Wealth 85 richest equals wealth 3.5 billion poorest.

[Keef]

I don't understand why people use large banks instead of local credit unions. @Dotini @Famine The only time you ever hear of financial problems it stems from a corporate bank, not a credit union.

 

[Dotini]

I don't understand why people use large banks instead of local credit unions. @Dotini @Famine The only time you ever hear of financial problems it stems from a corporate bank, not a credit union.

For one thing, deposits in banks are federally insured, while deposits in credit unions are insured by an association of credit unions. FWIW, I use a credit union.

But it appears to be a myth that there is much money in banks. A small amount of money is initially created by the Fed, from then on it is leveraged, loaned out, and finally commercialized. That means when you take out a loan for $100,000, the bank really doesn't have it to loan. The $100,000 is accounted as newly created money on federal ledgers. It exists only as your debt. It is part of a great bubble.

We are now at a point of so much global bad debt, that the Fed - and US taxpayers - are being urged by Lagarde and the EU to go on the hook to prop up all the world's failing states, currencies and economies. It's like shoveling sand against the tide, and it will break any man's back. http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/Latest-News-Wires/2014/0126/Christine-Lagarde-Beware-of-deflation

 

[Keef]

Yeah, I get the jist of the whole fractional-reserve system. It makes for good numbers, except that the numbers don't exist half the time. I'm just talking from a personal banking perspective, why on earth would anybody trust their money to a corporation with Federal insurance? Especially when the government is nigh bankrupt and their computers print 0's like its nobody's business.

 

[Dotini]

Yeah, I get the jist of the whole fractional-reserve system. It makes for good numbers, except that the numbers don't exist half the time. I'm just talking from a personal banking perspective, why on earth would anybody trust their money to a corporation with Federal insurance? Especially when the government is nigh bankrupt and their computers print 0's like its nobody's business.

The theory is that federal insurance is better than no insurance, or insurance by Smith & Wesson. When the government can no longer stand by its commitments, it means it is defunct, all bets are off, and chaos rules the realm of men.

 

[Crash]

For one thing, deposits in banks are federally insured, while deposits in credit unions are insured by an association of credit unions.

Credit union deposits are Federally insured with the full faith and credit of the US Government via the NCUA much like the FDIC insurance with bank deposits.

 

[Dotini]

Credit union deposits are Federally insured with the full faith and credit of the US Government via the NCUA much like the FDIC insurance with bank deposits.

From the article cited: " The NCUSIF was created without any tax dollars, capitalized solely by credit unions."

 

[Danoff]

I don't understand why people use large banks instead of local credit unions. @Dotini @Famine The only time you ever hear of financial problems it stems from a corporate bank, not a credit union.

Availability.

With a national bank, you can access your funds from anywhere in the country.

 

[Keef]

Availability.

With a national bank, you can access your funds from anywhere in the country.

With my credit union I have access via any STAR or Plus ATM in the country and overseas.

 

[Danoff]

With my credit union I have access via any STAR or Plus ATM in the country and overseas.

Let's say you wanted to buy a car in Texas in person with a cashier's check. How would you go about doing that?

 

[Pupik]

Most credit unions, if they're accredited, operate much in the same way for each other. Again, usually not a problem.

 

[Keef]

Let's say you wanted to buy a car in Texas in person with a cashier's check. How would you go about doing that?

I'm not sure. What I can tell you is that the last time I (my buddy) took a cashier's check for $2,000 from one bank to Chase to get it cashed, they refused. Apparently cashier's checks are not as binding as a paycheck which I find idiotic. The check has been certified by another bank for cryin' out loud. What a uselessly non-transferable form of payment. I'll stick to either credit or large cash sums from now on.

 

[Danoff]

I'm not sure. What I can tell you is that the last time I (my buddy) took a cashier's check for $2,000 from one bank to Chase to get it cashed, they refused. Apparently cashier's checks are not as binding as a paycheck which I find idiotic. The check has been certified by another bank for cryin' out loud. What a uselessly non-transferable form of payment. I'll stick to either credit or large cash sums from now on.

Even for a car?

