It Can Happen Here: The Confiscation Scheme Planned For U.S. And U.K. Depositors

[dixiegrrrrl]

Excerpts:

A joint paper by the U.S. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the Bank of England dated Dec. 10, 2012, shows that these plans have been long in the making; that they originated with the G20 Financial Stability Board in Basel, Switzerland (discussed earlier here); and that the result will be to deliver clear title to the banks of depositor funds.

New Zealand has a similar directive....

and

Although few depositors realize it, legally the bank owns the depositor's funds as soon as they are put in the bank. Our money becomes the bank's, and we become unsecured creditors holding IOUs or promises to pay . But until now the bank has been obligated to pay the money back on demand in the form of cash.
Under the FDIC-BOE plan, our IOUs will be converted into "bank equity." The bank will get the money and we will get stock in the bank.
With any luck we may be able to sell the stock to someone else, but when and at what price?

No exception is indicated for "insured deposits" in the U.S., meaning those under $250,000, the deposits we thought were protected by FDIC insurance. This can hardly be an oversight, since it is the FDIC that is issuing the directive.

http://seekingalpha.com/article/1306931-it-can-happen-here-the-confiscation-scheme-planned-for-u-s-and-u-k-depositors

[AnotherMcIntosh]

1. Thank you.

[Wellstone ruled]

2. Cyprus is just a dry run for the Banksters.

Get your heads out of your butt and get active.

[MineralMan]

3. Link to that paper, or it doesn't exist.

I tried to read the whole article, but that site won't let me into it unless I register. Who is the author, and why should I listen to her?

Thanks for your help.

[Hugin]

5. I had no problem.

But, if you insist.

http://books.google.com/books?id=bbEe7b6uEtUC&pg=PA83&lpg=PA83&dq=a+depositor+is+an+unsecured+creditor+of+the+bank+%26+cases&source=bl&ots=sz1VsR2Qrn&sig=yxgREMX75x3gpGlSy7de36ElyE&hl=en&sa=X&ei=OpFOUazgHeThiAKJyIHwAQ&ved=0CF4Q6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=a%20depositor%20is%20an%20unsecured%20creditor%20of%20the%20bank%20&f=false

Try this for a primary source.

[MineralMan]

6. Thanks.

[Hugin]

9. Check out page 83 in that book.

I'm having a terrible time getting the link to post.

[MineralMan]

8. Thanks again.

The thing is that this is not some government proposal or regulation at all. It's a paper, written in 2007 by some guy. It's descriptive, has a bunch of footnotes, and is not readable in full at your link. It's an ebook that sells for $100. I'm not seeing it being any sort of official document of any kind, and I can't read the whole thing.

Where's the proposed legislation? Where's the official government statement about this?

2007. Never mind.

[Hugin]

10. Here's the FDIC BoE paper referenced.

http://www.fdic.gov/about/srac/2012/gsifi.pdf

[Hugin]

4. K&R

Yep.

[rhett o rick]

7. What can we do to prevent this and/or protect ourselves from this? nm

[Hugin]

11. Join a Credit Union.

That way you're a part owner of the "Bank".

[L0oniX]

12. +1 ...Grow Financial.

[rhett o rick]

14. Sorry I dont know what that means. nm

[FrodosPet]

26. Credit Unions fail as well

Is Credit Union deposit insurance stronger and more stable than the FDIC?

http://www.ncua.gov/News/Pages/default.aspx

[dixiegrrrrl]

15. Folks do different things.

Some only keep minimal monthly expenses in the bank.
Turns out that people who used branches of the Cyprus banks located outside of Cyprus could bank normally during the lockdown.
Others moved their money to non-EU banks.

turns out also, that Cyprus banks had a huge amount of money leaving the banks in Feb.:

Euro area depositors fastest to leave Cyprus in February
http://ekathimerini.com/4dcgi/_w_articles_wsite2_1_28/03/2013_490447
(Good newspaper for what is going on over there)

[malaise]

46. Take your money out of the gawd damed banks

It's that simple

[rhett o rick]

47. And put it where? nm

[BeHereNow]

54. Amen Malaise...take your money out and put it into hard assets.

That is what I have been doing for over a decade.
I read the same article yesterday from a different source and thought,

"Well, the gloves are off- they plan to steal it all."

From the article-
"Open Bank Resolution (OBR) is Finance Minister Bill English’s favoured option dealing with a major bank failure. If a bank fails under OBR, all depositors will have their savings reduced overnight to fund the bank’s bail out."

Do NOT keep hard assets in a bank either as they are subject to being converted into bank shares as well.

BHN

[mainer]

71. How do you define hard assets?

(I have relatives who define them as guns and ammo.)

Real estate? This results in yearly outflow of property taxes.
Gold bars? Where to store them?
Jewelry/art/tangibles -- uh, if the economy crashes, they become worthless because no one can afford to buy them.

It really is getting to the point where you can't find any place trustworthy to safeguard your retirement savings. i'm just feeling pretty good that I have lots of farmland. People always have to eat.

[Chuuku Davis]

85. A garden

Long term food store
Water purification equipment
Solar power augmentation w battery bank
And yes an AR15 and Glock17

[dixiegrrrrl]

88. You HAVE hard assests, then.

The land.
And all the tools you have or need to make the land sustaining.

So, what else do you need to keep the farming going?
A well?
Your own power source?
Any workshop tools?
Think about how you can live, how you can plant, what you need to do that, if your bank suddenly closed.

Think about how you manage and what you need to do that.

[BeHereNow]

91. A well is a good thing, providing...

It is not near a fracking site.
Cheney's secret Energy task meetings back in 2001?
Made sure the fracking industry was immune to disclosing harmful
chemicals in their process.

Meanwhile, the BFEE now owns the land over the world's second largest
underground water aquifer. In Paraguay.

Look it up.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/oct/23/mainsection.tomphillips

BHN

[BeHereNow]

90. PMs

That is all.
Silver coins are your best bet right now.
Remember, PMs are NOT an investment.
They are a path to protecting your cash assets against a doomed fiat currency.
That is all I have to say on the matter.

If you can't figure out a place to stash your coins, other than a bank,
I wish you all the luck in the world.

BHN
PS: All conversions should be kept at a minimum of $5000.00 to stay off the
Patriot act legislation radar.
As always, DYOH.

[Yo_Mama]

13. This article is wrong

First, insured deposits would remain insured, covered in the normal manner.
http://www.fdic.gov/about/srac/2012/gsifi.pdf

Then, for those deposits not insured, what would happen is that the complex institution would be shut down by taking assets of top-level managers, then from bondholders, then last from uninsured depositors.

Also note that this paper was written to discuss the resolution of a multi-national banking/financial firm, and/or an SEC-regulated financial firm (non-bank with no deposit insurance).

There is nothing in this paper nor in the US plans to do away with deposit insurance. Your deposits in an FDIC-insured bank are covered up to $250,000:
http://www.fdic.gov/deposit/deposits/changes.html

Now deposits in a financial firm that is NOT an FDIC-insured bank aren't insured.

"Unsecured debt" really refers to bondholders, not depositors.

Even in the UK, there is no intent to get rid of deposit insurance:

The U.K. has also given consideration to the recapitalization process in a scenario in which a GSIFI’s liabilities
do not include much debt issuance at the holding company or parent bank level but instead comprise insured retail deposits held in the operating subsidiaries . Under such a scenario, deposit guarantee schemes may be required to contribute to the recapitalization of the firm , as they may do under the Banking Act in the use of other resolution tools. The proposed RRD also permits such an approach because it allows deposit guarantee scheme funds to be used to support the use of resolution tools, including bail-in, provided that the amount contributed does not exceed what the deposit guarantee scheme would have as a claimant in liquidation if it had made a payout to the insured depositors. That is consistent with the contribution requirement that is already imposed on the Financial Services Compensation Scheme in the U.K. in the exercise of resolution powers 10 and simulates the losses that would have been incurred by those deposit guarantee schemes during bank insolvency. But insofar as a bail - in provides for continuity in operations and preserves value , losses to a deposit guarantee scheme in a bail-in should be much lower than in liquidation. Insured depositors themselves would remain unaffected. Uninsured deposits would be treated in line with other similarly ranked liabilities in the resolution process, with the expectation that they might be written down.

.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

16. A piece of paper will prevent the banksters from doing whatever they want when they want?

A piece of paper and the rule of law will prevail?

That would have more credibility if, when Dick Cheney said that the U.S. Constitution was just a piece of paper, that our theoritical system of checks and balances had actually worked.

We theoritically had a piece of paper that was superior to anything that the FDIC has ever published: the U.S. Constitution.

In reality, we have openly admitted war criminals walking around free, rich, and happy.

Theoritically, we have a piece of paper that guarantees freedom of speech. In reality, we have a billionaire named Bloomberg who can have his police assault peaceful Occupy Wall Street protestors to shut down their ability to speak against the banksters and the politicians that support them. Bloomberg is not alone. There has been a coordinated effort in many cities to violently suppress those who would speak out against the banksters.

There are other Constitutional provisions which are also not stopping the banksters or the politicians who have bailed them out and ready to respond favorably to them.

For whatever reason, the two documents that you refer to seem to give you some comfort.

[Yo_Mama]

17. Uhhhhh

Actually. the first "piece of paper" the article refers to discusses wiping out banksters rather than depositors.

I think you're not quite grasping the flow here. The paper describes a plan that gives uninsured depositors a LOT of protection - really more than they now have. The plans wipe out bondholders and stockholders first! Insured depositors remain entirely covered.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

19. "paper describes a plan" -- You're missing the point that the paper doesn't mean anything.

It can describe whatever the authors want.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

39. Thanks for your insight.

I understand your thoughts.

If there had not been decisions made at the highest levels to disregard the rule of law and (a) abstain from giving de facto immunity to openly admitted war criminals and (2) abstain from giving de facto immunity to the banksters, I would still think that we had the rule of law in this country. Our politiicans have already given more money to the banksters. The bail-out money is not the only money that they've given them. The events in Cyprus, which are controlled in part by international bankers, leads me to be less confident than you that there will be a "usual way" that the FDIC or our politicans will deal with future events.

Thank you, nonetheless.

[dixiegrrrrl]

43. THIS piece of paper did not help folks in Cyprus:

Note the date.....
this Cyprus news source confirms the letter
http://cyplive.com/eng/news/bankcypznalitax.html

copy of the letter courtesy of http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=219245

[B Stieg]

20. Thank YOU, Yo

Sorry, Dixie, but you sound like a Teabagger.

[dixiegrrrrl]

21. Even us life long dems have lost our retirement funds

Last edited Fri Mar 29, 2013, 02:30 PM - Edit history (1)

and had our social security threatened.
I can assure you that being concerned about our life savings is not the pervue of only one political point of view.

Is New Zealand's Green Party also "like a Teabagger"?

"Open Bank Resolution (OBR) is Finance Minister Bill English’s favoured option dealing with a major bank failure.
If a bank fails under OBR, all depositors will have their savings reduced overnight to fund the bank’s bail out."

Bill English is proposing a Cyprus-style solution for managing bank failure here in New Zealand -
a solution that will see small depositors lose some of their savings to fund big bank bailouts,"
said Green Party Co-leader Dr Russel Norman.
http://www.voxy.co.nz/politics/national-planning-cyprus-style-solution-greens/5/150410

[snot]

61. Thank you, dixiegrrrrl!

Some of us have worked hard, saved, never relied on the gov or anyone else, lost large chunks of savings in 2008 never regained, etc.

And now that we're old, face the prospect of what's left being looted.

[Ruby the Liberal]

50. ROFL!

That is hilarious. Teabagger? Do you even know what those people believe? DG is about as far from that as is even possible. These concerns are real - protect the banks at all costs.

Oh, and welcome to DU. Enjoy your stay.

[quaker bill]

52. It already happened here

I inherited 700 shares in a bankrupt S&L because my maternal grandmother invested in an uninsured CD to get a higher interest rate. Since it was uninsured, when the S&L went broke, it was converted to shares of untradable and unlisted stock. About 10 years after she passed, the thing came out of bankruptcy. The shares had value and could be sold, which I did immediately. I believe I got 20 cents on her original dollar. The insured depositors got 100 cents on the dollar, the uninsured got valueless stock certificates. This really happened here in the US.

[amandabeech]

59. Under US law, if a bank is insolvent, it is either taken over by another bank

or closed.

