is my bank safer than my safe deposit box located in that same bank?
yeah, never mind...
Well the bankers would be safer.... they consider that an "other" potential asset.
No banks are safe (bail ins, FDIC limits, systemic risks)
Welcome to the Precious Metals Bug Forums
Welcome to the PMBug forums - a watering hole for folks interested in gold, silver, precious metals, sound money, investing, market and economic news, central bank monetary policies, politics and more. You can visit the forum page to see the list of forum nodes (categories/rooms) for topics.
Why not register an account and join the discussions? When you register an account and log in, you may enjoy additional benefits including no ads, market data/charts, access to trade/barter with the community and much more. Registering an account is free - you have nothing to lose!
Well the bankers would be safer.... they consider that an "other" potential asset.
Kitco report has a few more details on Barney Frank's assertion:
Regulators shut down Signature to send the message that crypto is toxic - Barney Frank
Former congressman Barney Frank says that regulators shut down Signature Bank in an effort to send the message that crypto is toxic.
www.kitco.com
Bitcoin Nears $25K as Interbank Funding Stress Indicator Surges to Highest Level Since COVID Crash
Banking sector stress strengthens the case for Fed pause next week. Likely beneficiaries from the financial stress are gold and bitcoin, one observer said.
Looks to me like they've taken down a couple of the corrupt banks. Interesting, while still trying to insure deposits.
Politically-correct customers.
VC outfits; tech startups (staffed with Woketards) and individuals (Woked-up) on the coasts.
Equally Woked-up morons and criminals were running them...but the Elites must be PROTECTED. And people must SEE...they're protected.
So the contagion seems to be stopped. Until the next spark...
- Messages
- 9,933
- Reaction score
- 7,775
- Points
- 238
Banking History
Glass Steagall Act
The Glass-Steagall Act, part of the Banking Act of 1933, was landmark banking legislation that separated Wall Street from Main Street by offering protection to people who entrust their savings to commercial banks. Millions of Americans lost their jobs in the Great Depression, and one in four lost their life savings after more than 4,000 U.S. banks shut down between 1929 and 1933, leaving depositors with nearly $400 million in losses. The Glass-Steagall Act prohibited bankers from using depositors’ money to pursue high-risk investments, but the act was effectively undercut by looser restrictions in the deregulatory environment of the 1980s and 1990s.As the Great Depression of the 1930s devastated the U.S. economy, many blamed the economic meltdown in part on financial-industry shenanigans and loose banking regulations.
U.S. Senator Carter Glass, a Democrat from Virginia, first introduced the legislation in January 1932, and the bill was co-sponsored by Democratic Alabama Representative Henry Steagall.
By June 16, 1933, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed the Glass-Steagall Act into law as part of a series of measures adopted during his first 100 days to restore the country’s economy and trust in its banking systems.
FDIC Created
The Glass-Steagall Act set up a firewall between commercial banks, which accept deposits and issue loans, and investment banks that negotiate the sale of bonds and stocks.The Banking Act of 1933 also created the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), which protected bank deposits up to $2,500 at the time (now up to $250,000 as a result of the Dodd-Frank Act of 2010).
As the bill stated, it was designed “to provide for the safer and more effective use of the assets of banks, to regulate interbank control, to prevent the undue diversion of funds into speculative operations, and for other purposes.”
Alan Greenspan and Bank Deregulation
Starting in the 1970s, large banks began to push back on the Glass-Steagall Act’s regulations, claiming they were rendering them less competitive against foreign securities firms.The argument, embraced by Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, who was appointed by President Ronald Reagan in 1987, was that if banks were permitted to engage in investment strategies, they could increase the return for their banking customers while avoiding risk by diversifying their businesses.
Soon, several banks began crossing the line once established by the Glass–Steagall Act through loopholes in the act. For example, the act stipulated that while a Federal Reserve member bank could not deal in securities, a bank could affiliate with a company that did as long as that company that was not “engaged principally” in such activities.
Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act
One of the most prominent deals that exploited this loophole was the 1998 merger of banking giant Citicorp with Travelers Insurance, which owned the now-defunct investment bank Salomon Smith Barney.One year later, President Bill Clinton signed the Financial Services Modernization Act, commonly known as Gramm-Leach-Bliley, which effectively neutralized Glass-Steagall by repealing key components of the act.
President Clinton said the legislation would “enhance the stability of our financial services system” by permitting financial firms to “diversify their product offerings and thus their sources of revenue” and make financial firms “better equipped to compete in global financial markets.”
Great Recession Strikes
Some economists point to the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act as a key factor leading to the housing market bubble and subsequent Great Recession, the financial crisis of 2007-2008.Sources
Glass-Steagall Act
www.history.com
- Messages
- 9,933
- Reaction score
- 7,775
- Points
- 238
Dodd–Fwank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act
July 21, 2010Law
Pub. L. No. 111-203, 124 Stat. 1376, codified in relevant part at 12 U.S.C. § 5301, §§ 5481-5603, and in laws amended (Title X); and 12 U.S.C. § 5481 note, 15 U.S.C. § 1601 note, § 1602, and § 1631 et seq. (Title XIV)
Links
http://uscode.house.gov/statutes/pl/111/203.pdf
Title X of this Act creates a new Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection within the Federal Reserve Board as a new supervisor for certain financial firms and as a rulemaker and enforcer against unfair, deceptive, abusive, or otherwise prohibited practices relating to most consumer financial products or services. The Act transfers most of the FTC’s rulemaking authority and one study requirement to the Bureau but the FTC retains all of its enforcement authority and some rulemaking authority.