Seriously, this is a realistic scenario. You want to buy a car for, say $8k, from a private seller out of state. You're faced with a couple of options:

- Convince the seller to take a check. HA!
- Carry $8000 in cash to the other state in case the car checks out. Not optimal
- Carry $8000 cashier's check from your bank across state lines in case the car checks out. Better, but not optimal - especially if you haven't agreed on the sale price.
- Open an account with a national bank so that you can go get a cashier's check if the car checks out for the exact amount.

 

[HighSeasHoMastr]

Even for a car?

Seriously, this is a realistic scenario. You want to buy a car for, say $8k, from a private seller out of state. You're faced with a couple of options:

- Convince the seller to take a check. HA!
- Carry $8000 in cash to the other state in case the car checks out. Not optimal
- Carry $8000 cashier's check from your bank across state lines in case the car checks out. Better, but not optimal - especially if you haven't agreed on the sale price.
- Open an account with a national bank so that you can go get a cashier's check if the car checks out for the exact amount.

5- Use Paypal from any computer or mobile device.

 

[DK]

How did we get from wealth disparity to bank runs?

 

[Keef]

Even for a car?

Seriously, this is a realistic scenario. You want to buy a car for, say $8k, from a private seller out of state. You're faced with a couple of options:

- Convince the seller to take a check. HA!
- Carry $8000 in cash to the other state in case the car checks out. Not optimal
- Carry $8000 cashier's check from your bank across state lines in case the car checks out. Better, but not optimal - especially if you haven't agreed on the sale price.
- Open an account with a national bank so that you can go get a cashier's check if the car checks out for the exact amount.

If ye olde car dealership had one of those handy dandy card swipers like 95% of the the stores in this country I could simply use my debit card to pay for it. Instant transaction, card security is monitored by the bank, if it's lost or stolen it can be cancelled at a moment's notice, unauthorized charges are negated, etc. But no, ye olde dealership doesn't have a card swiper. The only place I know of around here that doesn't have a card swiper is the Hamburger Wagon and you can imagine why.

Clearly the price of cars doesn't have anything to do with dealerships not having card swipers - I could easily go to Walmart and swipe away $50,000 worth of inventory and the manager might complain that the late shift is gonna have a job on their hands. Why don't dealerships have card swipers? I've often wondered what the simplest way to buy a car would be and this is definitely it.

 

[Dotini]

Those swipe cards are not safe from hackers - like at Target, etc. They need to be replaced (at massive cost) by embedded chips, we are told.

 

[Danoff]

If ye olde car dealership had one of those handy dandy card swipers like 95% of the the stores in this country I could simply use my debit card to pay for it. Instant transaction, card security is monitored by the bank, if it's lost or stolen it can be cancelled at a moment's notice, unauthorized charges are negated, etc. But no, ye olde dealership doesn't have a card swiper. The only place I know of around here that doesn't have a card swiper is the Hamburger Wagon and you can imagine why.

Clearly the price of cars doesn't have anything to do with dealerships not having card swipers - I could easily go to Walmart and swipe away $50,000 worth of inventory and the manager might complain that the late shift is gonna have a job on their hands. Why don't dealerships have card swipers? I've often wondered what the simplest way to buy a car would be and this is definitely it.

I was thinking private party.

 

[Enemem]

Banks have always required advance notice for sums over £3,000 to my knowledge.

I understand why banks may need some warning for removal of large amounts of cash. They obviously need to move it around.

However please answer me this -

"Why would this need to happen for an exchange that is done electronically, since no movement of physical matter is required?"

 

[RC45]

The McLaren F1 was released 20 years ago. It cost a million dollars.

So... yes?

I don't get the issue. A handful of people who were gifted enough to have the ideas, strong enough to keep hold of them, smart enough to exploit the ideas and fortunate enough to continue to do so are more highly valued by the societies that consume their ideas than half of all people.

If we didn't have the 85 richest, there wouldn't be 3.5 billion people on the planet.

And of these hand full of people, many are actually oligarchs, monarchs and despots that simply stole their wealth from national treasuries - yet the finger gets pointed at the few capitalists that actulayy created wealth and didnt steal it.

And then these critics seem to not understand that wealth creation is not a zero-sum game - to make a fortune by way of trade does not mean that others are losing money.

 

[Pupik]

I understand why banks may need some warning for removal of large amounts of cash. They obviously need to move it around.

"Why would this need to happen for an exchange that is done electronically, since no movement of physical matter is required?"

