How about this idea. How about $100 trillion per account.
Why not?
Just get that printing press going!
Monkeys.
F*cking monkeys.
And Sheila Bair is the worst of 'em.
And this is gonna cost us trillions.
Get ready.
FDIC Asks Congress to Increase Bank Deposit Insurance
The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. wants Congress to increase temporarily the $100,000 ceiling on bank deposits guaranteed by the government.
October 02, 2008
FLASH: The FDIC, completely out of money and run by an incompetent crony monkey, wants Congress to raise limits to some unknown amount.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
A kajillion dollars!
Why not? They know they would get bailed out when they run out of funds.
FDIC insurance doesn't cost anything except to the banks for their premiums.
The fed requires all banks to keep reserves on deposit with them at no interest.
With fractional reserve banking, 100% of all the deposits of all banks are on deposit with the fed. So if the govt needs to pay claims, no problem, they already have the money.
Oh, and the fed deposits are not counted as part of the national debt. But we owe it anyway.
well, if all the banks start closing, scattering your money around won't protect it and washington can't use their limits to fight against monopoly; hence, it makes sense to raise it.
in reality, the folks in washington simply have to figure out if they can afford the paper on which money is printed on. And, thanks to Keith's video posting, we all know that politicians love supporting the paper industry.
Why not censure Bushco and Cheney tonight and go for the two-fer?
Have the nation vote electronically like american idol.
2nd Round: Greedspan, Ashcroft, Chertoff ad the ever popular Rumsfeld.
Don't you just HATE all of the above?
This actually seems to make a little scene... the FDIC was created in 1933 after the great depression with a $100k limit... but this was not tied to inflation... so the limit has stayed the same for 75 years
Having FDIC limits encourages banks to increase their interest rates for deposits but they could very well take the risk to go insolvent if rates rise followed by a rapid fall, just like what happened in the S&L crisis. Increasing the limits increases this moral hazard.
But the one thing that's missing in the banks is confidence. Increasing the FDIC limits will increase confidence of keeping money in the bank. Longer term, it creates more moral hazard.
-Mike
"the FDIC was created in 1933 after the great depression with a $100k limit"
Learn to use wikipedia and google folks, they're you're friends
The FDIC limit has continually gone up. In 1934 it was 2,500 and went to 5,000. In 1950 it was 5000 and went to 10000. In '66 to 15k. In '69 to 20k. In '80 to $100k
It was due for a rise. I'm OK with $250k. But not $1 million, or $2.5m as some are calling for.
It's just another unfunded ponzi scheme, an illusion. The bankers knew they could gamble, and if they lost the taxpayers would bail them out.
It's sick.
The Monkey Anti-Defamation League objects to comparing the FDIC boss as a monkey, as monkeys have more smarts and have higher ethical standards than this guy :P
Keith stop insulting monkeys.
Post a Comment