If it's closed, you're only guaranteed to get back money in insured accounts.

That's been the law for a very long time.

A couple of years ago, a largish bank on the West Coast was insolvent and closed. No other financial institution wanted it, so the FDIC had to wind it down.

All accounts subject to $250,000 FDIC insurance were paid. All other deposits received 60 cents on the dollar.

The thing is, if a bank is a subsidiary corporation of some giant octopus-like financial corporation (like Citibank or JP Morgan, etc.), it is possible for the head of the octopus to go bankrupt but the bank subsidiary to remain solvent because subsidiary corporations are separate for most legal purposes.

As I read the FDIC/English bank regulator piece, it is proposal for how to have a bankruptcy of the octopus's head, while preserving the solvent bank subsidiary and some other subsidiaries that are solvent and have roles that are important to the economy at large. One problem when the big financial companies started to wobble was that the FDIC did not have the authority or a plan to wind them up, which helped the crooks in charge make the argument that they had to be fully bailed out. It is possible that if one of these things goes down again, a progressive administration might actually let the FDIC keep the bank going and wind down or sell the rest of it.

[snot]

62. Did you live through and follow the S&L crisis?

Insolvent banking institutions were liquidated. Those who ran them were prosecuted. Those who owned them lost. Depositors, who were and who are still the least able to monitor or protect themselves from possible bank insolvency, were protected.

We followed the rules, and liquidated, prosecuted, etc. Lots of people went to jail; and the economy recovered within 4 to 6 years, depending how you count. Look up William K. Black for details.

By contrast, today: virtually no liquidations or prosecutions; and 4 years out from the bottom, recovery at best still a will o' the wisp.

The rules are in shambles; place no hope in them.

[dixiegrrrrl]

72. Exactly.

Plus the FDIC was stating, a couple of years ago, that it did not have enough funds to pay insured depositors because the banks, which are supposed to pay for the insurance, were not contributing to the FDIC.

[amandabeech]

76. The fund was very low after the rash of bank failures in the wake of the Great Recession.

Dodd Frank mandated that the deposit fund be replenished by additional levys. You can get more details on the plan at this link.

http://www.fdic.gov/deposit/insurance/index.html

In the event that the current plan does not result in a sufficient DIF, there will undoubtedly be a move on in Congress and in the White House to pass laws, not just resolutions which have been passed, to put the full faith and credit of the U.S. government behind the FDIC. That would mean finding the money somewhere and perhaps the sale of more Treasury bonds.

I don't deny that a big, big "Black Swan" event could topple the system, but my best guess is that the US is not in nearly as bad a shape as Cyprus.

You obviously disagree, but that's your right.

[dixiegrrrrl]

78. Amanda..I don't disagree that Dodd-Frank mandated additional levys.

I just don't tend to trust the bank's record of honest book keeping.
I DO believe that the banks have been working like crazy to get themselves re-capitalized
and I believe there is some pushback from the states to earn some easy money suing the banks.

[amandabeech]

75. So what do you think of this reg from the FDIC about the three

types of resolution, the second one of which results in a haircut to deposits above the insurance limit of $250,000?

http://www.fdic.gov/bank/historical/reshandbook/ch2procs.pdf

The deposits (liabilities) and assets (loans, esp. performing loans) are sold to solvent institutions and the rest of the assets are sold off and creditors, which include the uninsured portion of large accounts, are paid, usually something.

According to this piece, the FDIC chooses the resolution method that will result in the least cost to the deposit insurance fund.

[amandabeech]

77. Yes, snot, I did live through the S&L crisis.

One of my former colleagues went to work for the RTC, actually.

Bill Black is one of my heroes. Had I not been in bed with a nasty virus on election day, I was going to right him in for VP behind Bernie Sanders as pres. I live in a deep blue state, so there would have been no harm to the top of the ticket.

I would welcome any and all prosecutions. That there have been none is a travesty.

[xtraxritical]

18. Avoid all of this by putting your money in a brokerage account such as Charles Schwab.

They will issue you checks and a debit/credit card and many many tools to manage your money. They indemnify your funds. Even better Schwab reimburses you for all transaction fees (such as surcharges at ATMs). There are many many other choices of brokers too.

