Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Feeling Safe? Boe Paper: "depositors Who Deposit Their Money With A Bank Are Therefore No Longer The Legal Owners Of This Money"


Recommended Posts

0
HOLA441

Hmm that's not how I remember 2008. It was all about how the more recent buyers were victims of media/parents - couldn't have expected a crash, for outbidding others by absolute fortunes. Not made their £800,000 beds and lie in it, but lobbying for bailouts.

Anyway I take it you're being whimsical, with that 0.5% reward (lol), as those 2008 £800K houses now worth £1.3 million, and older upsizers treated themselves to houses at £800K that were worth £500K in 2008 in Croydon just recently, in the forever HPI victimhood... 'make renters pay'.

We didnt have bail-in legislation in 2008. Also, they've done cyrpus and they will be doing Greece after January so its very possible this time as there will be expertise in Europe.

The point I make is the rules of the game and rhetoric has changed. And nominal interst rates are so low you have to really question the risk/reward of large bank deposits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1
HOLA442

We didnt have bail-in legislation in 2008. Also, they've done cyrpus and they will be doing Greece after January so its very possible this time as there will be expertise in Europe.

The point I make is the rules of the game and rhetoric has changed. And nominal interst rates are so low you have to really question the risk/reward of large bank deposits.

Vs these house prices ?

£40K+ is a pittance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2
HOLA443

Vs these house prices ?

£40K+ is a pittance.

Maybe vs these house prices. Who knows? But I suspect a highly overvalued house is possibly not as risky as you think it is. I think the odds of a big nominal house price crash in pounds within 5 years is around 50% - I assume your odds would be higher?

However a bank deposit is certainly more risky than most people think it is.

However, I was thinking more on an absolute basis or vs a diversified portfolio of other holdings. Short term money market fund is probably better than a bank account, unless you think the UK government will default on its 3 month paper?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3
HOLA444

We didnt have bail-in legislation in 2008. Also, they've done cyrpus and they will be doing Greece after January so its very possible this time as there will be expertise in Europe.

The point I make is the rules of the game and rhetoric has changed. And nominal interst rates are so low you have to really question the risk/reward of large bank deposits.

That's right. We legislated bail ins in 2013, I've read the US have placed derivatives above depositors (or something like that), and the EU has put it through as well.

Cyprus worked with little resistance, and I doubt the biggest losers in a bail in would do much as they probably wouldn't understand anyway. I could be wrong but the 'test case' worked.

As a cynical hypothetical: They could be given a receipt for their deposits and told it's part of the long term economic plan, represents a good deal for taxpayers, and the crown is 100% behind it (with gold bars behind her). They'd all accept it and go home. The HPI has continued so long because of silly punters so this hypothetical could happen :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4
HOLA445

If it gets to the bail in stage and they don't want to confiscate houses directly they could just as likely say to people with notional equity in their houses that they have to take a loan and give the proceeds to the government and it'll be as good (bad) as a perpetual loan. Probably it wouldn't be put exactly like that but it would be maybe a one off tax and be that in effect - "For the good of the country, the right thing to do, to maintain the health of the housing market, the market value is what it was at last peak, if the value of your housing equity is £85,000 or less you aren't affected that's guaranteed, don't worry about it we'll just print off the money out of thin air for you just keep paying the interest, your country needs your housing equity, other guff etc etc etc".

When it comes to emergency measures there's going to be no investment category safe but the more liquid ones at least give you a chance to manoeuvre a bit.

Edited by billybong
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5
HOLA446
6
HOLA447

At the end of the day, you 'own' absolutely nothing. Not even land. Certainly not your income. It is all there by grace. Pieces of paper.

Only what you physically possess and only for as long as you can physically defend it from those who would forcibly remove it from you.

Sleep tight ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7
HOLA448
8
HOLA449

Any thoughts on National Savings and Investments? Would these be an easy target for a bail in, or would bank creditors take the hit?

My thinking is that they would be the last target, and hence the safest place for cash. If they bail in NS&I the concept of UK PLC as a place of safety is finished, you will be getting freshly printed devalued cash, but you will get your money, IMO. Bail In`s if they happen here are going to be some basket case BS that is balls deep in BTL loans, but even then I don`t see it happening in the UK, but I`m open to the idea that I could be wrong.

Edited by dances with sheeple
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9
HOLA4410

If somebody bought an overpriced 3 bed in Twickenham for 800k and lost their shirt because the market crashed would you argue it was the banksters/government/chinas/gods fault and all they wanted was a family home? Or would you argue that they made their bed and they should lie in it?

What about if someone bought shares in a bank and it fails, the shares lose most/all their value. It's the investors own fault right?

Same can be said for bank deposits, if you decide to become a creditor of a financial instiution ie a depositor in a bank and the bank of england ends up needing your deposit (ie credit) to make that bank hole beacuse it fails. It isn't stealing your deposits, it is acting in precisely what you have agreed to. I mean you get 0.5% to bear the risk.

Well they have made quite a job of making holes in banks, and then patching them up, but depositors should be last in the chain of who takes losses in a failed bank anyway, and because the concept that the little people should be doing due diligence on where they deposit their money is so alien to most ordinary people (and would undermine the system if it was overtly said that it is your tough luck if your chosen bank goes under) it is never openly spoken about, and this is probably why they didn`t do bail-in`s first time around, people would never have had confidence in the system ever again. The PTB are stuck between a rock and a hard place, if they don`t bail out banks confidence in the system collapses and if they do bail-in`s confidence in the system collapses.

Edited by dances with sheeple
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information