Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: BfloGuy

“The same is true anywhere in the world — only about 10% of your cash is at the bank. They just depend on the fact that everyone won’t want his at the same time.”

Then how can they take the 40% from depositors, even from a limited number of depositors who are subject to the 40%. Is there even enough cash in reserve to cover the 40% withdrawals? Remember, the 40% fee is based on total deposits above the $100,000, not the total fractional amount in reserve. Unless I’m missing something here, do these socialists ever realize the consequences what they’re doing? Or more than likely they just don’t care.


51 posted on 03/28/2013 2:09:39 PM PDT by ScottfromNJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies ]


To: ScottfromNJ
Then how can they take the 40% from depositors

They aren't taking actual cash; they're removing the obligation to pay the depositors back (and issuing worthless stock certificates for the difference). The whole deal is to make the bank's balance sheets look better, not to raise actual cash.

53 posted on 03/28/2013 2:23:13 PM PDT by steve86 (Acerbic by Nature, not Nurture™)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies ]

To: ScottfromNJ
Is there even enough cash in reserve to cover the 40%

No. This is a bookkeeping exercise.

do these socialists ever realize the consequences what they’re doing?

They do realize that if they just let the banks fail [like they should], the bank-to-government gravy train will be in danger.

65 posted on 03/28/2013 4:25:14 PM PDT by BfloGuy (The economy is not a pie, but a bakery.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson