Home › Forums › Financial Markets/Economics › Bailout for Dummies – Part I
- This topic has 190 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 11 months ago by
Coronita.
-
AuthorPosts
-
April 7, 2009 at 6:15 PM #15442April 7, 2009 at 6:36 PM #377663
jpinpb
ParticipantI’m a dummy, so I want to understand. How can the banks collapse if the government – I mean taxpayers – will continue to pour money in the black hole (and hearts) of the banks?
Seems like there’s no end to how much the government (taxpayers) will give. It’s not a flesh wound. The patient is bleeding to death, but they keep pumping blood into it. The monster is not dying as long as the blood (money) keeps flowing.
April 7, 2009 at 6:36 PM #377941jpinpb
ParticipantI’m a dummy, so I want to understand. How can the banks collapse if the government – I mean taxpayers – will continue to pour money in the black hole (and hearts) of the banks?
Seems like there’s no end to how much the government (taxpayers) will give. It’s not a flesh wound. The patient is bleeding to death, but they keep pumping blood into it. The monster is not dying as long as the blood (money) keeps flowing.
April 7, 2009 at 6:36 PM #378120jpinpb
ParticipantI’m a dummy, so I want to understand. How can the banks collapse if the government – I mean taxpayers – will continue to pour money in the black hole (and hearts) of the banks?
Seems like there’s no end to how much the government (taxpayers) will give. It’s not a flesh wound. The patient is bleeding to death, but they keep pumping blood into it. The monster is not dying as long as the blood (money) keeps flowing.
April 7, 2009 at 6:36 PM #378162jpinpb
ParticipantI’m a dummy, so I want to understand. How can the banks collapse if the government – I mean taxpayers – will continue to pour money in the black hole (and hearts) of the banks?
Seems like there’s no end to how much the government (taxpayers) will give. It’s not a flesh wound. The patient is bleeding to death, but they keep pumping blood into it. The monster is not dying as long as the blood (money) keeps flowing.
April 7, 2009 at 6:36 PM #378287jpinpb
ParticipantI’m a dummy, so I want to understand. How can the banks collapse if the government – I mean taxpayers – will continue to pour money in the black hole (and hearts) of the banks?
Seems like there’s no end to how much the government (taxpayers) will give. It’s not a flesh wound. The patient is bleeding to death, but they keep pumping blood into it. The monster is not dying as long as the blood (money) keeps flowing.
April 7, 2009 at 6:42 PM #377668TheBreeze
ParticipantI believe he’s talking about deposits above the FDIC limits (which I think are currently $250K?).
April 7, 2009 at 6:42 PM #377946TheBreeze
ParticipantI believe he’s talking about deposits above the FDIC limits (which I think are currently $250K?).
April 7, 2009 at 6:42 PM #378125TheBreeze
ParticipantI believe he’s talking about deposits above the FDIC limits (which I think are currently $250K?).
April 7, 2009 at 6:42 PM #378167TheBreeze
ParticipantI believe he’s talking about deposits above the FDIC limits (which I think are currently $250K?).
April 7, 2009 at 6:42 PM #378291TheBreeze
ParticipantI believe he’s talking about deposits above the FDIC limits (which I think are currently $250K?).
April 7, 2009 at 7:00 PM #377678davelj
Participant[quote=TheBreeze]I believe he’s talking about deposits above the FDIC limits (which I think are currently $250K?).[/quote]
Wrong. The $8 trillion represents ALL deposits in the domestic banking system. All DDA accounts now have unlimited coverage. And through CDARs, anyone (individuals or businesses) can get up to $50 million in time deposits fully covered by the FDIC. Uninsured deposits are a pretty small portion of the total at this point. (Prior to the crisis they were about 30% of the total.) Anyone that has uninsured deposits at this point isn’t paying attention.
Now, the real question is how you can have the temerity to post such an article without even understanding what the author is trying to convey. I just don’t get it. Bizarre.
April 7, 2009 at 7:00 PM #377956davelj
Participant[quote=TheBreeze]I believe he’s talking about deposits above the FDIC limits (which I think are currently $250K?).[/quote]
Wrong. The $8 trillion represents ALL deposits in the domestic banking system. All DDA accounts now have unlimited coverage. And through CDARs, anyone (individuals or businesses) can get up to $50 million in time deposits fully covered by the FDIC. Uninsured deposits are a pretty small portion of the total at this point. (Prior to the crisis they were about 30% of the total.) Anyone that has uninsured deposits at this point isn’t paying attention.
Now, the real question is how you can have the temerity to post such an article without even understanding what the author is trying to convey. I just don’t get it. Bizarre.
April 7, 2009 at 7:00 PM #378135davelj
Participant[quote=TheBreeze]I believe he’s talking about deposits above the FDIC limits (which I think are currently $250K?).[/quote]
Wrong. The $8 trillion represents ALL deposits in the domestic banking system. All DDA accounts now have unlimited coverage. And through CDARs, anyone (individuals or businesses) can get up to $50 million in time deposits fully covered by the FDIC. Uninsured deposits are a pretty small portion of the total at this point. (Prior to the crisis they were about 30% of the total.) Anyone that has uninsured deposits at this point isn’t paying attention.
Now, the real question is how you can have the temerity to post such an article without even understanding what the author is trying to convey. I just don’t get it. Bizarre.
April 7, 2009 at 7:00 PM #378176davelj
Participant[quote=TheBreeze]I believe he’s talking about deposits above the FDIC limits (which I think are currently $250K?).[/quote]
Wrong. The $8 trillion represents ALL deposits in the domestic banking system. All DDA accounts now have unlimited coverage. And through CDARs, anyone (individuals or businesses) can get up to $50 million in time deposits fully covered by the FDIC. Uninsured deposits are a pretty small portion of the total at this point. (Prior to the crisis they were about 30% of the total.) Anyone that has uninsured deposits at this point isn’t paying attention.
Now, the real question is how you can have the temerity to post such an article without even understanding what the author is trying to convey. I just don’t get it. Bizarre.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.