASB, this failure in accountability is the status quo. The problem with constant lying and deception is that reality intrudes from time to time.
The financial crisis isn't over when the banks are *still* holding tranches of paper that's worth much, much less than how it's stated on their books. The continuing travesty is that taxpayers are still donating $85 billion a month to continue bailing them out over time. The pumping of the stock market and downward manipulation of the price of gold are only a diversion from the real crime.
Reality comes when the bond market disappears.
Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally
<< <i>The banks themselves are much safer now. We went through the financial crisis and everything was fine for depositors. >>
Their risk in derivative bets is much greater. A rise in interest rates alone will cause interest rate swaps to bring them to their knees. The last talk of FED tapering caused a spike that got their attention.
Depositors realized a net loss on their savings thanks to inflation and ZIRP.
<< <i>No depositor lost a penny in an insured account. >>
Insurance (FDIC) didn't protect them, American taxpayers did. The loss was absorbed in money creation, increased soverign debt and dollar devaluation that both depositors and non-depositors must live with.
<< <i>Reality comes when the bond market disappears. >>
It's future is bleak as the buyers slowly disappear. This is the guarantee that QE will be with us until the end of the current US monetary system. The FED will become the sole large buyer of US soverign debt. The lack of foreign demand for dollars will be it's downfall. Keep an eye on international trade settlement payment agreements - they are your window into the dollar's demise.
"How many times can a man turn his head and pretend he just doesn’t see?” - Bob Dylan
<< <i>Jmski, unfortunately you and and and all of us on this board will disappear before the bond market does. >>
The dollar will outlive all of us, too. As far as "bank deposits, consider them a loan to the bank", of course! So what?
consider them anything that pleases you, consider them a a petunia! consider them a pecan pie! consider them a pertussis of the patella! So what?
Oh yes, "keep on stackin!" uh, ok.
Seriously, I consider bank deposits "preservers of purchasing power" in a "cash is king" way that no other asset class posesses. The risks to that capital are limited to very long, slow decay of [overall aggregate] purchasing power, which is near 100% certain, and the very unlikely, near 0% probability, IMO, of FDIC failure "run on all the banks" or total economic collapse type scenario, closing banks and pretty much everything else. Other than that, the money in the bank is "safe" from the other market-type risks of other asset classes, including leveraged things like bonds that produce income, as well as market risk of the underlying security, which at this point in the cycle must eventually turn against bonds, but of course everyone's been saying that for years now.
The market risk of precious metal in paper form (futures, ETFs, etc) is of the same nature as risks in other commodities, although the details and seasonality differ from things like food and energy, and are more similar to the semiprecious/ industrial metals like copper and nickel. And of course, real estate and stocks and art and bitcoins have their risk/reward profiles, too. The risk of holding physical is the market risk that maybe what you have will not be in favor at the time you wish to cash it in, and you will have to accept less than you paid, and this risk is multiplied the higher the % "collector premium" above melt one pays for neat items that have asthetic value in addition to metal. If someone is buying "bullion" with significant collector (semi-numismatic) percent premium, then they must also "market" that premium back to collectors, which reduces liquidity at the premium price which must be sought, as well as the time commitment that must be devoted to advertising, packaging, shipping, and accounting for the trade to the tax authorities, the tax that must be paid, all of which is offset by the risk that someone will rip you off by actually stealing your stash in storage or transit.
Losing my FDIC-insured bank deposits to a run on banks or FDIC insurance "default" is probably the very last thing I would spend my precious time worrying about, or planning for, financially speaking.
end of the dollar (as we know it) is not the end of America. Get past the emotional patriotism that clouds an otherwise very clear view. It's not the same dollar from 1913 when the FED was given power to manage it and it's not the same as it was in 1970 when it could be exchanged for gold. Every fiat currency has a lifespan. What's important at the end of that lifespan is "will the lessons learned be taken to heart soon enough to save the affected economy?" For the mistakes to be promptly corrected in order to save an affected economy requires an understanding of what approaches. It requires preparation for the change. Failure in this foresight and advance planning is how currency failure leads to economic and ultimately national failure.
"How many times can a man turn his head and pretend he just doesn’t see?” - Bob Dylan
Keep dreaming that if you have $249K in multiple FDIC accounts that you'll be fully compensated during a multiple banking failure/run/crisis. But, the govt can always just keystroke $5 TRILL into existence within a few months and "pay" everyone off. One should fully expect banking "rules" will be changed at the last minute in any new and "unforeseen" crisis. Cyprus was the blue print. No, the dollar won't go to zero....just a matter of how close it gets to zero.
Keep dreaming that if you have $249K in multiple FDIC accounts
Ok, that's quite a dream, to have one, much less several, quarter million savings accounts. I'll let such big brains with big cash worry those big worries, and envy them their stress.
If the time ever came when Congress needed to authorize an appropriation to enable FDIC to repay depositors you would see near unanimous approval like you have never seen before.
Treasury borrows, the Fed buys the debt, the dollar stays strong, inflation and interest rates stay very low, stocks rise almost every day.
<< <i>If the time ever came when Congress needed to authorize an appropriation to enable FDIC to repay depositors you would see near unanimous approval like you have never seen before.
Treasury borrows, the Fed buys the debt, the dollar stays strong, inflation and interest rates stay very low, stocks rise almost every day.
This is a perfect world for investors. >>
If the time ever came when Congress needed to authorize an appropriation to enable FDIC to repay depositors you would see much more serious problems than repaying depositors.
This is a perfect world for both wealthy investors and government dependency. Middle class is footing the bill. However, like Thatcher said, "Socialist governments traditionally do make a financial mess. They always run out of other people's money."
"How many times can a man turn his head and pretend he just doesn’t see?” - Bob Dylan
We had "more serious problems" in 2008, but rather than put the burden on the FDIC, the Treasury propped up the banks either by supporting acquisitions or TARP. TARP was very successful and the Treasury made a profit.
If Washington Mutual had failed and Citi and Bank of America not been propped up, we would have seen the necessity for Congress to add substantial funds to the FDIC.
That was the white knuckle financial moment. We won't see anything that severe for a couple generations.
