The German mint had to run continuously to print enough money everyday during their collapse. They stopped printing the backs of the money to save time.
Stores were resorting to weighing people’s money rather than counting it.
The situation reached its peak in 1923 when the German central bank was printing currency at an unprecedented rate. By November 1923, one US dollar was worth 4,210,500,000,000 marks. The government had to print million-mark notes, then billion-mark notes to keep up with the rapidly increasing prices.
He didn't seem to adjust his behavior after the jailing. Saw that coming.
I get the impression the forum is going to be a lot less hostile now.
The substantial truth doctrine is an important defense in defamation law that allows individuals to avoid liability if the gist of their statement was true.
@WCC said:
The US and global financial system are more overleveraged with (sub) basement level credit standards and (sub) >basement credit quality. It only appears otherwise due to an artificial economy from massive fiscal stimulus and >still very loose (global) monetary policy.
Most of the risk has been transferred elsewhere, outside the banking system, but the banking system does not >operate in a vacuum.
Bank leverage is 1/2 that from before the GFC...."Shadow" banking has taken up alot of the slack as has private credit but that isn't at discussion when we talk about regulated banks.
We bailed out the Teamsters CSPF with $36 billion but nobody notices. They'd rather b**** about "Wall Street banks" than focus on the real fraudsters.
Maybe...but emerging market debt risks are much less than 10 or 20 or 40 years ago. Back then they were B- or lower....today, they are BB or higher.
Ratings don't mean much of anything. Complete garbage when the credit cycle turns. Biggest difference now vs. then is that developed countries are in far worse shape and will be less able even if willing to bail them out. The IMF and World Bank don't exist in a parallel financial system.
We're in the greatest asset, credit, and debt mania ever, nothing is even close. Same one from the last quarter century plus, as it never ended. The dead wood has never been permitted to clear. That's what central bank and central government bailouts and fiscal "stimulus" lead to.
@WCC said:
There is never something for nothing, ever.
Betting on disaster rarely works out.
And if you are right -- but it happens 30 or 50 or 100 or 150 years from now -- does it matter ? Is it investable ?
Some trends are so slow-developing they may as well not happen from our perspective.
I have no problem with anyone taking risk. The problem I have is the socialization of losses which isn't and won't be limited to banks. There aren't anywhere near enough "ants" in the US to support the irresponsible and insufficiently prepared "grasshoppers".
Most people are counting on everything "working out". They have virtually no margin for error. By "most", I'm referring to something like 95% of the US population. In any supposed "Black Swan", they will either be financially impaired permanently, their living standards will decrease drastically, or they will end up in poverty if things do not "work out".
It doesn't take a national economic "disaster" to financially ruin most people and wreck their lives. You've stated you work or worked in wealth management or financial planning. How can you not recognize that?
From our prior posts, you'd have everyone believe we're in a similar position to Greece in 1981 when we aren't. The US is 50 years down this path to economic ruin from when the last link to the gold standard was severed. The US national debt and deficits immediately started exploding right after with corporate and personal debt following in the 80's.
Like most everyone else (especially finance industry professionals), you have faith (yes, that's exactly what it is) in the economic priesthood, mostly in government. I don't have a financial and economic religion.
The US economy is entirely artificial and has been since around the GFC. I've told you this. Look at the composition of US "growth". Practically all "growth" and more since 2008 is entirely or almost entirely the result of increased deficit spending. Virtually no one recognizes or admits it. The financial system is also a house of cards. It isn't "robust" as you've implied. It's entirely based upon confidence which isn't contingent upon mechanical inputs and outputs as conventional economics implies. In a loss of confidence which will be evident in credit availability and interest rates, there is nothing any government or any central bank can do to prevent declining or crashing living standards because neither produce any actual wealth.
Bank of America and Citigroup were both bailed out during the 2008 financial crisis through the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP).
Citigroup: It received $45 billion in TARP funds—$25 billion in October 2008 and an additional $20 billion in November 2008. The government also guaranteed losses on $306 billion of Citigroup's risky assets. This bailout was the largest among U.S. banks, and the government gained significant control over Citigroup's operations during this period. Citigroup eventually repaid the bailout funds and generated a $12 billion profit for taxpayers through dividends, interest, and stock sales.
Bank of America: It received $45 billion in total TARP assistance—$25 billion in late 2008 and another $20 billion in January 2009. The additional funds were part of a deal to support Bank of America's acquisition of Merrill Lynch, which had incurred significant losses. The government also provided a guarantee for $118 billion in potential losses on risky assets. Bank of America repaid the TARP funds by December 2009.
Both banks were among the largest recipients of federal assistance during the crisis, reflecting their critical roles in the financial system.
............................................