[quakerboy]

27. And what makes you think that that is safer?

An IOU is still an IOU. Its meaningless paper if whoever holds the actual cash vanishes. Or just refuses to pay.

[xtraxritical]

28. They're not a "bank" and are subject to SEC rules. Also, unlike banks they have a fiduciary

responsibility. Even if it were as risky as the too big to jail banks at least they bend over backwards to keep me happy, big banks don't. I also use a small local independent bank and they are terrific too. Stay away from the big franchise banks, for sure.

[Art_from_Ark]

30. Personally, I lost confidence in brokerage houses a long time ago

This is but one reason why:

http://www.georgiasecuritiesfraud.com/fraud-pages/brokerage-fraud.html

[AnotherMcIntosh]

44. Aren't there court opinions which held that banks have had fiduciary responsibilities?

The Florida Bar Journal published a relatively recent article which covers this and also cites a number of court opinions dealing with banks.

As noted by the aricle, the answer can involve grey areas when a relationship is one other than

"one of the classic relationships that impose fiduciary duties, such as the attorney/client, executor/heir, guardian/ward, agent/principal, trustee/beneficiary, or corporate officer/shareholder".

http://www.floridabar.org/DIVCOM/JN/JNJournal01.nsf/c0d731e03de9828d852574580042ae7a/a90812c2b64922f9852576d5007366ed!OpenDocument&Highlight=0,*

[snot]

64. Sure. Just like the Cyprus banks.

[dixiegrrrrl]

67. There are LAWS which say the FDIC is supposed to step in BEFORE a bank gets into deep trouble

and rescue the bank by replacing management, selling bank off to a stronger bank, etc.

There are LAWS which say the Federal Reserve ( which Turbo Timmy used to head) is supposed to be supervising banks for any signs of trouble and stepping in before there is an implosion.

There are LAWS which say Money Management funds are supposed to unwind in a certain order,
which means depositors get their money back before owners and partners and shareholders do..

when was the last time THAT happened to funds like MFGlobal.

There are LAWS which say if you are going to foreclose on a house, you have to provide proof of title AND loan to the court....yet millions of foreclosures happened without that proof, esp. in non-judicial states.

There are LAWS that say if you buy mortgages from a company, you are supposed to get the actual mortgage papers with the sale, and pass them on when you sell packages of mortgages to someone else...
now we find out that Countrywide routinely destroyed their loan paperwork, was never passed on to Bank of America, who sold tranches of mortgages to various funds,

but the LAWS that said the funds which bought the mortgage bonds had to have the actual mortgages in them,
well, golly gee whiz, that never happened either.

So to save the banks, the Government had Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac step in and buy the now worthless mortgage bonds, ( well, in computerized form, since there was no paperwork) with tax payer money.

The Constitution says Rule of Law is to apply everywhere.

Look around.....do YOU see rule of law applying to "the little people"?

[font style=color:#CC0000;] But whenever we see things done wildly, but taken tamely, then the State is growing insane...
G.K.Chesterton[/font]

[AnotherMcIntosh]

69. See #67 below.

[Chuuku Davis]

86. "subject to SEC rules"

Now that made me laugh
SEC rules would NEVER be broken

[amandabeech]

33. Unless Schwab has a FDIC insured bank as an operating subsidiary,

your entire deposit may be lost if Schwab goes down. It would be prudent to ask tough questions about any indemnity that they might offer, because it may be backed up by something that is likely to lose value in a situation in which Schwab would go down. For example, the indemnity might consist of credit default swaps.

The SEC does not offer any kind of insurance on any deposit. It is a regulatory agency, only.

[KoKo]

41. Plus the SEC failed us mightily in not spotting what was going on

and investigating long before the crash. They claimed it was "lack of funding for staff"...but, some of the fraud was so huge that "lack of staff" has been questioned by those investigating after the crash.

[Yo_Mama]

53. Then you don't even have FDIC insurance

Corzine's lot are still going begging for funds.

That's not safer. Note that even in Cyprus, the end result is that the insured depositors didn't lose their funds.