<< <i>We had "more serious problems" in 2008, but rather than put the burden on the FDIC, the Treasury propped up the banks either by supporting acquisitions or TARP. TARP was very successful and the Treasury made a profit.
If Washington Mutual had failed and Citi and Bank of America not been propped up, we would have seen the necessity for Congress to add substantial funds to the FDIC.
That was the white knuckle financial moment. We won't see anything that severe for a couple generations. >>
Because all of your mentioned "corrective actions" were just wallpaper that did not address the causes, you will something more severe THIS generation. The wall papper itself (QE, ZIRP, accounting malpractice) irresponsible debt, fractional lending and derivative gambling will see to it. Throw in a little greed and corruption and it is guaranteed.
"How many times can a man turn his head and pretend he just doesn’t see?” - Bob Dylan
<< <i>We had "more serious problems" in 2008, but rather than put the burden on the FDIC, the Treasury propped up the banks either by supporting acquisitions or TARP. TARP was very successful and the Treasury made a profit.
If Washington Mutual had failed and Citi and Bank of America not been propped up, we would have seen the necessity for Congress to add substantial funds to the FDIC.
That was the white knuckle financial moment. We won't see anything that severe for a couple generations. >>
TARP making the treasury a profit is a myth. Same goes for all the other crisis programs that claim the same thing. If the FED/Treasiry had to dole out $10-$20 TRILL world wide to plug holes in all the otc derivative's failures, there's no way anyone made a profit....other than the banks who held the winning side of the otc deriv's contracts. The USGovt was the loser all around. We will see another crisis more severe than 2008 within the in the next 2-5 years. TARP was successful only in that it prevented a complete banking system failure that would have destroyed a huge hunk of our current economy. Since nothing was fixed, the same crisis will present itself again. there's no need for the FDIC to pay off depositors on a bank failure. This is because depositors like you and me now stand in line behind the holders of otc derivatives that are carried by that bank. So if say JPM or BoA goes own in a heap, J6P depositors don't get paid off until the govt pays off the $TRILLIONs in failed derivatives to the winning betters. You'll be waiting a long time. And fwiw, the law now says that your deposits are used to pay off on those derivative bets. Neat huh?
Treasury borrows, the Fed buys the debt, the dollar stays strong, inflation and interest rates stay very low, stocks rise almost every day. This is a perfect world for investors.
Until the day it becomes a nightmare and the bills need to be paid. Similar things were said in 1929, 1966, 1973, 1987, 1999, 2007, and of course in November 2013. But it's different this time. In the past 5 years the FED has tripled its balance sheet with near worthless "assets" that are marked to model while increasing base money supply (M0) by 4X. In the past 17 years M2 has increased like clockwork 8-10% per year. And this is all good without any negative future outcome? Only one too big to fail bank failed in 2008....Lehman Brothers. The other bank failures were absorbed by other banks. But, it was the daisy chain of derivatives with Lehman that would have brought down the financial system if the FED and Treasury didn't pay off on all those winning bets. If another TBTF bank goes down w/o all the "assets" being passed along to another bank, the system will again seize up hard.
<< <i>I lost money when I stacked silver even though I held it for 17 years.
Why did you do that? >>
Changes in life.
And thats what is so unique about PMs. Very rarely are they ever sold by the primary investor because they are purchased out of overwhelming emotion. If PMs go up then investors feel their predictions are correct and they will hold forever as insurance/security/ect. If PMs go down then they are not sold as investors never take losses and their convictions so strong as to conclude the day of reckoning is near so they hold. PMs are almost only sold by the heirs. I wasnt about to wait another 50 years for my heirs to sell.
The other thing about bullion, besides getting emotionally attached to it, is that it's difficult and time consuming to sell.
Stocks, a few keystrokes and some of it is sold, wait a little time, the trade settles and the money is in the bank ready to spend.
A large collection of diverse physical "products" (large enough to "matter" to the investor) is going to be WORK to market, transport, collect payment.
because there's the matter of the "premium" for "neat" bullion that they paid going in, that they're going to want to try to capture when they get back out.
However, take the stuff in in one big lot somewhere, they're going to count the ounces and offer something very near spot. Disappointed, they decline and haul the stuff back home.
OR, they're "forced" to sell by circumstances of Needing The Money and take what they can get (or their heirs do), the wholesaler retails it by parting it out, and the cycle starts anew.
The exception, of course, is the Stacker who is also a Retailer, buying from the mint and other places and marketing graded pieces and "better bullion" to others for profit. (which these folks often roll into still more metal) these folks will praise metals and extol their virtues, yet interestingly, always have some for sale to others
Since I'm feelin' a little contrary today, here goes:
And thats what is so unique about PMs. Very rarely are they ever sold by the primary investor because they are purchased out of overwhelming emotion. If PMs go up then investors feel their predictions are correct and they will hold forever as insurance/security/ect. If PMs go down then they are not sold as investors never take losses and their convictions so strong as to conclude the day of reckoning is near so they hold. PMs are almost only sold by the heirs. I wasnt about to wait another 50 years for my heirs to sell.
I think you over-generalize a bit, based on your own personal experience. I've sold off my entire pm holdings twice without a whole lot of angst, and I've sold other chunks at various times for different reasons but in each case there was a better use for the funds. No regrets. It works well that way. There's more judgment involved than you suggest. This is true for any assets, not just metals.
The other thing about bullion, besides getting emotionally attached to it, is that it's difficult and time consuming to sell.
No more difficult than a phone call and a registered mail package.
Stocks, a few keystrokes and some of it is sold, wait a little time, the trade settles and the money is in the bank ready to spend.
Keystrokes and quick turnarounds aren't necessarily the sign of a sophisticated investor. In fact, they might be a sign of impulsiveness. Fast liquidations will also undoubtedly play a part when the stock market goes south. This is an unregulated HFT wild west-type of environment and the little guy has all of the disadvantages. Just sayin'.
A large collection of diverse physical "products" (large enough to "matter" to the investor) is going to be WORK to market, transport, collect payment.
because there's the matter of the "premium" for "neat" bullion that they paid going in, that they're going to want to try to capture when they get back out.