The Act further provides for FTC/Bureau coordination regarding certain rulemaking and enforcement activities. The Act provides authority for each agency to enforce some of the other’s rules with respect to consumer financial practices. The Act also authorizes FTC rulemaking for certain motor vehicle dealers under standard Administrative Procedure Act procedures rather than the procedures set forth in the FTC Act.
In addition, the Act amends the Electronic Fund Transfer Act (a) to provide for limitations on interchange transaction fees; (b) to prohibit exclusive payment networks and routing restrictions for debit cards; (c) to limit the restrictions that credit and debit card networks may impose on retailers regarding discounts or transaction amount limits based on form of payment, and (d) to provide standards for remittance fee practices. It also provides for improved financial disclosures, including integration of mortgage disclosures under the Truth in Lending Act and the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act.
Title XIV of the Act amends the Truth in Lending Act, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, and other consumer financial laws to prevent mortgage-related abuses and to improve availability of responsible, affordable mortgage credit. It addresses compensation-based incentives; inappropriate steering, discrimination, and other abusive, unfair, deceptive, or predatory practices; minimum federal lending standards; high-cost mortgages; mortgage servicing; and appraisals. Title XIV provides a new enforcement role for the FTC regarding home appraisals.
Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, Titles X and XIV
Title X of this Act creates a new Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection within the Federal Reserve Board as a new supervisor for certain financial firms and as a rulemaker and enforcer against un
Last edited:
- Messages
- 11,468
- Reaction score
- 2,517
- Points
- 238
In a harsh blow to an already-reeling sector, Moody’s Investors Service on Monday cut its view on the entire banking system to negative from stable.
- Messages
- 190
- Reaction score
- 200
- Points
- 168
In my opinion, the VCs have always been low intelligence fools who were not investors, but gamblers. They spent their money and their investors' on stupid ventures that value investors would reject as ... shitty.
I did have a brief encounter with a VC, and he was a shit head. I hope he lost his wad on his deal for video advertisement devices on shopping carts.
- Messages
- 9,933
- Reaction score
- 7,775
- Points
- 238
BIDEN CRISIS: Moody’s Downgrades Banking Segment to “Negative”, Assets in US Banks Are $2 Trillion LESS than Their Balances
By Joe Hoft
View original
Biden couldn’t have done a better job destroying the US economy if he tried.
Earlier today, Moody’s dropped its rating for the Banking SEGMENT from stable to negative. This was a huge event that those in the banking and finance areas know is a very big deal.
Moody’s doesn’t downgrade entire segments without much thought and discussion on the matter.
CNBC reported:
Moody’s rating was reported this morning on the War Room where Steve Cortes reported that Moody’s downgraded the banking segment due to a “rapidly deteriorating operating environment”:
more
- Messages
- 11,468
- Reaction score
- 2,517
- Points
- 238
Collapse of U.S. banks: There is one 'common theme,' says investment advisory firm
Mar 15, 2023Ram Ahluwalia of Lumida Wealth discusses the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank, Signature Bank and Silvergate Bank. 3:50
- Messages
- 11,468
- Reaction score
- 2,517
- Points
- 238
Credit Suisse leads Europe bank stock rout after short-lived SVB respite
Europe's bank stocks came under pressure again on Wednesday, with Credit Suisse tumbling to a new low, as investors continued to worry about stresses within the sector following Silicon Valley Bank's collapse.
www.reuters.com
Maybe you will be be reimbursed with a shiny new cbdc.
That's exactly what is going to end up happening.
Barney Frank Talks More About the Surprise Shuttering of Signature Bank
“I was sort of vindicated — they have not argued that we were insolvent,” says the author of the Dodd-Frank Act.
nymag.com
Barney Frank Talks More About the Surprise Shuttering of Signature Bank
“I was sort of vindicated — they have not argued that we were insolvent,” says the author of the Dodd-Frank Act.
it really sucks when the Communists turn their attention back on you.
- Messages
- 11,468
- Reaction score
- 2,517
- Points
- 238
Is The US Banking System Safe? ...15 Years Later
With the recent implosion of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank, the largest bank failures since 2008, I had an overwhelming feeling of deja vu. I wrote the article Is the U.S. Banking System Safe on August 3, 2008 for the Seeking Alpha website, one month before the collapse of the global financial system. It was this article, among others, that caught the attention of documentary filmmaker Steve Bannon and convinced him he needed my perspective on the financial crisis for his film Generation Zero. Of course he was pretty unknown in 2009 (not so much anymore) , and I continue to be unknown in 2023.