[dixiegrrrrl]

73. Note that in Cyprus, those insured depositors WERE GOING TO lose their funds.

The original plan was to take money from ALL depositors, and the bank had stated that since it was called a "tax"
it was not covered as an insurable loss.
There was a great outroar, and so they came up with Plan B, which was to take money from those who had over the insured amount of 250,000.
That was the ONLY reason insured depositors did not lose their funds.

Note that this is important not because of the DETAILS, but because a country decided that banks could rob their depositors.

[Yo_Mama]

84. No, other countries decided that regulators could rob their bank depositors

And the country itself REFUSED.

There was not one vote for it!

[ms.smiler]

22. The very same banksters who crashed the world economy remain at their desks, don’t they?

No one has been held accountable for their actions. Our government won’t lay a hand on anyone of stature or importance in that industry. They can launder money for drug cartels and terrorist organizations and our government will only impose negligible fines.

Given that the industry functions the same as it did prior to the financial crisis of 2008, with the very same crooks in place who can act with impunity, how likely do you suppose it is that they will again lead their organizations and the industry to another crisis point?

I consider it quite likely. Nothing was learned and nothing has changed.

And when the next crisis arrives, what assurances do I have that the rules won’t change? Am I expected to believe that unlike the Cypriots, I won’t ever retire one Friday night to awaken on Saturday morning to learn the banks were closed and the rules were changed?

Depositors in Cyprus never expected a day when their deposits could be exchanged for bonds in failed banks, just as Americans don’t expect such a situation. Yet it happened.

I know how our system is supposed to function and it shall right up to the day when those in the industry and our government determine a reason to change the rules and I doubt they would change in my favor.

The government will again do everything possible to protect the banksters at our expense.

[Ruby the Liberal]

51. Bonds would have been a better option

The bondholders were actually protected in this scheme. No, the uninsured "haircuts" are being given equity stakes. Not a good place to be...

[snot]

63. Ay-yup.

[ms.smiler]

23. dixiegrrrrl, I just found this same article on AlterNet

http://www.alternet.org/economy/think-your-money-safe-think-again-confiscation-scheme-planned-us-and-uk-depositors?page=0%2C0&akid=10252.315804.i5IK15&rd=1&src=newsletter816391&t=5

The entire article can easily be read without an account or log in.

[dixiegrrrrl]

24. Oh, very good. That will make it easier for anyone who is truly interested.

thanks...

[dkf]

25. That is something that the Europeans exposed with Cyprus...

Once they explained it, it made perfect sense.

[AdHocSolver]

29. Implementing such a scheme would lead to world-wide economic collapse.

All trade in goods and services would collapse. People would find it difficult, if not impossible, to pay their bills.

This scheme is nothing more than an economic doomsday machine.

Anyone subscribing to such an irresponsible plan is a lunatic.

[dixiegrrrrl]

31. Which makes me wonder why Cyprus did it and New Zealand is proposing it.

Sure is a good thing that we do not have lunatics and financial terrorists in charge of our economy.
Whew!

[Oilwellian]

34. LOL, indeed

USA! USA! USA!

[AdHocSolver]

38. The short answer to your question.

Global economic collapse would eliminate all middle class influence and allow the One Percent to set up a global dictatorship of the 99 percent.

The last time the One Percent attempted to achieve this goal was during World War II. That turned out to be too messy. US bankers and Wall Street did business with all sides, but the Axis powers riled up the masses who fought back, and the attempt failed.

The current attempt at global domination has been carried out more subtly.

The tools are the capture of global trade using government puppets to make corporate sponsored trade and financial agreements such as NAFTA and the World Trade Organization.

There is the setting up and taking over of central banks, such as the Federal Reserve Bank, beholden to the bankers and Wall Street.

There are the huge tax breaks to the wealthy and corporations, and the ability to hide income in offshore tax havens.

Let's not forget war profiteering (Iraq, Afghanistan), exorbitant health care costs, stolen elections, corrupt politicians, privatization of education, and more.

This is part of the big picture. The powers that be will give in temporarily on social issues. However, don't be fooled. Once the economy collapses, and the dictatorship is instituted, the One Percent will revert to their draconian agenda.

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

35. I would think there would be blood in the streets if that happens

but then I was shocked by the fact that most Americans didn't demand the immediate prosecution of the hedge fund swindlers that nearly wrecked the economy or demand the heads of Chimpco when WMD weren't found in Iraq.