However, take the stuff in in one big lot somewhere, they're going to count the ounces and offer something very near spot. Disappointed, they decline and haul the stuff back home.
That's why they invented telephones! And premiums go both ways, not always just against the seller. It's part of the cost of doing business, and sometimes the premium benefits you when you sell.
OR, they're "forced" to sell by circumstances of Needing The Money and take what they can get (or their heirs do), the wholesaler retails it by parting it out, and the cycle starts anew.
The exception, of course, is the Stacker who is also a Retailer, buying from the mint and other places and marketing graded pieces and "better bullion" to others for profit. (which these folks often roll into still more metal) these folks will praise metals and extol their virtues, yet interestingly, always have some for sale to others
Being forced to sell anything is a sure sign of poor money management skills. Period. And as for heirs, they are always better off getting free money than if they had not, and if they don't put in the effort to know what's been given to them, they shouldn't expect to maximize their benefit. It's hard to feel sorry for heirs unless they have some sort of legitimate disability.
BTW, I enthusiastically extoll precious metals and have none for sale at this time, nor am I a dealer and neither do I bother to form an emotional attachment to my assets. I do keep pretty close tabs on where the money goes, however. I work for a living and my pay derives directly from my own inputs; if I don't work or put in the time I don't have the income. I am qualified in finance and I assess my investments on the basis of merit, risk, comparative value and my own set of personal circumstances. I only gamble for recreation and I pay my taxes diligently.
There are more than just a few valid reasons to step aside from the craziness by being in metals, most of which are debated here regularly.
Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally
<< <i>The exception, of course, is the Stacker who is also a Retailer, buying from the mint and other places and marketing graded pieces and "better bullion" to others for profit. (which these folks often roll into still more metal) these folks will praise metals and extol their virtues, yet interestingly, always have some for sale to others >>
Or, The exception, of course, is the coin collector who is also a retailer, buying from the mint and other places and marketing graded pieces and "better coins" to others for profit. (which these folks often roll into still more coins) these folks will praise coins and extol their virtues, yet interestingly, always have some for sale to others >>
I fall into both of these (one of which you already knew) and don't believe either to be deceptive as you attempted to make it sound.
My customers (of both bullion and coins) get exactly what they paid for at a price they obviously determine to be fair and receive top of the line customer service. The fact that I believe in the value of PMs, stack them from business profits (which proves I believe in their virtue) and try to provide PM/economic knowledge to others that seek it is irrelevant to my business model.
Do you really see it as deception when it involves bullion instead of coins or do you also see "coin" dealers as being deceptive? If so, I dare ya to go over to the coin forum and call them devious.
"How many times can a man turn his head and pretend he just doesn’t see?” - Bob Dylan
"October of 2008 was, then, in relatively pure form, the institutional version of an old fashioned bank run."
"If the US government were to lose control of interest rates, and interest rates shoot up, then it risks a massive sovereign credit crisis, it risks a credit derivatives crisis, and it risks the financial Armageddon of an interest-rate derivatives crisis. That is why quantitative easing was created in the first place. And QE remains the primary defense against a disaster which could otherwise consume the global financial order in a matter of days."
Review: Excellent presentation that shows why IMF proposed "bail-ins" are a seriously considered option throughout the world (IMF sees the global threat). It also clearly explains the current derivative massive threat to the global economy, the reasons behind QE and the FED's need to control interest rates. Great primer on FED policy since the crash of '08 and a must read for those wanting to better understand QE. If politicians understood what this man is saying (and were not intoxicated from Wall Street money) derivatives would be outlawed tomorrow.
Opinion on How This Affects PMs: In the current economic enviornment QE cannot end, and will likely have to be increased at an exponential rate if interest rates start to rise. The US economy appears to be more fragile than ever with its survival heavily dependent on indefinitely low interest rates - it is a powder room full of fuses trying to avoid a match. It takes only one match to blow PMs through the roof. I like the odds - call and raise you a box of silver eagles.
"How many times can a man turn his head and pretend he just doesn’t see?” - Bob Dylan
<< <i>Opinion on How This Affects PMs: In the current economic enviornment QE cannot end, and will likely have to be increased at an exponential rate if interest rates start to rise. The US economy appears to be more fragile than ever with its survival heavily dependent on indefinitely low interest rates - it is a powder room full of fuses trying to avoid a match. It takes only one match to blow PMs through the roof. I like the odds - call and raise you a box of silver eagles. >>
derryb...get another crystal ball....yours is beyond saving.
"Bongo drive 1984 Lincoln that looks like old coin dug from ground."
No depositor has ever lost a penny in an FDIC insured account.
As others have pointed out, the US Treasury and Fed would do whatever is necessary to fully back the deposit insurance program.
We saw this happen numerous times in 2008 and early 2009. They also bailed out AIG in order to prevent derivatives from taking down the US financial system, and made money in the process.
There is no sure thing.... life is full of surprises and the financial house of cards is subject to a financial tornado.... when it will come is just a guess...that it will come is very likely. Cheers, RickO
<< <i>No depositor has ever lost a penny in an FDIC insured account.
As others have pointed out, the US Treasury and Fed would do whatever is necessary to fully back the deposit insurance program.
We saw this happen numerous times in 2008 and early 2009. They also bailed out AIG in order to prevent derivatives from taking down the US financial system, and made money in the process.
Find something else to worry about. >>
That money/debt had to come from somewhere. Who's on the hook for those payouts over the years? .........tax payers. And who are the tax payers?......depositors. They end losing a lot more than pennies....just in a more roundabout way.
<< <i>No depositor has ever lost a penny in an FDIC insured account.
As others have pointed out, the US Treasury and Fed would do whatever is necessary to fully back the deposit insurance program.
We saw this happen numerous times in 2008 and early 2009. They also bailed out AIG in order to prevent derivatives from taking down the US financial system, and made money in the process.
Find something else to worry about. >>
That money/debt had to come from somewhere. Who's on the hook for those payouts over the years? .........tax payers. And who are the tax payers?......depositors. They end losing a lot more than pennies....just in a more roundabout way. >>
RR, once they drink the Koolaid there's no hope for them. Save the one's who think they are getting thirsty.
