Well, yeah. We live in a tower block, and it’s the upstairs neighbour’s roof, so whatever. Actually, come to think of it, where are my tin snips…
(ETA, she IS better though. I ask her for advice, sometimes)
3 Likes
Reading this made me really glad I live in Australia. Sure we got issues but we actually had a crisis early this year. I was in hospital for a week and my daughter, born premature, was in the NICU for 6 weeks. It took a toll of us physically and emotionally but not financially. Both my hospital stay and hers was free.
8 Likes
You failed to provide evidence for the many opinions you’ve expressed in this thread. If you’re going to be unnecessarily hostile and hold me to special standards you’re not going to hold anyone else to, perhaps you should just try not interacting with me at all.
Problem with that is we’re already in ZIRP. So this scenario is like: OK, Fed raises rates by .5% and WHOOOAAAHH, looks like a few banks are going to implode. Let’s go back to QE…
…but it has almost no effect because going from 1% rates to 0.5% rates doesn’t actually provide much more incentive for banks to borrow treasuries and the damage has already been done from the failing banks’ point of view.
Okay, capital infusions, as we know the Treash can legally do now. I think the failure of the FDIC is an interesting thought experiment–all companies and countries fail–so what comes after? Some countries such as Greece have come to the razors edge of taking deposits. But I think the US has more ‘levers’ to pull.
I’m not the one declaring not to trust the FDIC, etc. as if it were based on some facts.
But, whatever, keep your agitation. 
I don’t think the FDIC would fail – I think it would be intentionally suspended. Otherwise, it is exactly just a capital infusion – the banks take the deposits and then the FDIC replaces them with government money.
The reasons I think a haircut would be on the table are, as I mentioned before, that bailouts create a moral hazard and because I don’t think the US government can run up arbitrary amounts of debt without serious financial consequences. But maybe US government default is less bad than bank runs/general financial chaos? Don’t really have a good guess what that would look like.
Another factor is that the last round of capital infusions had strings attached, e.g. the banks have to actually pay the loans back. Some banks actually seemed to want to refuse the capital infusions to limit exposure to the liabilities imposed by those strings. So does the next round not have so many strings attached? None at all? More because the banks are just going to fail anyway?
There’s also the fact that the capital infusions didn’t seem to do so very much as QE for the health of the banks, so even a massive infusion that drives USG to the brink of default may not even do the trick.
Now that I find highly unlikely. Suspending the FDIC would almost instantly cause a panic. Who would be the first to panic? Billionaires (who are also political donors) that have tens of thousands of insured accounts. Is that gonna happen?
On the plus side the value of Brinks stock would likely skyrocket.
1 Like
BTW, this thread has it ALL! A brief summary:
homelessness/mental health/social responsibility -> on the merits of hoarding cash -> healthy miserliness -> more on the merits of hoarding cash -> survivalism -> weird deconstructions of the article -> more on social safety nets, especially health care -> cider press cameo! -> on buying a house vs remaining debt-free -> different strokes for diff’r’nt fokes -> turtles, koalas and kitties playing nicely together -> SINGLE MALT -> LEAD FLASHING -> The FDIC
6 Likes
- Most billionaires have accountants who would not let them put more than $250,000 into a single bank account. In fact, I doubt very much billionaire money at all lives in depositor accounts.
- I’m cynical enough to believe that important political donors would get a heads up on this before the general public.
I have an accountant that won’t let me put more than $250k in an account (now I just need to actually get that kind of money), but that wasn’t what I was referring to.
Shutting down the FDIC will cause a bank run, which will put a cap on withdrawals, even on solvent banks. Every millionaire I know has several insured accounts. It appears typical.
So I’m not even talking about the 1%–i don’t think the 10% would allow the political will to suspend the FDIC.
The only realistic way for the agency to go down is if it were privatised.
Shutting down the FDIC without taking into account the near-inevitability of a bank run would cause a bank run.
I mean, I realize I’m talking about the financial equivalent of martial law. That’s what I’m saying I think will happen next time something like 2008 happens.
And that’s why I think the answer would be:
$treasury->money->print(10000000000000);
Yes, the treasury runs mission critical systems on Perl.
1 Like
sub awjt{
$some = 1000000000;
$treasury=$treasury-$some;
$pinky = 1;
$lip = "lower";
$some->awjt_swiss_acct();
}
&awjt;
3 Likes
We got code covered, looks like it’s gonna be my job to do the people stuff…
1 Like
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