[dixiegrrrrl]

36. The fact there has been no fallout is encouraging the plan writers

Dutch Finance Minister Jeroen Dijsselbloem, the chair of the Eurogroup of euro-zone finance ministers,
made the now famous remark of using Cyprus "as a template" and said one reason he felt that way was because
there was no loud outcry/protest from Cypriots.
He later tried to back out the "template" remark, but none of the denials issued by those in the European Central Bank
(ECB) were very convincing.

Amazing that John Corzine could just walk away after the massive MFGlobal swindle, and not one charge has been filed.

The corruption is so pervasive, at all levels, that I think most people have no idea where to start in protesting.

As for Chimpco, remember that Pelosi squashed any protests by saying "impeachment was off the table."....

And later, when people DID rise up and protest TARP, our Congress simply waited a day or 2 and then voted for it anyhow.

I am amazed at how many folks STILL do their banking ( checking and savings) at the TBTF banks.

[KoKo]

42. A-men, dixiegrrrrl! John Corzine..(not seen or heard from)

could it be because he was in charge of Bundling Donations OPs for the Obama Campaign II? Couldn't let THAT GUY go down...Nope..he was "too connected, to fail."

[snot]

66. +!

[snot]

65. you go, DG!

[WillyT]

37. HUGE K & R !!!

[Fumesucker]

45. Cyprus is a trial balloon

If it goes up and is not shot down in dramatic fashion you can count on an entire fleet of zeppelins along the same lines.

[dixiegrrrrl]

48. Yep..first place my brain went...

and that was before New Zealand went public with their discussion of doing it.

[BeHereNow]

55. SO glad you posted this DG!!!

I read the same article yesterday on the ICH list.
Posted a link to it which I now know was not necessary, as it is the same article as the one you
provided in your OP.

I was so upset by it that I called my advisor and asked him to call me
with his take on what moves to make to convert as much cash as possible
to hard assets.

I started doing that over a decade ago and have not looked back once.
I just want to continue to do so and just keep enough cash in our credit union
to pay monthly bills.

The PTB are out to take everything, and there is no stopping them.
It is important that people are aware of this FDIC-BOE movement so they can
keep as much of their assets safe as possible.

BHN

[BeHereNow]

56. More from Reuters- Move your money people. It CAN happen here.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/03/29/us-cyprus-parliament-idUSBRE92G03I20130329

&quot Reuters) - Big depositors in Cyprus's largest bank stand to lose far more than initially feared under a European Union rescue package to save the island from bankruptcy, a source with direct knowledge of the terms said on Friday.

Under conditions expected to be announced on Saturday, depositors in Bank of Cyprus will get shares in the bank worth 37.5 percent of their deposits over 100,000 euros, the source told Reuters, while the rest of their deposits may never be paid back."

BHN

[dixiegrrrrl]

57. Better safe than sorry, that's what my Grandma taught me.

She raised her family thru the Depression and "The Big One" ( WW2).
Her motto was sort of "Don't trust AND verify"....
"Watch what they do, not what they say"

I gotta say, there was no living in denial with her around...nope.

[BeHereNow]

58. Because I know you are capable of connecting the dots- here is one for you.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/inside-the-market/insider-buying-of-gold-stocks-surges-to-multi-year-highs/article10312788/

Enjoy.

BHN

[BeHereNow]

60. Kick n/t

bhn

[bhikkhu]

68. I have to say, the "Cyprus Solution" seemed pretty equitable to me

Given a failed economy, they opted to take a percentage of the deposits of the wealthy to save the system as a whole. That impoverishes no one, takes nothing from the poor, and takes only from the wealthy what the wealthy could afford (or could manage to afford, given the amounts - perhaps a little downscaling if one had large expenses from multiple holdings).

In any case, the two largest effects are - income inequality is improved, and a failed economy is put closer to balance.

Even "taking" part isn't exactly that, as cash was translated to bank shares. Which would mean that a large depositor now has a certain interest in the success of the economy in general, which can't be said of many wealthy here.

[dixiegrrrrl]

70. Get back to me in 3 months when you know the value of those bank shares.

did you forget the original plan was to confiscate EVERY depositor's money?
Under and over 250,000, insured or not?
and the government at the time claimed since it was not a "bank loss" that insurance was not in effect?