"How many times can a man turn his head and pretend he just doesn’t see?” - Bob Dylan
<< <i>No depositor has ever lost a penny in an FDIC insured account.
As others have pointed out, the US Treasury and Fed would do whatever is necessary to fully back the deposit insurance program.
We saw this happen numerous times in 2008 and early 2009. They also bailed out AIG in order to prevent derivatives from taking down the US financial system, and made money in the process.
Find something else to worry about. >>
Why did they save AIG ? How can an insurance company function in a 0% world? How do they pay out on future claims if safe ways of investing only pay them 2% ?
Are the insurance companies supposed to load up on junk bonds to secure future capital to pay claims? I can see some issues with that plan.
The AIG business model is on life support or dead already.
None of these bailouts made much sense unless you look at it from the standpoint of politicians paying back favors .
Since the Sept 2008 bailout of AIG the company has totally regained its health.
The shares have more than doubled since the first offering of Treasury shares at $28.50 after the crisis.
AIG is very profitable. Look at their income statement for 2014. They earned over $10 billion pre tax.
In a simple sense they take in premiums and earn return on investments. They pay out claims and have administrative expenses. The difference is pre-tax earnings.
<< <i>Since the Sept 2008 bailout of AIG the company has totally regained its health.
The shares have more than doubled since the first offering of Treasury shares at $28.50 after the crisis.
AIG is very profitable. Look at their income statement for 2014. They earned over $10 billion pre tax.
In a simple sense they take in premiums and earn return on investments. They pay out claims and have administrative expenses. The difference is pre-tax earnings. >>
No way Jose
The investments they made in the old days to get their 8% or whatever the business model required don't exist anymore except at a much higher level of risk.
If you want to run an insurance business by investing capital in Greek bonds then it will work until it doesn't but however long it goes its going to be a white knuckle ride.
They will have no pre tax earnings buying safe investments or they will have earnings but no safety take your pic .
Bloomberg: "One point of contention is Treasury’s decision to allow AIG—along with TARP recipients Citigroup (C) and Ally Financial—to use operating losses from previous years to eliminate taxes on current income. The allowance, which typically does not apply to bankrupt or acquired companies, added $17.7 billion to AIG’s fourth-quarter earnings and will allow the company to shield profits from taxes for many years to come. “It’s important to remember that a substantial portion of AIG’s recent earnings were attributable to Treasury’s unilateral decision to preserve AIG’s net operating losses,” says J. Mark McWatters, a law professor at Southern Methodist University who was a Republican appointee to the TARP oversight committee."
Elizabeth Warren, former chairman of Congress’s TARP oversight panel: “That kind of bonus wasn’t necessary to protect the economy,” she said in a joint statement with three other former committee members on March 12. “It also gives AIG a leg up against its competitors at a time when everyone should have to play by the same rules—especially when it comes to paying taxes.”
Looks like AIG gets to play by a different set of rules and continues to cost taxpayers money, this time in the form of lost tax revenue.
"How many times can a man turn his head and pretend he just doesn’t see?” - Bob Dylan
<< <i>Bloomberg: "One point of contention is Treasury’s decision to allow AIG—along with TARP recipients Citigroup (C) and Ally Financial—to use operating losses from previous years to eliminate taxes on current income. The allowance, which typically does not apply to bankrupt or acquired companies, added $17.7 billion to AIG’s fourth-quarter earnings and will allow the company to shield profits from taxes for many years to come. “It’s important to remember that a substantial portion of AIG’s recent earnings were attributable to Treasury’s unilateral decision to preserve AIG’s net operating losses,” says J. Mark McWatters, a law professor at Southern Methodist University who was a Republican appointee to the TARP oversight committee."
Elizabeth Warren, former chairman of Congress’s TARP oversight panel: “That kind of bonus wasn’t necessary to protect the economy,” she said in a joint statement with three other former committee members on March 12. “It also gives AIG a leg up against its competitors at a time when everyone should have to play by the same rules—especially when it comes to paying taxes.”
Looks like AIG gets to play by a different set of rules and continues to cost taxpayers money, this time in the form of lost tax revenue. >>
Different set of rules? Since when can't you take previous years losses? I do not believe, AIG or Citigroup ever filed for bankruptcy. Even our host, used that tax advantage for several years after 2008....
"Bongo drive 1984 Lincoln that looks like old coin dug from ground."
<< <i>The Treasury would have an extra $200+ billion if it had held its shares. >>
Can we have a look at AIG's balance sheet? Is it stuffed full of junk bonds valued at par? Should be fun at some point in the future. Accounting standards only apply to the peons though so maybe no big deal.
200 billion was only 2 months of QE at the height of the program . It was safer just to ctrl-P it
The US Treasury made good money on its investment in AIG and the TARP program.
Now, shareholders continue to profit from investments in AIG and these same banks and insurance companies that participated in TARP.
If anyone thinks these stocks are trading at inflated prices, they can sell the shares short and profit from the decline.
I own AIG, Citi, Wells Fargo, Capital One, US Bancorp, State Street, PNC, First Republic, Prudential, Primerica & Cigna, from their offerings in 2009/2010. Every one has been an outstanding investment.
Comments
<< <i>Bank deposits are insured by the FDIC to $250,000 per account.
The banks themselves are much safer now. We went through the financial
crisis and everything was fine for depositors.
No depositor lost a penny in an insured account. >>
only because trillions in bailouts covered the FDIC's underfunded butt. Don't for a minute believe Americans or congress will stand for trillions more the next time. TBTF banks remain on the edge and in reality some are insolvent, only to be protected by approved, false accounting and the FED sucking up their toxic assets. Just another can being kicked down the road. At some point the FED becomes toxic.
It will be interesting to see if that FDIC protection applies when account holders are included with all the other creditors when it comes time to properly write down the bank's debt.
Speaking of bailouts, keep an eye on the $1 Trillion in student loans, half of it owed to our favorite uncle. Unfortunately, "Uncle" is just a nickname for the shrinking 43% who pay federal income tax.
