Posted on 08/30/2016 7:47:57 AM PDT by Lorianne
The first half of 2016 has been a roller-coaster for financial markets. A combination of uncertainties surrounding the U.K.'s vote to leave the European Union and weaker-than-expected corporate earnings results across the region means a tough second half looms.
European banks, in particular, have had a very tough six months as the shock and volatility around Brexit sent banking stocks south. Major European banks like Deutsche Bank and Credit Suisse saw their shares in free-fall after the referendum's results were announced. In the U.K., RBS was the worst-hit, with its shares plunging by more than 30 percent since June 24.
The current uncertainty over when the U.K. will start the process of quitting the EU has banks on tenterhooks. But a source told CNBC that banks are "preparing for an economic nuclear winter situation."
Speaking on the condition of anonymity due to the sensitive nature of the topic, a source from a major investment bank told CNBC that financial services firms have put together a strategy in place that takes into account the worst-case scenario that could happen by the end of this year.
"This could mean triggering Article 50, referendum in other European nations leading to a break-up of the euro or sterling hitting below $1.20 or lower. The banks are ready for anything now," the source said.
The source further explained that the challenge in 2016 is nothing compared to when the Lehman Brothers collapsed in 2008 and the banking sector is this time a lot more resilient. "Markets hate uncertainty and the events this year have unfortunately created a lot of mystery around what is going to happen next."
(Excerpt) Read more at cnbc.com ...
Yeah, and part of my withdrawals will be lead based.
The biggest risks are coming from China right now.
We "little folk" are never going to get out of the financial doldrums unless globalism and "too big to fail" banking schemes collapse.
As far as what's happening to banks is concerned, why would anyone leave money in a bank if fees cost more than the interest paid to savers? I've already reached the point where I pre-pay my utility bills a few months ahead, since the money in a checking account would only pay .01% interest. I figure it's safer with them in case of an economic meltdown. And why have debt to keep money in the bank? If there is a banking nightmare, it would take awhile to get ones savings. And another thing....I don't fully trust that there couldn't be a negative interest situation where the banks would be allowed to charge a fee to withdraw funds.
How's that for cynical?
Smart man!
You’ll be far better off then most when the beast comes to collect.
Yep! Doomsayers suck! The future is always better! Why, adjusted for inflation, I am making more now than my father did in the 60’s! Oh, wait, no, I’m not...
Wife and I are thinking of leaving the city and taking up a more simple life.
We have 20 chickens now. The four acre plot (top of one of the knobs and no trees there) where my neighbor fed his cattle for roughly 3 decades is rather fertile ground as well...
Wife and I are thinking of leaving the city and taking up a more simple life.
It’s weird how, when you’ve found the right life partner you never run out of things to talk about. And what is often said by one of us is, “People pay good money to enjoy a view like this a week or so out of the year.”
The only downside is the 3 hour round trip commute to Louisville. But it is more than worth it!
Planning to blame their Ponzi scheme collapse on STOOOOPID American and British voters.
We did have a terrible melt-down (still ongoing); instead of reflecting on paper it is being reflected by negative birthrates. We are trafficking Third Worlders into the West to mask it, but it is very real and visible to all.
Let’s see, banks are in trouble because they have a certain amount of bad loans that probably won’t be repaid. Banking regulations may force them to write off those bad loans possibly leading to bank insolvency. This writing off of bad loans is analogous to burning money.
In a fiat money system, money can be easily replaced - the fed can print it and give it to the banks that are in trouble, i.e. “kick the can down the road” and in that scenario it’s the right thing to do. The cost of doing this is “moral hazard”, the benefit is saving millions (not just the bank) from misery.
The moral hazard, (irresponsibility on the part of the people who run the banks) can be taken care of by instituting some type of punishment for the people involved, so that it’s an example to others in the future to be more careful about who they loan money to.
You cannot be serious.
Few people recognized the subprime debacle in 2007.
Carry on, the economy is rolling. Yawn...
The real hazard in the scenario you share is Hyperinflation.
Yes, that is where I believe it is going. I think cash will first be very valuable, until it’s next to worthless.
Of interest. The global fiat money shell game may actually be the real zombie apocalypse.
I am having this discussion with me wife.
The return on my 401(k) has been horrendous over the past few years. Granted, my holdings have been pretty conservative.
I said to her, based on the way things look today is it reasonable to expect that it will go up more the penalty we have to pay to take it out?
We could pay off everything but the small mortgage. (This is a 401(k) from an employer from the 1990’s. Its not being added to.) The figures used to project growth are abysmal. 3-5% per year is a pipe dream.
I never thought about tapping into that before. But I am seriously doing the math now. I cannot see where its much of a risk. The market going down 10% in the near future? It doesn’t seem like much of stretch.
Agreed !
That may be one of the reasons why central banks are calling for banks to buy up corporate debt
It may postpone the grand fall and bubble burst
Just more kicking the can down the road...
Ok probably not best place to ask this question, but since we’re talking self-sufficiency and you mentioned chickens, maybe you’re the person to ask.
I’ve got 15 on pasture now. We got the egg thing down in previous years, so we will keep 5-6 as layers. Thing is, I’d really also like to keep a rooster so I have a more self-sustaining flock. No close neighbors, so no worries there.
But how will he affect the eggs we collect? Will they all be fertilized? Just some of them? And do I have to keep him sequestered from the hens so he doesn’t breed with all of them?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.