Unfortunately there might be a day when the big banks cannot be bailed out by the US government, and that is the day we could have the real meltdown. We avoided catastrophe by a small margin the last time.
Individuals were not responsible for the Great Depression. It was caused by policy makers. Ya think it can't happen again? Better think twice. It simply starts with one bank run. Faith in a system is what keeps a system afloat.
Gold has a world price entirely unaffected by accounting games between the Treasury and the Fed. - Jim Rickards
@derryb said:
Individuals were not responsible for the Great Depression. It was caused by policy makers. Ya think it can't happen again? Better think twice. It simply starts with one bank run. Faith in a system is what keeps a system afloat.
The current confidence mostly rests on the combined programs creating government sponsored moral hazard. The government has never anticipated even one crisis to my knowledge. Government is always closing the barn door after the proverbial horses have bolted. Some of this is due to political resistance but it's also a feature of the system because all government actions are by committee meaning it's invariably always last to act.
The FRB was created to supposedly prevent a repeat of the 1907 Panic. The FDIC, SEC, and government mortgage insurance (among others) were created in response to the early 30's bear market and Great Depression. The SEC started designating rating agencies as "Nationally Recognized" as a result of the mid-70's bear market. FDICIA was passed in response to the 80's banking crisis. Sarbanes-Oxley due to Enron and other accounting frauds. Dodd-Frank in response to the GFC. No doubt, I've left others out too.
None of this will prevent the next one, especially a systemic one. Yes, some regulators (agencies and individuals) have or might have spoken up to provide a warning, but the direct source isn't from the expected origin. Even if it was, it's ultimately psychological.
Comments
The German mint had to run continuously to print enough money everyday during their collapse. They stopped printing the backs of the money to save time.
Stores were resorting to weighing people’s money rather than counting it.
The situation reached its peak in 1923 when the German central bank was printing currency at an unprecedented rate. By November 1923, one US dollar was worth 4,210,500,000,000 marks. The government had to print million-mark notes, then billion-mark notes to keep up with the rapidly increasing prices.
But it could never happen here. LOL
Gold has a world price entirely unaffected by accounting games between the Treasury and the Fed. - Jim Rickards
Certainly not in our lifetimes. Welcome to 2025, not even in the same universe as 1923 Germany. THKS!
I'm surprised no one posted a link like this with all of the data and bank info.
https://www.bankrate.com/banking/list-of-failed-banks/
http://ProofCollection.Net
this thread is more about emotion than facts
"certainty" that something will or will not occur is an excellent start to failure.
Gold has a world price entirely unaffected by accounting games between the Treasury and the Fed. - Jim Rickards
A picture is worth a thousand words?
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/comment/13874943/#Comment_13874943
Yelling at clouds on pmbug.com
Yes but doesn't have a list of the banks.
http://ProofCollection.Net
Several countries that have recently defaulted on their sovereign debt:
Russia: Defaulted on $47 billion in foreign currency bonds in 2022, following international sanctions due to the invasion of Ukraine.
Lebanon: Defaulted on $31.3 billion in March 2020, amid a severe economic crisis.
Ukraine: Currently in default on $30 billion of foreign currency debt, exacerbated by the ongoing conflict with Russia.
Argentina: Defaulted on $10.5 billion in February 2020, continuing its history of repeated defaults.
Ecuador: Defaulted on $17.3 billion in April 2020, influenced by the COVID-19 pandemic and falling oil prices.
Ghana: Currently in default on $13 billion of foreign currency debt.
Sri Lanka: Defaulted on international debt in May 2022, following a severe economic crisis and depletion of foreign currency reserves.
Zambia: Currently in default, as part of a record number of Fitch-rated sovereigns in default status.
.
Well, it looks like the self-proclaimed "Redneck Hillbilly" has been PERMANENTLY banned.
.
He didn't seem to adjust his behavior after the jailing. Saw that coming.
I get the impression the forum is going to be a lot less hostile now.
The substantial truth doctrine is an important defense in defamation law that allows individuals to avoid liability if the gist of their statement was true.
Bank leverage is 1/2 that from before the GFC...."Shadow" banking has taken up alot of the slack as has private credit but that isn't at discussion when we talk about regulated banks.
We bailed out the Teamsters CSPF with $36 billion but nobody notices. They'd rather b**** about "Wall Street banks" than focus on the real fraudsters.
There is a LOT more of that coming.
Maybe...but emerging market debt risks are much less than 10 or 20 or 40 years ago. Back then they were B- or lower....today, they are BB or higher.
Ratings don't mean much of anything. Complete garbage when the credit cycle turns. Biggest difference now vs. then is that developed countries are in far worse shape and will be less able even if willing to bail them out. The IMF and World Bank don't exist in a parallel financial system.
