General Discussion

muriel_volestrangler

(106,164 posts)

24. Here's the paragraph that Benton refers to just above

Tue Apr 9, 2013, 06:22 PM

Apr 2013

47 Similarly, because the group remains solvent, retail or corporate depositors should not have an incentive to “run” from the firm under resolution insofar as their banking arrangements, transacted at the operating company level, remain unaffected. In order to achieve this, the authorities recognize the need for effective communication to depositors, making it clear that their deposits will be protected.

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

I think Ellen Brown has assumed that where the document talks about 'unsecured debt', it means deposits. But there's no reason to think that is does, and, with that paragraph, and the whole point of the document being how to keep a bank running, rather than having it collapse and taking everything with it, it's clear that the document it talking about how to keep deposits safe, while converting bonds and similar debt instruments into new shares in the bank (while the old shares lose all their rights, and therefore value, since shareholders lose first).

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

59 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

THIS scares me: from Jonathon Turley's website [View all] snappyturtle Apr 2013 OP

Can you eat stocks? demwing Apr 2013 #1

Doesn't matter how big of a fire I build ... Kennah Apr 2013 #54

Bank Of America Dumps $75 Trillion In Derivatives On U.S. Taxpayers With Federal Approval OnyxCollie Apr 2013 #2

I so appreciate you posting these links. I had read about this and it, too, is snappyturtle Apr 2013 #3

It seems likely to happen. OnyxCollie Apr 2013 #5

Meanwhile, Wikipedia says that "In nominal terms, the total 2011 GWP was around US$69.11 trillion." Occulus Apr 2013 #6

Like an aneurysm about to burst. nt OnyxCollie Apr 2013 #7

I'm starting to think that letting it all fall apart is the only possible path to a lasting remedy. Occulus Apr 2013 #9

Misleading figure for a couple of reasons: geek tragedy Apr 2013 #11

Glad someone has a clue. Lucky Luciano Apr 2013 #35

Financial transactions are not part of GDP MindPilot Apr 2013 #16

The notional amount of their derivs was about $75T. Lucky Luciano Apr 2013 #34

your math isn't wrong. Volaris Apr 2013 #40

uh Occulus Apr 2013 #41

sorry. But on a brighter note, think of it this way: Volaris Apr 2013 #43

Hmmm. Then how about this tactic. Occulus Apr 2013 #45

See, THAT'S why I come here, Volaris Apr 2013 #46

You're welcome. Occulus Apr 2013 #47

You always think this couldn't possibly happen mercymechap Apr 2013 #4

It's not so much that any one of us would be a mother lode for a bank but snappyturtle Apr 2013 #13

If/when it happens I'm sure PBO will propose a policy to "protect" the VERY VERY VERY poor..... forestpath Apr 2013 #8

A work program OnyxCollie Apr 2013 #10

A FEMA camp program, more likely. WinkyDink Apr 2013 #50

ACLU: Debtors� prisons are alive and well in (Ohio) OnyxCollie Apr 2013 #53

I'm reading the actual FDIC BOE plan and am a substantial portion of the way through it, Benton D Struckcheon Apr 2013 #12

...and just finished it. Benton D Struckcheon Apr 2013 #14

Well, in the bank's view, the depositors are safe as they get stock in lieu of $$. snappyturtle Apr 2013 #15

No, that's not what it says. Benton D Struckcheon Apr 2013 #17

Actually the FDIC-BOE article says from the beginning snappyturtle Apr 2013 #27

I'm not addressing the article, I'm addressing the primary source, the actual plan. Benton D Struckcheon Apr 2013 #30

I was using the same source as you. Unfortunately, I used the term 'article'. nt snappyturtle Apr 2013 #37

Where does it "say from the beginning that depositers are unsecured creditors"? muriel_volestrangler Apr 2013 #57

It doesn't. What I meant to say was that from the beginning to the end of snappyturtle Apr 2013 #58

Here's the paragraph that Benton refers to just above muriel_volestrangler Apr 2013 #24

It's a post Cyprus interpretation of the document that doesn't stand up to even cursory scrutiny, Benton D Struckcheon Apr 2013 #32

Well, it's not 'obvious' to me. Maybe you should also read snappyturtle Apr 2013 #36

According to the CRA amendments to the Gramm-Leach Act, OnyxCollie Apr 2013 #18

Read that again Benton D Struckcheon Apr 2013 #19

90 billion > 75 trillion OnyxCollie Apr 2013 #22

That's notional value Benton D Struckcheon Apr 2013 #23

Richard Wolff is concerned OnyxCollie Apr 2013 #28

Thanks for posting these links too...love me some Richard Wolff. I find snappyturtle Apr 2013 #29

That's just an appeal to authority Benton D Struckcheon Apr 2013 #31

Richard Wolff is an economics professor. OnyxCollie Apr 2013 #33

You still have not acknowledged the difference between derivative notional and derivative value. Lucky Luciano Apr 2013 #38

Well, what's the difference then? OnyxCollie Apr 2013 #39

I would estimate that dividing by 25 is about right. Lucky Luciano Apr 2013 #42

Even dividing by 25 is still a shitload of money. nt OnyxCollie Apr 2013 #44

Remember that is gross. If I have two trades on the book with you... Lucky Luciano Apr 2013 #52

Is the plan you are reading titled dixiegrrrrl Apr 2013 #25

My bank is so nice... fadedrose Apr 2013 #20

Literal one would be just plain silly as Satan's minions aren't likely to catch fire. Kennah Apr 2013 #55

It certainly would screw the majority of Social Security recipients, who Cleita Apr 2013 #21

Gee, one might almost think that was part of the plan. WinkyDink Apr 2013 #51

Theoretically, the FDIC insures deposits. JDPriestly Apr 2013 #26

I've done more reading on this doc by the FDIC and BOE. snappyturtle Apr 2013 #59

K&R DeSwiss Apr 2013 #48

THAT would finally = revolution. Bankers would be murdered. WinkyDink Apr 2013 #49

Madame Guillotine, please pick up your voicemail. Kennah Apr 2013 #56