jump to last post 1-3 of 3 discussions (4 posts)

insured deposits seperated from the Wall Street casino !?#$

  1. mel22 profile image59
    mel22posted 7 years ago

    Last I knew this was  already done at banks.. isn't that the difference between a regular savings account and a riskier money MARKET account?obviousaly the money market account gives a higher return for the risk of lending to the market , than an lower yielding regular account used to fund business and car loans, etc.  Is this right or am I missing something? How is this anything new? regular accounts have always been insured by FDIC and money market wasn't I thought!?$% wasn't there always inherewnt risk in money market accounts which are not insured against loss?

    1. Quilligrapher profile image88
      Quilligrapherposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Hi Mel,
      The term "Wall Street Casino" is being used in the press lately to describe the common practice by banks of using deposits and borrowed funds for investing on Wall Street for their own account.  As we have seen over the last several years, when they win they win, but when they loose the government has to bail them out.

  2. mel22 profile image59
    mel22posted 7 years ago

    At the least make them call in all callable bonds and pay down d true debt b4 allowing to buy their own stock on the market. So in other words they're using regular insured deposits to put on the books and use in the market.. Weren't the insured deposits already part of Tier 1 reserve capital to begin with? How were they ever used on the market? if they were putting under different capital why aren't hancuffs and jail terms being handed out. I thought this was already illegal? So i opted out of making extra money in the riskier  but higher yielding MM acount , got paid less return , even though my money was being used money market anyway. 

    Sounds like this is more than just a "shorting" issue and subprime toxic assett downturn.. Its looking more like blatant" bank fraud" from the beginning!

    ..or all 3 of the above...

  3. mel22 profile image59
    mel22posted 7 years ago

    Wonder if this was the reason the Fed would not give out the info on the "Bloomberg" FOIA request ,  because the CEO's of the banks that received the money to back up their "fraudulent bets using insured deposits" would be the ones with the "jailbird" sign on their forehead?... hmmmmm....starting to see this a bit more clearly for what it really is.

    This whole time I thought it was ppl bankrupting on their mortgage obligations and day traders and bad underwriters at banks.