The short answer would probably be if multiple people wanted to make large transactions at the same date.

And dealerships can accept some transactions (or part of a financial transaction) by credit card, but typically, they limit the amount for anti-fraud reasons. My guess is that the credit card companies don't guarantee amounts over a certain limit, or they don't typically process very high transactions.

 

[MSTER232]

If I may cite the fictional Golgafrinchans at this point, no society can function without creators, workers and managers. We actually see this in the UK (and the USA), where our youth are now so disproportionately self-entitled that they will refuse to do jobs they have the skills for and cannot get jobs they want because they're unwilling to work for them and they're filled by 1st and 2nd generation migrants. The demeaning jobs they deem as beneath them - street sweepers, bog cleaners, burger flippers, factory line workers - are absolutely essential to keep society functioning, and we need (evil) businesses to provide those jobs. In between those two worlds, we need layers of management to guide the workers and advise the creators - so the workers can work and the creators can create without having to manage themselves.

The mindset that the creators exploit the workers ignores the fact that the creators create the jobs for the workers and the fact the creators compensate the workers for their work by selling the products they make to consumers (who are creators, workers AND managers).

.

Isnt this a terrible teenager stereotype?

 

[Kent]

6- Money order.

How did this become an issue in the first place, I'd think all would be talking about the discrepancy in wealth through-out the world rather than the basics of banking institutions.
I know that they are interconnected in a way but part of the world being insanely poor and the rest of US being able to use computers is a totally different thing. Atleast, IMHO.

 

[Enemem]

No, Kent, you're right. Quite horrendous the difference, the question is are we prepared to maintain the status quo, or do something about it?

 

[Danoff]

No, Kent, you're right. Quite horrendous the difference, the question is are we prepared to maintain the status quo, or do something about it?

There are so many questions in between:

1) Is it a problem?
2) Why is it happening?
3) Can we do something about it?
4) Should we do something about it?
5) What should we do about it?


The assumptions in this thread are:

1) Yes
2) Capitalism
3) Yes
4) Yes
5) Theft

Here's what I strongly suspect:

1) Sometimes
2) Government
3) Yes
4) Yes
5) Deregulate

 

[Enemem]

1) Is it a problem? Not for the rich. But for the majority of the planet - yes.
2) Why is it happening? Some people say hard work and good luck. Others say that
money is used to influence the politics creating laws and regulations that benefit the rich over everyone else.
3) Can we do something about it? We can try.
4) Should we do something about it? Undoubtedly
5) What should we do about it? Lobby parliament to alter legislation. Voice your concerns. Shop wisely and philsophically !

 

[Joel]

2) Why is it happening? Some people say hard work and good luck. Others say that
money is used to influence the politics creating laws and regulations that benefit the rich over everyone else.

So here's the thing. How do you plan to change this? Governments have virtually always been bought out by the rich, which is the biggest problem inherent in big government. What bothers me about this idea that we need to increase tax rates on the rich is that when you break it down what's being said is that the rich are so powerful because they buy out the government, and the solution to that is more government.

Doesn't that seem like the wrong way to go?

 

[Enemem]

How do we plan to change this?

The floor is open........

 

[Dotini]

So here's the thing. How do you plan to change this? Governments have virtually always been bought out by the rich, which is the biggest problem inherent in big government. What bothers me about this idea that we need to increase tax rates on the rich is that when you break it down what's being said is that the rich are so powerful because they buy out the government, and the solution to that is more government.

Doesn't that seem like the wrong way to go?

For hundreds of years, the time honored way for British and French to solve this problem was to kill the rich, put their heads on spikes, and exterminate what's left over of their progeny and heirs.

/slight exageration

 

[Danoff]

1) Is it a problem? Not for the rich. But for the majority of the planet - yes.

Why? Please explain.

2) Why is it happening? Some people say hard work and good luck. Others say that
money is used to influence the politics creating laws and regulations that benefit the rich over everyone else.

So you want to use government to stop people from using the government to gain advantage.... but every time that's attempted it gets turned to the advantage of the influential.

5) What should we do about it? Lobby parliament to alter legislation. Voice your concerns. Shop wisely and philsophically !

Lobby them for what exactly?

 

[sumbrownkid]

But can those wealthy people know why kids like Cinnamon Toast Crunch?