Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I would put it at a coin flip if there are major bank failures if the FDIC will actually be able to cover those accounts. You also need to think about what happened in Cyprus when they had their bail-ins. People went to draw "their" money out of the banks, and the banks said not so fast, that money is not "yours" any longer.
I would put it at a coin flip if there are major bank failures if the FDIC will actually be able to cover those accounts. You also need to think about what happened in Cyprus when they had their bail-ins. People went to draw "their" money out of the banks, and the banks said not so fast, that money is not "yours" any longer.
Bottom line - have some physical cash on hand.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolverine607
Yes as long as it is no more than $250K as it is FDIC insured.
Unless the law changes that is.
Thanks I have 1.1M divided up between 5 accounts. I’m thinking that I should be good.
It's sort of safe, thanks to the Dodd-Frank act. Accounts are insured up to FDIC limits assuming the FDIC has the necessary money on hand or can borrow. If the FDIC runs out of money then deposits can be clawed back on the basis that depositors are lenders to the bank. Pretty much all 1930s protections have been dismantled by our "Representatives" so that Banks can do what they did in the 1920s, i.e. sink the economy with horrific debt burden. They of course are having Pina Coladas on their isles.
I would not put the blame all on banks, at least not traditional banks. Maybe the greedy invesment banks who hoard real estate and make us beleive our economy is dependent on a strong housing market as in price appreciation which is a complete bullsh*t and only steals from future generations.
Thus the blame lies in government policy allowing cheap and easy credit and little to no money down loans even after 2008-2009 crisis and the whole trying to inflate home prices to outrageous levels of $220K or more for starter bungalows in most major metro areas when such homes should only be costing $100K to $140K.
The government need to go back to the rules to encourage more construction and tax breaks for home builders to make it profitable to build nice starter homes 1000 to 1400 square feet for reasonable selling price of $130K to $170K instead of the outrageous $200K or more selling price for tiny condos in all metros or even worse homes minimum of only 1400 square feet costing well north of $250K and often north of $300K to build which has caused this mess.
They also need to make a minimum of 20% down payment required and normal 6-8% interest rates on mortgages no exceptions. And outlaw and get rid of home equity loans to do improvements or buy cars and such and start looking as a home as a place to live while striving to own it free and clear not a flippin ATM machine.
Also they should tax the heck out of real estate hoarders or ones who own second homes hoping to sell for a profit later on with super high property taxes while making them super low at both millage and assessment level for one's primary residence they actually live in. For example California Prop 13 and Proposal A in Michigan or other states with similar property tax laws protection should be eliminated for those holding real estate they do not live in or have vacation homes and should be permanent for even new home buyers as long as it is their residence they live in. Now businesses should also get protection as well. But those who actually hoard real estate for vacation homes should have to pay taxes based on home value and get no property tax assessment protection at all. Maybe except multi family apartment unit landlord so rents can be reasonable. But not secondary homes regardless unless it is used for business purposes other than hoping to sell for profit later on because of stupid high price appreciation,
Basically the government and many have brainwashed us to believe that high level of home price appreciation is good when in reality it is very bad for future generations and not sustainable which is why we were in this mess before 2008 and appear to be headed into it again and now the virus once in a century thing is icing on the cake to exploit the cracks in the economy and it hyper debt band aid policies that are not sustainable.
Yes, bankers worked hard to dismantle Glass-Steagall. You can thank both Democrats and Republications who are both empty stooges of the Bankers.
I am not sure that is safe. I think they only cover $250K per bank per person even under multiple accounts from research I have done.
If they are in 5 different accounts spread across 5 different banks you are good I think.
Only to the extent the FDIC has the money or can borrow (I think the limit is $500 billion right now). A rather stealth change in the law which I raised with the clown who represents my district in Congress. The joker was supposed to look into it but never got back. I wonder why?
Should be fine. The bigger banks are almost hyper-capitalized. I'm on the board of a smaller bank here in Texas around since the 1800s and it's similarly positioned in a relative sense.
In '08 our banks were a weak spot now they are a point of strenght.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