"How many times can a man turn his head and pretend he just doesn’t see?” - Bob Dylan
I saw a news story somewhere on the interwebzz the other day that the FDIC was thinking of removing protection from deposits held in foreign branches of US banks.
I can't find it now maybe someone else has seen it?
<< <i>I saw a news story somewhere on the interwebzz the other day that the FDIC was thinking of removing protection from deposits held in foreign branches of US banks.
I can't find it now maybe someone else has seen it? >>
Yes, effective 9/10/13
"How many times can a man turn his head and pretend he just doesn’t see?” - Bob Dylan
"the bail-in capital could be seen as a form of insurance (provided by creditors) against bank insolvency".
"How many times can a man turn his head and pretend he just doesn’t see?” - Bob Dylan
No depositor lost a penny in an insured account.
Every time a banker fails to be held accountable and is bailed out, it makes it just a little bit harder for the average working American to make it. Worse yet, the bailouts continue at a crazy rate of $85 billion a month. This greatest wealth transfer in the history of the world is nothing less than complete and utter theft from the people who spent their lives working in real jobs and saving a bit here and there for their old age.
There was no financial crisis other than for a few tbtf bankers. The real result of these bailouts is that we all lost, whether our insured accounts "lost money" or not. Since the corruption of FASB, this failure in accountability is the status quo. The problem with constant lying and deception is that reality intrudes from time to time.
The financial crisis isn't over when the banks are *still* holding tranches of paper that's worth much, much less than how it's stated on their books. The continuing travesty is that taxpayers are still donating $85 billion a month to continue bailing them out over time. The pumping of the stock market and downward manipulation of the price of gold are only a diversion from the real crime.
Reality comes when the bond market disappears.
I knew it would happen.
<< <i>The banks themselves are much safer now. We went through the financial crisis and everything was fine for depositors. >>
Their risk in derivative bets is much greater. A rise in interest rates alone will cause interest rate swaps to bring them to their knees. The last talk of FED tapering caused a spike that got their attention.
Depositors realized a net loss on their savings thanks to inflation and ZIRP.
<< <i>No depositor lost a penny in an insured account. >>
Insurance (FDIC) didn't protect them, American taxpayers did. The loss was absorbed in money creation, increased soverign debt and dollar devaluation that both depositors and non-depositors must live with.
<< <i>Reality comes when the bond market disappears. >>
It's future is bleak as the buyers slowly disappear. This is the guarantee that QE will be with us until the end of the current US monetary system. The FED will become the sole large buyer of US soverign debt. The lack of foreign demand for dollars will be it's downfall. Keep an eye on international trade settlement payment agreements - they are your window into the dollar's demise.
"How many times can a man turn his head and pretend he just doesn’t see?” - Bob Dylan
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
<< <i>Jmski, unfortunately you and and and all of us on this board will disappear before the bond market does. >>
The dollar will outlive all of us, too. As far as "bank deposits, consider them a loan to the bank", of course! So what?
consider them anything that pleases you, consider them a a petunia! consider them a pecan pie! consider them a pertussis of the patella! So what?
Oh yes, "keep on stackin!" uh, ok.
Seriously, I consider bank deposits "preservers of purchasing power" in a "cash is king" way that no other asset class posesses. The risks to that capital are limited to very long, slow decay of [overall aggregate] purchasing power, which is near 100% certain, and the very unlikely, near 0% probability, IMO, of FDIC failure "run on all the banks" or total economic collapse type scenario, closing banks and pretty much everything else. Other than that, the money in the bank is "safe" from the other market-type risks of other asset classes, including leveraged things like bonds that produce income, as well as market risk of the underlying security, which at this point in the cycle must eventually turn against bonds, but of course everyone's been saying that for years now.
The market risk of precious metal in paper form (futures, ETFs, etc) is of the same nature as risks in other commodities, although the details and seasonality differ from things like food and energy, and are more similar to the semiprecious/ industrial metals like copper and nickel. And of course, real estate and stocks and art and bitcoins have their risk/reward profiles, too. The risk of holding physical is the market risk that maybe what you have will not be in favor at the time you wish to cash it in, and you will have to accept less than you paid, and this risk is multiplied the higher the % "collector premium" above melt one pays for neat items that have asthetic value in addition to metal. If someone is buying "bullion" with significant collector (semi-numismatic) percent premium, then they must also "market" that premium back to collectors, which reduces liquidity at the premium price which must be sought, as well as the time commitment that must be devoted to advertising, packaging, shipping, and accounting for the trade to the tax authorities, the tax that must be paid, all of which is offset by the risk that someone will rip you off by actually stealing your stash in storage or transit.
Losing my FDIC-insured bank deposits to a run on banks or FDIC insurance "default" is probably the very last thing I would spend my precious time worrying about, or planning for, financially speaking.
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
"How many times can a man turn his head and pretend he just doesn’t see?” - Bob Dylan
months and "pay" everyone off. One should fully expect banking "rules" will be changed at the last minute in any new and "unforeseen" crisis. Cyprus was the blue print. No, the dollar won't go to zero....just a matter of how
close it gets to zero.
Ok, that's quite a dream, to have one, much less several, quarter million savings accounts. I'll let such big brains with big cash worry those big worries, and envy them their stress.
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
Not one, ever.
It would be political suicide for politicians to allow insured depositors to lose money.
Will never happen.
"How many times can a man turn his head and pretend he just doesn’t see?” - Bob Dylan
enable FDIC to repay depositors you would see near unanimous approval like
you have never seen before.
Treasury borrows, the Fed buys the debt, the dollar stays strong, inflation and interest
rates stay very low, stocks rise almost every day.
This is a perfect world for investors.
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
Why did you do that?
I knew it would happen.
<< <i>I lost money when I stacked silver even though I held it for 17 years. >>
That explains a lot. Be sure you dump those stocks sooner.
"How many times can a man turn his head and pretend he just doesn’t see?” - Bob Dylan
<< <i>If the time ever came when Congress needed to authorize an appropriation to
enable FDIC to repay depositors you would see near unanimous approval like
you have never seen before.
Treasury borrows, the Fed buys the debt, the dollar stays strong, inflation and interest
rates stay very low, stocks rise almost every day.