We're in the greatest asset, credit, and debt mania ever, nothing is even close. Same one from the last quarter century plus, as it never ended. The dead wood has never been permitted to clear. That's what central bank and central government bailouts and fiscal "stimulus" lead to.
There is never something for nothing, ever.
those who like to have the last word seem to find a way back> @GoldFinger1969 said:
About those credit ratings agencies
Gold has a world price entirely unaffected by accounting games between the Treasury and the Fed. - Jim Rickards
Betting on disaster rarely works out.
And if you are right -- but it happens 30 or 50 or 100 or 150 years from now -- does it matter ? Is it investable ?
Some trends are so slow-developing they may as well not happen from our perspective.
I have no problem with anyone taking risk. The problem I have is the socialization of losses which isn't and won't be limited to banks. There aren't anywhere near enough "ants" in the US to support the irresponsible and insufficiently prepared "grasshoppers".
Most people are counting on everything "working out". They have virtually no margin for error. By "most", I'm referring to something like 95% of the US population. In any supposed "Black Swan", they will either be financially impaired permanently, their living standards will decrease drastically, or they will end up in poverty if things do not "work out".
It doesn't take a national economic "disaster" to financially ruin most people and wreck their lives. You've stated you work or worked in wealth management or financial planning. How can you not recognize that?
From our prior posts, you'd have everyone believe we're in a similar position to Greece in 1981 when we aren't. The US is 50 years down this path to economic ruin from when the last link to the gold standard was severed. The US national debt and deficits immediately started exploding right after with corporate and personal debt following in the 80's.
Like most everyone else (especially finance industry professionals), you have faith (yes, that's exactly what it is) in the economic priesthood, mostly in government. I don't have a financial and economic religion.
The US economy is entirely artificial and has been since around the GFC. I've told you this. Look at the composition of US "growth". Practically all "growth" and more since 2008 is entirely or almost entirely the result of increased deficit spending. Virtually no one recognizes or admits it. The financial system is also a house of cards. It isn't "robust" as you've implied. It's entirely based upon confidence which isn't contingent upon mechanical inputs and outputs as conventional economics implies. In a loss of confidence which will be evident in credit availability and interest rates, there is nothing any government or any central bank can do to prevent declining or crashing living standards because neither produce any actual wealth.
Bank of America and Citigroup were both bailed out during the 2008 financial crisis through the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP).
Citigroup: It received $45 billion in TARP funds—$25 billion in October 2008 and an additional $20 billion in November 2008. The government also guaranteed losses on $306 billion of Citigroup's risky assets. This bailout was the largest among U.S. banks, and the government gained significant control over Citigroup's operations during this period. Citigroup eventually repaid the bailout funds and generated a $12 billion profit for taxpayers through dividends, interest, and stock sales.
Bank of America: It received $45 billion in total TARP assistance—$25 billion in late 2008 and another $20 billion in January 2009. The additional funds were part of a deal to support Bank of America's acquisition of Merrill Lynch, which had incurred significant losses. The government also provided a guarantee for $118 billion in potential losses on risky assets. Bank of America repaid the TARP funds by December 2009.
Both banks were among the largest recipients of federal assistance during the crisis, reflecting their critical roles in the financial system.
............................................
Unfortunately there might be a day when the big banks cannot be bailed out by the US government, and that is the day we could have the real meltdown. We avoided catastrophe by a small margin the last time.
Individuals were not responsible for the Great Depression. It was caused by policy makers. Ya think it can't happen again? Better think twice. It simply starts with one bank run. Faith in a system is what keeps a system afloat.
Gold has a world price entirely unaffected by accounting games between the Treasury and the Fed. - Jim Rickards
You'll never be wrong betting on disaster. But you're almost always certainly early.
http://ProofCollection.Net
The current confidence mostly rests on the combined programs creating government sponsored moral hazard. The government has never anticipated even one crisis to my knowledge. Government is always closing the barn door after the proverbial horses have bolted. Some of this is due to political resistance but it's also a feature of the system because all government actions are by committee meaning it's invariably always last to act.
The FRB was created to supposedly prevent a repeat of the 1907 Panic. The FDIC, SEC, and government mortgage insurance (among others) were created in response to the early 30's bear market and Great Depression. The SEC started designating rating agencies as "Nationally Recognized" as a result of the mid-70's bear market. FDICIA was passed in response to the 80's banking crisis. Sarbanes-Oxley due to Enron and other accounting frauds. Dodd-Frank in response to the GFC. No doubt, I've left others out too.
None of this will prevent the next one, especially a systemic one. Yes, some regulators (agencies and individuals) have or might have spoken up to provide a warning, but the direct source isn't from the expected origin. Even if it was, it's ultimately psychological.