Q: Hi 5i Team,
This is an unusual question and feel free to take a pass on it, as it might not fall within the definition of the service you offer, and I would fully understand. Also, feel free, if answered to post or not.
There have been bank confiscations in Cyprus. And I believe, banking problems in other jurisdictions where the depositor has taken the hit. Rare, but they happen.
We were supposedly immune from such confiscation action by the rules and regulations of the banking industry, and also having relatively strong and stable economies and banking systems.
Since the Cyprus event, and the problems of the 2008 crash, according to articles in Canadian MoneySaver (May and June, 2013), the banking rules in the US and followed by Canada have been modified to allow for the backs to take money from their depositors, during an economic crisis, rather than rely on a government bail out.
This is not something that keeps me awake nights, but it does nag me as ... How does this make sense ?
I do not understand why the regulations were changed. Changes normally happen if there is a "really big reason to do so." In other words, If our economic and banking systems are in such great shape and are expected to be for the distant future, why change the rules ? The implication is that perhaps some sort of condition could occur that to save the "systems" (government budget and banking system), the investors will take the hit. (This also raises the option that ... Hey, why not just print money and give it to the banks as in the past - there was grumbling, but it did solve the problem).
I guess I am looking for a general comment on banks, safety of deposits, and why need to change regulations.
Thanks for the great service.
Jim,
This is an unusual question and feel free to take a pass on it, as it might not fall within the definition of the service you offer, and I would fully understand. Also, feel free, if answered to post or not.
There have been bank confiscations in Cyprus. And I believe, banking problems in other jurisdictions where the depositor has taken the hit. Rare, but they happen.
We were supposedly immune from such confiscation action by the rules and regulations of the banking industry, and also having relatively strong and stable economies and banking systems.
Since the Cyprus event, and the problems of the 2008 crash, according to articles in Canadian MoneySaver (May and June, 2013), the banking rules in the US and followed by Canada have been modified to allow for the backs to take money from their depositors, during an economic crisis, rather than rely on a government bail out.
This is not something that keeps me awake nights, but it does nag me as ... How does this make sense ?
I do not understand why the regulations were changed. Changes normally happen if there is a "really big reason to do so." In other words, If our economic and banking systems are in such great shape and are expected to be for the distant future, why change the rules ? The implication is that perhaps some sort of condition could occur that to save the "systems" (government budget and banking system), the investors will take the hit. (This also raises the option that ... Hey, why not just print money and give it to the banks as in the past - there was grumbling, but it did solve the problem).
I guess I am looking for a general comment on banks, safety of deposits, and why need to change regulations.
Thanks for the great service.
Jim,