Do you realize that some of the "wealthy" depositors are businesses which support the economy?
and by taking those deposits, the businesses have no way to stay alive?

That "system as a whole" which you identify as being saved, is the bank's system, seeing as how it was actually broke, it benfitted from stealing the depositor's money.

In an ordinary bank bust, all the money is ...gone., and the depositors who are not insured lose out.
In Cyprus, all the uninsured money was taken by the bank, to use as a bribe to the Troika so it could borrow
even more money to cover up its bankruptcy.
It did this by taking the stolen money and putting into a bad bank, then shutting down the bad bank, and designating the other bank as a "good bank" which continues to act like a bank.
The stolen money was then given to the "loan shark"..the Troika, the ECB.
That ain't success of an economy...that is kicking the can further down the street into a blind alley.
If you can't afford to pay the loan shark except by stealing, then you have a problem with earning the rest of the money you need to live.
Hitting the wall is a certainty, it just puts off the inevitable.

"the two largest effects are - income inequality is improved, and a failed economy is put closer to balance. "

Income inequality is NOT improved, since the closed bank employees are now jobless,
the small businesses which lost their operating capital are now closed,
and bank rationing means many people cannot make full payments for their mortgages and bills, thus are in deep financial trouble.
I cannot fathom how this brings a failed economy closer to balance.
It has the opposite effect.

[marybourg]

79. What you are setting forth as facts are completely untrue. You're

entitled to your own opinions, but not to your own facts.

[dixiegrrrrl]

81. which facts are you calling untrue?

[marybourg]

82. All. Starting with this untruth:

"did you forget the original plan was to confiscate EVERY depositor's money". UNTRUE.

[dixiegrrrrl]

83. Sorry, facts are facts, and its not only true, but has a lot of news citations.

Are you unaware of what happened the week of March 17th?
I was posting about it from the get go...

first post, here, with cititations:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022517284

Eurozone leaders and the IMF on Saturday announced an unprecedented levy on all deposits in Cypriot banks as the sting in the tail of a 10-billion-euro bailout for the near-bankrupt government in Nicosia.

The levy will see deposits of more than 100,000 euros in Cypriot banks hit with a 9.9 percent charge when lenders re-open their doors on Tuesday after a scheduled bank holiday on Monday.
Under that threshold and the levy drops to 6.75 percent.

Wiki has entire sequence of events as it played out:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012%E2%80%932013_Cypriot_financial_crisis

[BeHereNow]

92. DG- Why do you waste your breath on fools?

Very few "get it," spend your time and energy on THEM.

BHN

[Ruby the Liberal]

96. Why do you think this was such a huge deal?

First time since banking insurance was created that they were threatening to pull 6.75% of INSURED deposits - and before they even let the ink dry, New Zealand was already floating trial balloons about following suit.

Maybe pay a little attention to what is going on before you start ranting at people? You know the old saying...

[grahamhgreen]

74. We need a a special prosecutor.

[marybourg]

80. To do . . ?

[madville]

87. I've been converting a portion of my liquid savings to physical silver and gold

As a hedge against collapse. Mainly 90% silver U.S. currency at the moment, like pre-1965 quarters (worth around $5 each at today's silver prices).

[BeHereNow]

89. Ah, someone who "gets it"

Yes, yes, and yes.
BHN

[smirkymonkey]

93. Thanks for this.

This is terrifying.

[dixiegrrrrl]

94. Apparently Canada now has same plan.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/111632967

and New Zealand

New Zealand considers Cyprus-style banking failure solution
http://rt.com/business/new-zealand-cyprus-style-banking-failure-solution-477/

[Octafish]

95. They should do this in the Grand Caymans and Switzerland.

That's where the REAL money is...the stuff absconded over the past 33 years, thanks to Reaganomics and the BFEE.

Thank you for the heads-up, dixiegrrrrl! These are atomic gangster times.

PS: Seeking Alpha has been correct on most things, including the money laundering and all the rest, which is more than ABCNNBCBSFauxNoiseNutwork has ever been.

[Skip Intro]

97. They'll have to round up our guns first.

Oh, wait...