[bsrsharma]

I am not aware of any mass failure of Credit Unions. My personal opinion is they are more cautious and don’t get into speculative/risky lending. So, I view them favorably compared to banks.

For a specific Credit Union, you should lookup at

http://www.bankrate.com/brm/safesound/brm_explain.asp

for Safe & Sound and CAEL (Capitalization, Asset quality, Earnings and Liquidity) ratings.

[bsrsharma]

I could see delays, errors, or headaches if your bank does go under

I don't think so; In the late '80s and early '90s, during S & L meltdown, FDIC was extremely efficient and punctual in paying depositors.

[bsrsharma]

I could see delays, errors, or headaches if your bank does go under

I don't think so; In the late '80s and early '90s, during S & L meltdown, FDIC was extremely efficient and punctual in paying depositors.

[bsrsharma]

I could see delays, errors, or headaches if your bank does go under

I don't think so; In the late '80s and early '90s, during S & L meltdown, FDIC was extremely efficient and punctual in paying depositors.

[bsrsharma]

I could see delays, errors, or headaches if your bank does go under

I don't think so; In the late '80s and early '90s, during S & L meltdown, FDIC was extremely efficient and punctual in paying depositors.

[bsrsharma]

I could see delays, errors, or headaches if your bank does go under

I don't think so; In the late '80s and early '90s, during S & L meltdown, FDIC was extremely efficient and punctual in paying depositors.

[bsrsharma]

All this discussion is about private wealth (or lack of it). Publicly, we are $9 Trillion in debt and $50 Trillion in unfunded entitlements. It is hard to understand why some people are so keen to run for national offices!

[bsrsharma]

All this discussion is about private wealth (or lack of it). Publicly, we are $9 Trillion in debt and $50 Trillion in unfunded entitlements. It is hard to understand why some people are so keen to run for national offices!

[bsrsharma]

All this discussion is about private wealth (or lack of it). Publicly, we are $9 Trillion in debt and $50 Trillion in unfunded entitlements. It is hard to understand why some people are so keen to run for national offices!

[bsrsharma]

All this discussion is about private wealth (or lack of it). Publicly, we are $9 Trillion in debt and $50 Trillion in unfunded entitlements. It is hard to understand why some people are so keen to run for national offices!

[bsrsharma]

All this discussion is about private wealth (or lack of it). Publicly, we are $9 Trillion in debt and $50 Trillion in unfunded entitlements. It is hard to understand why some people are so keen to run for national offices!

[bsrsharma]

There is another issue that has not been addressed: as the Baby Boomers start to finance their retirement, the equity will start going down further. This has started in 2006 and will continue all the way till 2025. So, net household wealth has nowhere to go but down (with all the implications for consumer spending etc.,) as the mean age of population rises. The years 1946 – 2006 were the rising tide of household wealth; 2006 – 20xx will see the reverse of these changes.

[bsrsharma]

There is another issue that has not been addressed: as the Baby Boomers start to finance their retirement, the equity will start going down further. This has started in 2006 and will continue all the way till 2025. So, net household wealth has nowhere to go but down (with all the implications for consumer spending etc.,) as the mean age of population rises. The years 1946 – 2006 were the rising tide of household wealth; 2006 – 20xx will see the reverse of these changes.

[bsrsharma]

There is another issue that has not been addressed: as the Baby Boomers start to finance their retirement, the equity will start going down further. This has started in 2006 and will continue all the way till 2025. So, net household wealth has nowhere to go but down (with all the implications for consumer spending etc.,) as the mean age of population rises. The years 1946 – 2006 were the rising tide of household wealth; 2006 – 20xx will see the reverse of these changes.

[bsrsharma]

There is another issue that has not been addressed: as the Baby Boomers start to finance their retirement, the equity will start going down further. This has started in 2006 and will continue all the way till 2025. So, net household wealth has nowhere to go but down (with all the implications for consumer spending etc.,) as the mean age of population rises. The years 1946 – 2006 were the rising tide of household wealth; 2006 – 20xx will see the reverse of these changes.

[Author]

Posts