This is a perfect world for investors. >>
If the time ever came when Congress needed to authorize an appropriation to
enable FDIC to repay depositors you would see much more serious problems than
repaying depositors.
This is a perfect world for both wealthy investors and government dependency.
Middle class is footing the bill. However, like Thatcher said, "Socialist governments traditionally do make a financial mess. They always run out of other people's money."
"How many times can a man turn his head and pretend he just doesn’t see?” - Bob Dylan
the Treasury propped up the banks either by supporting acquisitions or TARP.
TARP was very successful and the Treasury made a profit.
If Washington Mutual had failed and Citi and Bank of America not been propped up,
we would have seen the necessity for Congress to add substantial funds to the FDIC.
That was the white knuckle financial moment. We won't see anything that severe for
a couple generations.
<< <i>We had "more serious problems" in 2008, but rather than put the burden on the FDIC,
the Treasury propped up the banks either by supporting acquisitions or TARP.
TARP was very successful and the Treasury made a profit.
If Washington Mutual had failed and Citi and Bank of America not been propped up,
we would have seen the necessity for Congress to add substantial funds to the FDIC.
That was the white knuckle financial moment. We won't see anything that severe for
a couple generations. >>
Because all of your mentioned "corrective actions" were just wallpaper that did not address the causes, you will something more severe THIS generation. The wall papper itself (QE, ZIRP, accounting malpractice) irresponsible debt, fractional lending and derivative gambling will see to it. Throw in a little greed and corruption and it is guaranteed.
"How many times can a man turn his head and pretend he just doesn’t see?” - Bob Dylan
<< <i>We had "more serious problems" in 2008, but rather than put the burden on the FDIC,
the Treasury propped up the banks either by supporting acquisitions or TARP.
TARP was very successful and the Treasury made a profit.
If Washington Mutual had failed and Citi and Bank of America not been propped up,
we would have seen the necessity for Congress to add substantial funds to the FDIC.
That was the white knuckle financial moment. We won't see anything that severe for
a couple generations. >>
TARP making the treasury a profit is a myth. Same goes for all the other crisis programs that claim the same thing. If the FED/Treasiry had to dole out $10-$20 TRILL world wide to plug holes in all the otc derivative's failures, there's no way anyone made a profit....other than the banks who held the winning side of the otc deriv's contracts. The USGovt was the loser all around. We will see another crisis more severe than 2008 within the in the next 2-5 years. TARP was successful only in that it prevented a complete banking system failure that would have destroyed a huge hunk of our current economy. Since nothing was fixed, the same crisis will present itself again. there's no need for the FDIC to pay off depositors on a bank failure. This is because depositors like you and me now stand in line behind the holders of otc derivatives that are carried by that bank. So if say JPM or BoA goes own in a heap, J6P depositors don't get paid off until the govt pays off the $TRILLIONs in failed derivatives to the winning betters. You'll be waiting a long time. And fwiw, the law now says that your deposits are used to pay off on those derivative bets. Neat huh?
Treasury borrows, the Fed buys the debt, the dollar stays strong, inflation and interest
rates stay very low, stocks rise almost every day. This is a perfect world for investors.
Until the day it becomes a nightmare and the bills need to be paid. Similar things were said in 1929, 1966, 1973, 1987, 1999, 2007, and of course in November 2013. But it's different this time. In the past 5 years the FED has tripled its balance sheet with near worthless "assets" that are marked to model while increasing base money supply (M0) by 4X. In the past 17 years M2 has increased like clockwork 8-10% per year. And this is all good without any negative future outcome? Only one too big to fail bank failed in 2008....Lehman Brothers. The other bank failures were absorbed by other banks. But, it was the daisy chain of derivatives with Lehman that would have brought down the financial system if the FED and Treasury didn't pay off on all those winning bets. If another TBTF bank goes down w/o all the "assets" being passed along to another bank, the system will again seize up hard.
But a man hear what he wants to hear
and disregards the rest
roadrunner, I appreciate the time you take to document the facts.
I knew it would happen.
<< <i>All lies and jests
But a man hear what he wants to hear
and disregards the rest
roadrunner, I appreciate the time you take to document the facts.
Same here. Getting hard to even determine what is fact.
"How many times can a man turn his head and pretend he just doesn’t see?” - Bob Dylan
<< <i>I lost money when I stacked silver even though I held it for 17 years.
Why did you do that?
Changes in life.
And thats what is so unique about PMs. Very rarely are they ever sold by the primary investor because they are purchased out of overwhelming emotion. If PMs go up then investors feel their predictions are correct and they will hold forever as insurance/security/ect. If PMs go down then they are not sold as investors never take losses and their convictions so strong as to conclude the day of reckoning is near so they hold. PMs are almost only sold by the heirs. I wasnt about to wait another 50 years for my heirs to sell.
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
Stocks, a few keystrokes and some of it is sold, wait a little time, the trade settles and the money is in the bank ready to spend.
A large collection of diverse physical "products" (large enough to "matter" to the investor) is going to be WORK to market, transport, collect payment.
because there's the matter of the "premium" for "neat" bullion that they paid going in, that they're going to want to try to capture when they get back out.
However, take the stuff in in one big lot somewhere, they're going to count the ounces and offer something very near spot. Disappointed, they decline and haul the stuff back home.
OR, they're "forced" to sell by circumstances of Needing The Money and take what they can get (or their heirs do), the wholesaler retails it by parting it out, and the cycle starts anew.
The exception, of course, is the Stacker who is also a Retailer, buying from the mint and other places and marketing graded pieces and "better bullion" to others for profit.
(which these folks often roll into still more metal) these folks will praise metals and extol their virtues, yet interestingly, always have some for sale to others
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
And thats what is so unique about PMs. Very rarely are they ever sold by the primary investor because they are purchased out of overwhelming emotion. If PMs go up then investors feel their predictions are correct and they will hold forever as insurance/security/ect. If PMs go down then they are not sold as investors never take losses and their convictions so strong as to conclude the day of reckoning is near so they hold. PMs are almost only sold by the heirs. I wasnt about to wait another 50 years for my heirs to sell.
