Posted on 03/15/2023 9:10:40 AM PDT by ChicagoConservative27
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) on Wednesday said the $250,000 cap on deposit insurance should be reexamined to better suit small business and nonprofit organizations.
“I think that we should reexamine, just overall, about why we have limits at $250,000 of protection,” she said on CNBC’s “Squawk Street.”
The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) insures up to $250,000 for each depositor if a bank fails. Warren said this insurance was meant for individuals, and a similar level of protections would help small businesses and nonprofit organizations have more confidence when depositing money into a bank.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
Oh, did “they” have some big bux in SVB? Guess “they” are on the warpath now eh? Have a beer liawatha and relax.
She wants more wampum.
It should be tied to INFLATION.................
What does she mean “reexamined”? Didn’t Biden just basically eliminate it?
Watch the Rats approve insuring all deposits over $10,000, allowing the little guys to take the heat for the rich and famous. It fits their actions.
An Indian giver?
Fauxcahontas’ cheek bones need to be re-examined.
I could see it being raised to $1 million in this day and age but what does that have to do with bailing out Big Banking to the tune of billions?
Why would a nonprofit be investing their money? I thought they were suppose to do good this with their donations not use the organization as a money generating enterprise.
If the moccasin fits. . . .
This she/he/it, whatever it is, is a fricken’ complete MORON.
My understanding is that she’s talking about the money in the bank , just money in basic business checking accounts. She’s not talking about nonprofits speculatively investing their money.
FDIC insurance is like any other insurance.
Just because $250,000 of your deposit is ‘insured’ is not a guarantee that you’ll get $250,000 if it comes to that.
Like with the FDLIC you are more likely to get ten cents on the dollar, perhaps a bit more, perhaps a bit less.
So raising the insured amount is just window dressing if there’s not going to be a corresponding increase in the amount being paid out.
Seems like when I was a teenager (I’m 73) the limit was about $10,000 or $15,000. Seemed like a lot of money at the time.
Hey Senator Albino Squaw, the Great Spirit does not provide mid-day sustenance at no charge, it requires much wampum (as white man say, “There is no free lunch”).
The FDIC insurance program is funded by assessments made to every bank that is covered by it. So if you think the insurance needs to be increased, then that cost will be paid by every FDIC-insured institution in the country, who will in turn pass those costs onto customers as higher fees, lower rates paid and higher rates charged. It’s not simply a matter of the Great White Father (known to Native Americans by his Indian name of “he who stumbles up steps to great flying eagle with full diaper”) to simply waive his hand and decree it so and now everyone is magically covered at no cost.
What needs to be examined is why the taxpayers are on the hook for the investments of banks.
History: FDIC protection came out of the Great Depression. Banks had been too free with their investments and lost the public’s capital when the markets tanked. To restore confidence, banks were separated from brokerage firms and one would store capital and the other would invest. Bank deposits would be covered by insurance.
In 1999, those restrictions were removed and banks got back into the risk business. Banks bought brokerage firms and got back into investing. Since then, we’ve had at least two serious banking crises so far. What’s fun is that although the wall between banking and investing fell, the protections for banks didn’t. Now, banks reap the profits from profitable investments and the public bears the loss.
So now mz socialist wants to coddle millionaires and billionaires:-)
Bongo.
Insure all the risk away which will drive up the FDIC fees they charge the banks and in turn, the bank will increase the fees paid by we the people.
If you want more bank failures, this is one way to get that.
There should be NO protection for bank deposits. How about getting back to 100% if deposits being still in the banks? Let people put money in investor banks if they want it to make money, and let the investor beware. Arrest, convict and execute financial scammers. Take all of their worldly goods no matter where it has ended up, and make investors whole.
As it is, very wealthy people use other peoples money to make more money, shielding THEIR WEALTH from exposure. The entire banking/monetary system will and should collapse. It is built upon much less than a tulip bulb. It is built upon promises.
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.