Bronco Posted October 15, 2010 Posted October 15, 2010 This makes a lot of sense to me considering recent experiences at various financial institutioins. Enjoy! Quote
JayB Posted October 16, 2010 Posted October 16, 2010 Interesting. It'd be interesting to learn if the rules that the FDIC uses for losses on loan-portfolios that get picked up by the bank that takes over the failing bank are discretionary or statutory. One more reason that public insurance for bank deposits larger than ~$5,000 whatever will cover the cash savings of genuinely poor people is a terrible idea. If you have more than that socked away, you could afford private deposit insurance, which would make it more expensive to keep your money at a sketchy bank and cheaper to keep your money at a sound bank. Few people know that even the likes of FDR opposed public deposit insurance because it resulted in significantly more bank failures in the few states that tried it out. When no one had to worry about whether or not their bank was sound, bad banks were able to attract far more deposits than they would have otherwise. The most influential group lobbying for public deposit insurance were community bankers, who knew that it would enable them to attract far more deposits than they'd be able to if they had to compete with large banks. They were also able to limit interstate banking, which also made bank-failures more common than they'd be otherwise. IMO if you've got enough wherewithal to sock away more than a few thousand dollars you can fork over whatever it would cost to insure your stash on your own dime. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.