I think you over-generalize a bit, based on your own personal experience. I've sold off my entire pm holdings twice without a whole lot of angst, and I've sold other chunks at various times for different reasons but in each case there was a better use for the funds. No regrets. It works well that way. There's more judgment involved than you suggest. This is true for any assets, not just metals.
The other thing about bullion, besides getting emotionally attached to it, is that it's difficult and time consuming to sell.
No more difficult than a phone call and a registered mail package.
Stocks, a few keystrokes and some of it is sold, wait a little time, the trade settles and the money is in the bank ready to spend.
Keystrokes and quick turnarounds aren't necessarily the sign of a sophisticated investor. In fact, they might be a sign of impulsiveness. Fast liquidations will also undoubtedly play a part when the stock market goes south. This is an unregulated HFT wild west-type of environment and the little guy has all of the disadvantages. Just sayin'.
A large collection of diverse physical "products" (large enough to "matter" to the investor) is going to be WORK to market, transport, collect payment.
because there's the matter of the "premium" for "neat" bullion that they paid going in, that they're going to want to try to capture when they get back out.
However, take the stuff in in one big lot somewhere, they're going to count the ounces and offer something very near spot. Disappointed, they decline and haul the stuff back home.
That's why they invented telephones! And premiums go both ways, not always just against the seller. It's part of the cost of doing business, and sometimes the premium benefits you when you sell.
OR, they're "forced" to sell by circumstances of Needing The Money and take what they can get (or their heirs do), the wholesaler retails it by parting it out, and the cycle starts anew.
The exception, of course, is the Stacker who is also a Retailer, buying from the mint and other places and marketing graded pieces and "better bullion" to others for profit.
(which these folks often roll into still more metal) these folks will praise metals and extol their virtues, yet interestingly, always have some for sale to others
Being forced to sell anything is a sure sign of poor money management skills. Period. And as for heirs, they are always better off getting free money than if they had not, and if they don't put in the effort to know what's been given to them, they shouldn't expect to maximize their benefit. It's hard to feel sorry for heirs unless they have some sort of legitimate disability.
BTW, I enthusiastically extoll precious metals and have none for sale at this time, nor am I a dealer and neither do I bother to form an emotional attachment to my assets. I do keep pretty close tabs on where the money goes, however. I work for a living and my pay derives directly from my own inputs; if I don't work or put in the time I don't have the income. I am qualified in finance and I assess my investments on the basis of merit, risk, comparative value and my own set of personal circumstances. I only gamble for recreation and I pay my taxes diligently.
There are more than just a few valid reasons to step aside from the craziness by being in metals, most of which are debated here regularly.
I knew it would happen.
<< <i>The exception, of course, is the Stacker who is also a Retailer, buying from the mint and other places and marketing graded pieces and "better bullion" to others for profit.
(which these folks often roll into still more metal) these folks will praise metals and extol their virtues, yet interestingly, always have some for sale to others >>
Or,
The exception, of course, is the coin collector who is also a retailer, buying from the mint and other places and marketing graded pieces and "better coins" to others for profit.
(which these folks often roll into still more coins) these folks will praise coins and extol their virtues, yet interestingly, always have some for sale to others >>
I fall into both of these (one of which you already knew) and don't believe either to be deceptive as you attempted to make it sound.
My customers (of both bullion and coins) get exactly what they paid for at a price they obviously determine to be fair and receive top of the line customer service. The fact that I believe in the value of PMs, stack them from business profits (which proves I believe in their virtue) and try to provide PM/economic knowledge to others that seek it is irrelevant to my business model.
Do you really see it as deception when it involves bullion instead of coins or do you also see "coin" dealers as being deceptive? If so, I dare ya to go over to the coin forum and call them devious.
"How many times can a man turn his head and pretend he just doesn’t see?” - Bob Dylan
"October of 2008 was, then, in relatively pure form, the institutional version of an old fashioned bank run."
"If the US government were to lose control of interest rates, and interest rates shoot up, then it risks a massive sovereign credit crisis, it risks a credit derivatives crisis, and it risks the financial Armageddon of an interest-rate derivatives crisis. That is why quantitative easing was created in the first place. And QE remains the primary defense against a disaster which could otherwise consume the global financial order in a matter of days."
Review: Excellent presentation that shows why IMF proposed "bail-ins" are a seriously considered option throughout the world (IMF sees the global threat). It also clearly explains the current derivative massive threat to the global economy, the reasons behind QE and the FED's need to control interest rates. Great primer on FED policy since the crash of '08 and a must read for those wanting to better understand QE. If politicians understood what this man is saying (and were not intoxicated from Wall Street money) derivatives would be outlawed tomorrow.
Opinion on How This Affects PMs: In the current economic enviornment QE cannot end, and will likely have to be increased at an exponential rate if interest rates start to rise. The US economy appears to be more fragile than ever with its survival heavily dependent on indefinitely low interest rates - it is a powder room full of fuses trying to avoid a match. It takes only one match to blow PMs through the roof. I like the odds - call and raise you a box of silver eagles.
"How many times can a man turn his head and pretend he just doesn’t see?” - Bob Dylan
Well, they're cheaper now than they were then. Keep on stackin' (?)
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
<< <i>Opinion on How This Affects PMs: In the current economic enviornment QE cannot end, and will likely have to be increased at an exponential rate if interest rates start to rise. The US economy appears to be more fragile than ever with its survival heavily dependent on indefinitely low interest rates - it is a powder room full of fuses trying to avoid a match. It takes only one match to blow PMs through the roof. I like the odds - call and raise you a box of silver eagles. >>
derryb...get another crystal ball....yours is beyond saving.
<< <i>derryb...get another crystal ball....yours is beyond saving.
Sticking with the one I have, stand by the opinion. Fragility of economic environment proven by years of ZIRP.
Not a matter of "if," a matter of "when." lol
"How many times can a man turn his head and pretend he just doesn’t see?” - Bob Dylan
HE>I
As others have pointed out, the US Treasury and Fed would do whatever is necessary
to fully back the deposit insurance program.
We saw this happen numerous times in 2008 and early 2009. They also bailed out
AIG in order to prevent derivatives from taking down the US financial system, and made
money in the process.