With the recent implosion of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank, the largest bank failures since 2008, I had an overwhelming feeling of deja vu. I wrote the article Is the U.S. Banking System Safe on August 3, 2008 for the Seeking Alpha website, one month before the collapse of the global financial system. It was this article, among others, that caught the attention of documentary filmmaker Steve Bannon and convinced him he needed my perspective on the financial crisis for his film Generation Zero. Of course he was pretty unknown in 2009 (not so much anymore) , and I continue to be unknown in 2023.
I was looking at Jamie Dimon's history on Wiki-puke-ia...wanted a detail or two, but I fell down the rabbit hole, as happens.
Dimon came onboard JPMC from Banc One, the parent company of Bank One (state) all over the nation.
Bank One, emerged from a Columbus, Ohio, regional...which was fighting "Depression-Era restrictive branch-banking laws in Ohio (Wiki's claim)."
I recall that period, as a teen and young adult in Ohio. Branch banking over county lines was prohibited. That meant there were well over a hundred banks in the state, all of them relatively small, locally focused.
The first legal battle the predecessor to Bank One won, was the legal ability to set up holding companies that would own various county banks. Hence they went on a buying spree, mostly rural banks, and organized them under Banc One Corporation.
Later loosening, enabled banks to combine assets and be absorbed into out-of-county banks. Bank One became a huge Ohio bank.
And then, of course, further loosening on the Federal level, with Bank One buying small banks in 20 states. And it all ended with Chase, resurrected after a near-collapse by JP Morgan...JPMC buying Banc One.
From a small Franklin County bank, to this monolith that dictates social mores, prevents competition in matters such as SD boxes, and has gone Woke.
Yeah. We need to re-examine the decentralized system given us with what Wiki calls "Depression-Era" regulation.
Dimon came onboard JPMC from Banc One, the parent company of Bank One (state) all over the nation.
Bank One, emerged from a Columbus, Ohio, regional...which was fighting "Depression-Era restrictive branch-banking laws in Ohio (Wiki's claim)."
I recall that period, as a teen and young adult in Ohio. Branch banking over county lines was prohibited. That meant there were well over a hundred banks in the state, all of them relatively small, locally focused.
The first legal battle the predecessor to Bank One won, was the legal ability to set up holding companies that would own various county banks. Hence they went on a buying spree, mostly rural banks, and organized them under Banc One Corporation.
Later loosening, enabled banks to combine assets and be absorbed into out-of-county banks. Bank One became a huge Ohio bank.
And then, of course, further loosening on the Federal level, with Bank One buying small banks in 20 states. And it all ended with Chase, resurrected after a near-collapse by JP Morgan...JPMC buying Banc One.
From a small Franklin County bank, to this monolith that dictates social mores, prevents competition in matters such as SD boxes, and has gone Woke.
Yeah. We need to re-examine the decentralized system given us with what Wiki calls "Depression-Era" regulation.
Yellen is cornered on her plan's that are essentially Eliminate SMALL banks and force people into their woke shit ESG banks.
www.zerohedge.com
Watch: Yellen Stammers After Senator Corners Her On Bailouts, Protecting CCP-Linked Deposits | ZeroHedge
ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero
www.zerohedge.com
What else would you expect? Everything Woke turns to (pejorative).
Ma Yellin is part of Team Obombah. They never saw a bad idea they didn't just LUUV...
Ma Yellin is part of Team Obombah. They never saw a bad idea they didn't just LUUV...
Seems to me she is saying, if the depositors or share holders of the bank are wealthy marxist, have ties to the CCP or part of the Democratic money laundry system you will be made whole. If your bank is in a rural conservative community your limit is $250k and you will pay higher fees for the bailout of the preferred bank.
But we aren't picking favorites... You could also bank with Hells Fargo or Goldman Suchs
Things must be worse than is being reported by the state run media. I got an email from my local bank assuring me everything fine.
.
.
- Messages
- 11,468
- Reaction score
- 2,517
- Points
- 238
Things must be worse than is being reported by the state run media. I got an email from my local bank assuring me everything fine.
.
Hey Irons...............just a thought but you had some pretty good threads going on gim2. Your metal detecting, hunting blind and atv threads were great. They would be a welcome addition here if you're interested.
That's the kind of warm fuzzies that helps people and businesses with uninsured deposits sleep well at night!
Things must be worse than is being reported by the state run media. I got an email from my local bank assuring me everything fine.
.
The local US Bank had new CD signs paying over 4%, more than US Treasuries. Their stock also tanked Friday. This is gonna be ugly.
It has to be.
How else are they gonna be able to force their cbdc down everyone's throat, if it doesn't get incredibly ugly first? They'll want it to look like a gleaming palace on a hill, in comparison.
Forcing CBDCs on the public, will be about like forcing the Jab on the public.
EVEN IF they accept it initially...it will tear society apart, and destroy one-half the economy - the half that contain entertainment, travel, discretionary energy use, such as boating...it will enrage the public as they're limited in meat and fuel purchases.
It will completely destroy motivation - and THAT...WILL cause a collapse.
- Messages
- 9,933
- Reaction score
- 7,775
- Points
- 238
