Bailout of Cyprus to cost depositors 10% immediately
- Thread starter Caput Lupinum
- Start date
Matthew 26:14
New Member
Unlike a sharemarket correction or precious metal drop of 10%, a bank tax of 10% offers no future upside to regain losses. Eg. If shares drop 10%, there is an expectation that they can rise 10% and hence over time you have no loss. A 10% loss on cash offers no future rise so the loss is in fact a real loss, not a paper loss.
Ooh.............. that sounds interesting! This thread seems to be taking up some room it seems..... Wonder if it because of all the crime going on?
By the way, i'm watching all this latest news like a Hawk...... Thank god for the Internets!
Bring on the 19th of March 2013 ASAP!
By the way, i'm watching all this latest news like a Hawk...... Thank god for the Internets!
Bring on the 19th of March 2013 ASAP!
Its almost business opening hours for banks in Eastern Europe; lets see if we see a contagious retail deposit frenzy in Europe today.
Matthew 26:14
New Member
If Cyprus takes 10% of money out of bank accounts and there's limited fallout, it will give the EU/ECB the confidence to do the same in other stressed countries like Portugal, Spain, Greece, Italy etc.
If I had money in any Mediterranean country's bank I'd be lining up 9AM Monday to get it all out.
The purpose of a bank is not to make money, but as a safe place to store it. If there's risk that some or all will be lost, you'd be getting the hell outa there.
If I had money in any Mediterranean country's bank I'd be lining up 9AM Monday to get it all out.
The purpose of a bank is not to make money, but as a safe place to store it. If there's risk that some or all will be lost, you'd be getting the hell outa there.
TheEnd said:
You really should be careful what you wish for.
It just might come true and have consequences you never imagined or wanted.
In any case I can't see the European bank allowing a real bank run to occur - they will provide all the physical cash wanted and just keep printing more if necessary.
If it comes down to a choice between bank run and printing money, the printing will win every time.
B
Byron
Guest
trew said:
Or they will keep the doors locked indefinately.
I believe that is what happened in Argentina at the beginning of their financial crisis in the 90s (from memory). People could no longer get physical access to their money.
B
Byron
Guest
bordsilver said:According to the source of absolute truth (also known as the lazy bastards source):radiobirdman said:bordsilver said:Gandhi
One example out of thousands. and i dont think it was as peacfull as you think.
At least you didnt say Nelson (im a terrorist) Mandela
- The Revolutions of 1989: Even though many of these revolutions did not take place entirely in 1989, they are usually grouped together as such.
19871989 The Singing Revolution a cycle of singing mass demonstrations, followed by a living chain across the Baltic states (Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia), known as the Baltic Way.
1989 The Peaceful Revolution in the German Democratic Republic leading to the fall of the Berlin Wall
1989 The Velvet Revolution the bloodless revolution in Czechoslovakia leading to the downfall of the communist government there.
1989 The bloodless revolution in Bulgaria that resulted in the downfall of the communist government.
...but I can't really be stuffed double checking how "nonviolent" they really were. Stick with Gandhi as the best example.
Edit: The "appropriate" level of violence versus nonviolence is always a cost benefit analysis on a case by case basis. Historically, violence has probably been used more often to change the boundaries of an existing regime rather than to dismantle an existing one from within. Sweeping generalisations are invariably wrong (including this one )
Romania and Yugoslavia were not peaceful don't forget. Also China in 89, peaceful protest didn't work.
I think Mathew 26:14 is right. Contagion is the risk here... the precedent has been set.
Rather than this strengthening the Euro, anyone in a country with even the slightest hint of instability will be thinking their saving could be raided at anytime and start sending their cash off-shore into other currencies.
Anyone in the PIIGS, Portugal, the eastern ex-soviet satellite states would all be very nervous at the mo...
Rather than this strengthening the Euro, anyone in a country with even the slightest hint of instability will be thinking their saving could be raided at anytime and start sending their cash off-shore into other currencies.
Anyone in the PIIGS, Portugal, the eastern ex-soviet satellite states would all be very nervous at the mo...
B
Byron
Guest
Clawhammer said:
The P in PIIGS stands for Portugal.
Also this is not a done deal as the proposed tax grab has not passed the Cyrpiot Parliament.
If it does pass i predict violence on a huge scale. Violence against the banks and against govt authorities. Greek Cypriots are not likely to just grumble about it as we would do here.
If it doesn't pass, Germany may not fund the bailout. Then it gets interesting.
AngloSaxon
Active Member
bordsilver said:According to the source of absolute truth (also known as the lazy bastards source):radiobirdman said:bordsilver said:Gandhi
One example out of thousands. and i dont think it was as peacfull as you think.
At least you didnt say Nelson (im a terrorist) Mandela
- The Revolutions of 1989: Even though many of these revolutions did not take place entirely in 1989, they are usually grouped together as such.
19871989 The Singing Revolution a cycle of singing mass demonstrations, followed by a living chain across the Baltic states (Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia), known as the Baltic Way.
1989 The Peaceful Revolution in the German Democratic Republic leading to the fall of the Berlin Wall
1989 The Velvet Revolution the bloodless revolution in Czechoslovakia leading to the downfall of the communist government there.
1989 The bloodless revolution in Bulgaria that resulted in the downfall of the communist government.
...but I can't really be stuffed double checking how "nonviolent" they really were. Stick with Gandhi as the best example.
Edit: The "appropriate" level of violence versus nonviolence is always a cost benefit analysis on a case by case basis. Historically, violence has probably been used more often to change the boundaries of an existing regime rather than to dismantle an existing one from within. Sweeping generalisations are invariably wrong (including this one )
Don't forget though that by then the Soviets who propped up all the communist regimes of the Warsaw Pact were themselves on the edge of collapse. If the Soviets were as strong then as they were before Reagan began confronting them at the start of the decade, the peaceful revolutions would not have happened. Or the Soviets would have just rolled a few divisions of T-80s into their capitals and crushed anyone in their way - Hungary 1956 all over again. In the 1980s I was friends with Germans (Bavarians I think) who fled after 1956, they still lived in fear of the Soviets in 1984 from the other side of the world. Because in their eyes, violence worked.
I'll add to Romania and Yugoslavia's end of communism experience being bloody - Albania. A country that tore itself apart to get to the same place with hardly a shot fired in anger.
hawkeye said:radiobirdman said:hawkeye said:
Sh*t i dont have all day. 99.9% of all overthrown oppressive Regimes, Monarchys, governments,Tribal chiefs.
has been violent
Dont they teach history anymore
They were all replaced with oppressive regimes weren't they? Or haven't you taken a look at the world today?
Even the American example. Only 80 or so years later you had a civil war there and a couple hundred years later a government far worse than the King was from whom they rebelled.
Violence begets violence. Either violence is OK or it isn't. Most people understand violence is not OK. What we need to do is convince people that violence is not OK just because you have the label of government. That they are people just like us with no more rights or privileges than anyone else. Then the cycle of violence that is the history of the world can be broken.
Yes all Regimes are oppressive even the so called good ones.
By history i ment the last 3000 years or so, more violent than not, and the next 3000 years will be the same .
but we will probably be back to sticks and stones by then :lol:
Byron said:
The vote in parliament is pointless. If the vote doesn't pass, they can take the money anyway.
"Depositor Repression" May Spread To Swizterland, EURCHF Spikes
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-03-18/depositor-repression-may-spread-swizterland-eurchf-spikes
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-03-18/depositor-repression-may-spread-swizterland-eurchf-spikes
More then one way to skin a cat... err I mean fleece the sheeple. A truly insane world the one we find ourselves inhabiting