Find something else to worry about.
<< <i>No depositor has ever lost a penny in an FDIC insured account.
As others have pointed out, the US Treasury and Fed would do whatever is necessary
to fully back the deposit insurance program.
We saw this happen numerous times in 2008 and early 2009. They also bailed out
AIG in order to prevent derivatives from taking down the US financial system, and made
money in the process.
Find something else to worry about. >>
That money/debt had to come from somewhere. Who's on the hook for those payouts over the years? .........tax payers. And who are the tax payers?......depositors. They end losing a lot more than pennies....just in a more roundabout way.
<< <i>
<< <i>No depositor has ever lost a penny in an FDIC insured account.
As others have pointed out, the US Treasury and Fed would do whatever is necessary
to fully back the deposit insurance program.
We saw this happen numerous times in 2008 and early 2009. They also bailed out
AIG in order to prevent derivatives from taking down the US financial system, and made
money in the process.
Find something else to worry about. >>
That money/debt had to come from somewhere. Who's on the hook for those payouts over the years? .........tax payers. And who are the tax payers?......depositors. They end losing a lot more than pennies....just in a more roundabout way. >>
RR, once they drink the Koolaid there's no hope for them. Save the one's who think they are getting thirsty.
"How many times can a man turn his head and pretend he just doesn’t see?” - Bob Dylan
<< <i>No depositor has ever lost a penny in an FDIC insured account.
As others have pointed out, the US Treasury and Fed would do whatever is necessary
to fully back the deposit insurance program.
We saw this happen numerous times in 2008 and early 2009. They also bailed out
AIG in order to prevent derivatives from taking down the US financial system, and made
money in the process.
Find something else to worry about. >>
Why did they save AIG ? How can an insurance company function in a 0% world? How do they pay out on future claims if safe ways of investing only pay them 2% ?
Are the insurance companies supposed to load up on junk bonds to secure future capital to pay claims? I can see some issues with that plan.
The AIG business model is on life support or dead already.
None of these bailouts made much sense unless you look at it from the standpoint of politicians paying back favors .
<< <i>My bank gives a free jar of KY Jelly to anyone opening up a savings account. >>
You mean you have to bring your own knee pads!
The shares have more than doubled since the first offering of Treasury shares at $28.50 after the crisis.
AIG is very profitable. Look at their income statement for 2014. They earned over $10 billion
pre tax.
In a simple sense they take in premiums and earn return on investments. They pay out
claims and have administrative expenses. The difference is pre-tax earnings.
<< <i>Since the Sept 2008 bailout of AIG the company has totally regained its health.
The shares have more than doubled since the first offering of Treasury shares at $28.50 after the crisis.
AIG is very profitable. Look at their income statement for 2014. They earned over $10 billion
pre tax.
In a simple sense they take in premiums and earn return on investments. They pay out
claims and have administrative expenses. The difference is pre-tax earnings. >>
No way Jose
The investments they made in the old days to get their 8% or whatever the business model required don't exist anymore except at a much higher level of risk.
If you want to run an insurance business by investing capital in Greek bonds then it will work until it doesn't but however long it goes its going to be a white knuckle ride.
They will have no pre tax earnings buying safe investments or they will have earnings but no safety take your pic .
B
Elizabeth Warren, former chairman of Congress’s TARP oversight panel: “That kind of bonus wasn’t necessary to protect the economy,” she said in a joint statement with three other former committee members on March 12. “It also gives AIG a leg up against its competitors at a time when everyone should have to play by the same rules—especially when it comes to paying taxes.”
Looks like AIG gets to play by a different set of rules and continues to cost taxpayers money, this time in the form of lost tax revenue.
"How many times can a man turn his head and pretend he just doesn’t see?” - Bob Dylan
<< <i>Bloomberg: "One point of contention is Treasury’s decision to allow AIG—along with TARP recipients Citigroup (C) and Ally Financial—to use operating losses from previous years to eliminate taxes on current income. The allowance, which typically does not apply to bankrupt or acquired companies, added $17.7 billion to AIG’s fourth-quarter earnings and will allow the company to shield profits from taxes for many years to come. “It’s important to remember that a substantial portion of AIG’s recent earnings were attributable to Treasury’s unilateral decision to preserve AIG’s net operating losses,” says J. Mark McWatters, a law professor at Southern Methodist University who was a Republican appointee to the TARP oversight committee."
Elizabeth Warren, former chairman of Congress’s TARP oversight panel: “That kind of bonus wasn’t necessary to protect the economy,” she said in a joint statement with three other former committee members on March 12. “It also gives AIG a leg up against its competitors at a time when everyone should have to play by the same rules—especially when it comes to paying taxes.”
Looks like AIG gets to play by a different set of rules and continues to cost taxpayers money, this time in the form of lost tax revenue. >>
Different set of rules? Since when can't you take previous years losses? I do not believe, AIG or Citigroup ever filed for bankruptcy. Even our host, used that tax advantage for several years after 2008....
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887323339704578172960483282372
By Treasury's calculation, the final round of sales means the government will have a net positive return on its AIG bailout of $22.7 billion.
At a 25% tax rate, AIG would need to have $90 billion in profits to make the gain to the US Treasury. Seems the US taxpayer done a-ok.
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
<< <i>The Treasury would have an extra $200+ billion if it had held its shares. >>
Can we have a look at AIG's balance sheet? Is it stuffed full of junk bonds valued at par? Should be fun at some point in the future. Accounting standards only apply to the peons though so maybe no big deal.
200 billion was only 2 months of QE at the height of the program . It was safer just to ctrl-P it
Now, shareholders continue to profit from investments in AIG and these same banks and
insurance companies that participated in TARP.
If anyone thinks these stocks are trading at inflated prices, they can sell the shares
short and profit from the decline.
I own AIG, Citi, Wells Fargo, Capital One, US Bancorp, State Street, PNC, First Republic, Prudential, Primerica &
Cigna, from their offerings in 2009/2010. Every one has been an outstanding investment.
… now keep in mind, bank deposits are just a little bit different than investments in banking.
HE>I