Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
bsrsharma
Participantdip below 11,000 … the market rallies?
That might the cause. Programmed buying probably kicked in sensing bottom at 11K point. I am sure many more programs will kick in at 10K point.
Participantdip below 11,000 … the market rallies?
That might the cause. Programmed buying probably kicked in sensing bottom at 11K point. I am sure many more programs will kick in at 10K point.
Participantdip below 11,000 … the market rallies?
That might the cause. Programmed buying probably kicked in sensing bottom at 11K point. I am sure many more programs will kick in at 10K point.
Participantdip below 11,000 … the market rallies?
That might the cause. Programmed buying probably kicked in sensing bottom at 11K point. I am sure many more programs will kick in at 10K point.
Participantdip below 11,000 … the market rallies?
That might the cause. Programmed buying probably kicked in sensing bottom at 11K point. I am sure many more programs will kick in at 10K point.
Participant10.5 is actually good; Whoever wins, the index will at least touch 12 during 2009-2012, I think. We haven’t even seen a dozen banks blow up yet. During S&L crisis , hundreds of banks went down.
Participant10.5 is actually good; Whoever wins, the index will at least touch 12 during 2009-2012, I think. We haven’t even seen a dozen banks blow up yet. During S&L crisis , hundreds of banks went down.
Participant10.5 is actually good; Whoever wins, the index will at least touch 12 during 2009-2012, I think. We haven’t even seen a dozen banks blow up yet. During S&L crisis , hundreds of banks went down.
Participant10.5 is actually good; Whoever wins, the index will at least touch 12 during 2009-2012, I think. We haven’t even seen a dozen banks blow up yet. During S&L crisis , hundreds of banks went down.
Participant10.5 is actually good; Whoever wins, the index will at least touch 12 during 2009-2012, I think. We haven’t even seen a dozen banks blow up yet. During S&L crisis , hundreds of banks went down.
ParticipantCapeman,
I think it is good to inform depositors that both FDIC and NCUA are federal government agencies and hence will stand behind any losses up to the insured amount. If the losses exceed trust fund amounts, it will most likely be replenished with open ended taxpayer funds. Not doing so would take out complete confidence in banking system. This guarantee is certainly more explicit than the implicit support behind GSE’s that is attracting treasury and Fed support now.
In summary, splitting deposits to $100K and keeping it at the highest interest paying bank or credit union deposits is no less safe than treasuries and probably more profitable.
ParticipantCapeman,
I think it is good to inform depositors that both FDIC and NCUA are federal government agencies and hence will stand behind any losses up to the insured amount. If the losses exceed trust fund amounts, it will most likely be replenished with open ended taxpayer funds. Not doing so would take out complete confidence in banking system. This guarantee is certainly more explicit than the implicit support behind GSE’s that is attracting treasury and Fed support now.
In summary, splitting deposits to $100K and keeping it at the highest interest paying bank or credit union deposits is no less safe than treasuries and probably more profitable.
ParticipantCapeman,
I think it is good to inform depositors that both FDIC and NCUA are federal government agencies and hence will stand behind any losses up to the insured amount. If the losses exceed trust fund amounts, it will most likely be replenished with open ended taxpayer funds. Not doing so would take out complete confidence in banking system. This guarantee is certainly more explicit than the implicit support behind GSE’s that is attracting treasury and Fed support now.
In summary, splitting deposits to $100K and keeping it at the highest interest paying bank or credit union deposits is no less safe than treasuries and probably more profitable.
ParticipantCapeman,
I think it is good to inform depositors that both FDIC and NCUA are federal government agencies and hence will stand behind any losses up to the insured amount. If the losses exceed trust fund amounts, it will most likely be replenished with open ended taxpayer funds. Not doing so would take out complete confidence in banking system. This guarantee is certainly more explicit than the implicit support behind GSE’s that is attracting treasury and Fed support now.
In summary, splitting deposits to $100K and keeping it at the highest interest paying bank or credit union deposits is no less safe than treasuries and probably more profitable.
-
AuthorPosts
