👉Bank Bail-Ins Explained : It Is The Banks Doing The Robbing

👉Bank Bail-Ins Explained : It Is The Banks Doing The Robbing




With panic breaking out in the financial system, the danger grows that bank customers will have their deposits bailed in to save desperate banks. The nasty truth about the global banking system is that it is rigged to privatize profits and socialize losses, of which bail-ins is the ultimate example. The system is designed so that the risks by the bankers in their reckless financial gambling with other people's money are ultimately borne not by the bankers, but by households. As the European experience of bail-in proves, it is an insane policy that destroys households but also the banking system, by destroying the public's trust in banks to keep their money safe. Americans must stop this policy in its tracks and fight for a Glass-Steagall separation of the banks instead, to keep deposit-taking banks separate from the risks of financial gambling. Today that America and the world are facing a new financial crisis, with panicked financial authorities slashing interest rates and trying to stimulate the housing market to save the banks, Warning signs are all over that bail-ins are on the horizon for savers and depositors. A bail-in is when a bank recapitalizes itself by tapping its creditors, including depositors. Practically a bank confiscates private property to indemnify itself for losses it has suffered. The wealthy and powerful have been siphoning off our wealth by stealth. Now they’re getting ready to do it in plain sight. There is no accountability. The banks can continue with risky speculations. Pay themselves and investors huge salaries, bonuses, and dividends. Then steal our savings if it all goes pear-shaped. Not on. The next crisis will come straight after all the legislation is passed, so that's why the cash ban is so important to fight and stop. The cash ban is the final step to bail-in. The “bail-in” is the ultra-insane culmination of the “too big to fail” doctrine. By this doctrine, any and all assets, public or private, in our financial system can and will be sacrificed (stolen by the Big Banks) to prevent any of the Big Banks from “failing” – that is, going bankrupt as a consequence of their own reckless gambling. The truth is that banks in most western nations are vulnerable to bail-ins. In the coming months, another banking crisis will hit. When it does, bank accounts will be frozen, and deposits will be used to “bail-in” the banks. Canada, New Zealand, the US, the UK, and Germany have all implemented legislation that would allow them to first FREEZE and then SEIZE bank assets during the next crisis. Bank depositors are now considered shareholders and, in a bail-in scenario, will lose some or all of their deposits. The moves by western nations towards bail-in regimes whereby “too big to fail” banks confiscate individual and companies' deposits have been put in place with very little public discussion or awareness of the risks and ramifications of bail-ins. That is all money that will just disappear overnight in the case of bank failure. In some cases, it already has. Most people think of the money they deposit into the bank as a personal asset they own. Once a deposit is made at the bank, it’s no longer your property. It’s the bank's property. What you own is a promise from the bank to repay. It’s an unsecured liability. That’s a very different thing from owning physical cash stuffed under your mattress. The whole template for this was set out in Cyprus, the first bail-in perpetrated in the Western world, occurred in Cyprus in 2013. People in Cyprus had to find this out the hard way. Jerome Powell was a central figure in the development of the "bail-in" strategy in the US, having been involved in “simulations” of large bank failure as far back as 2011, as well as the development of the strategies put forth in Dodd-Frank bill, namely: 1) That banks develop “living wills” or plans for “rapid and orderly resolution in the event of material financial distress or failure of the company, and include both public and confidential sections.” 2) Bail-Ins: programs through which the FDIC would seize a failing bank systemic importance and wipe out all of its shareholders’ capital as well as much of bondholders’ in order to prop the bank up. This makes one wonder. Did Trump pick Powell because Trump knows the US will be having another financial crisis in the near future? After all, Trump routinely called the stock market a big fat bubble in the run-up to the 2016 election. As one of the most connected financial elites in the US, Trump would know better than most, just how leveraged the system had become. Why else would Trump pick the man who literally "wrote the book" on how to deal with systemic failure for the US banking system. A banking crisis is certainly coming. And smart investors will prepare for it well in advance. Depositors, including savers, should consider diversifying some of their capital and not having all their eggs in the bank deposit basket. An allocation to physical gold and silver is prudent in this regard. Gold and silver are financial insurance against bank bail-in, political mismanagement, and insolvent banks and governments. Allocated and segregated coins and bars confers outright legal ownership that is difficult to be appropriated, confiscated, or subject to haircuts. The Bail-in regime is one of the greatest financial risks to investors, savers, and indeed companies internationally today. Yet it remains the most poorly covered financial risk and is largely ignored by financial advisers, brokers, and not surprisingly governments and banks. The growing financial risk in all western countries has not been properly analyzed. In a world already beset with huge deflationary pressures and still insolvent banks, the bail-in regime and confiscating deposits, especially from job-creating companies, would be extremely deflationary and would likely contribute to severe recessions. In America - The bank robs you! Welcome back to The Atlantis Report. Don't trust the bankers. They will steal your money legally. Bank Bail-Ins is now Legal in the United States. Bail-ins. "You know what that is? Taking money from the depositors who put money in the bank and simply taking it to recoup their own capital that they can't get back from the people they lent to. Is it legal to have a bail-in, to take the money of the depositor and not give it back to them? The answer is yes. In many countries, including the United States, the laws now allow a bail-in. So they convert your deposit (which is a liability) over to the other side of the balance sheet (asset) to promote bank liquidity and preserve the senior investor's (hedge and private equity funds) positions. You then have common & preferred stock shares that may end up being worth nothing in the event that the senior investor's (hedge and private equity funds) BOND positions get paid their principals in a fire sale/liquidation due to market collapse. Another "legal" method of the banks to wash their hands clean of owing anything to depositors. They change the rules in their favor. Cigarette manufacturers were required to place a warning label on every pack. Why aren't there warning signs in front of every bank stating that your deposits are not yours, and in the event of a bank failure, there's not enough money in the FDIC to cover all your deposits, and you'll receive bank stock, and ultimately nothing due to bail-ins. Basically, deposit your earnings at your own risk. If the public knew, this would cause one of the biggest bank-runs in history. Just imagine if the general public realized their bank could take their deposits and just run away with them (through speculation and such). Buyer beware! They do have a warning - it is FDIC - that tells you all you need to know. This is old news. Bail-in legislation has been law since 2015. Obama also issued an executive order regarding capital controls. Money is a digital illusion of wealth. It is in the system they control. Why would anyone want to give up control of their own assets? How come when you lend your money to the bank you don't own it, and when they lend money to you, they own it. Does that make any sense? When you don't pay back your borrowed money, they can take stuff from you. When they don't pay back their borrowed money, you should be able to take stuff from them. Thing is ,none should make money off your money. We’re not liable to you, and your not liable to us, does that door swing both ways? If so, just stop paying your debts! People need to start asking themselves. If the FED can print endless money. Why do banks need to seize mine in a crisis, and why the hell are we paying taxes if the money can just be typed into existence. I know the short answer is control of humanity. But if people could think in these terms, they might start bucking the system. When taking out a reasonable amount of cash from the bank and the teller asks you the reason why say loudly, "I'm worried about a banking financial crash!". Up to the mid-1970s, the prevailing principle in business was 'let the buyer beware.' In other words, it was up to the consumer to make sure that they were fully informed about the product or service they were about to purchase, and the seller's responsibility, in general, ended with sale. However, this was 'flipped' with the introduction of consumer law, which put far more responsibility on the seller to address what economists call information asymmetry, which basically means the seller typically knows more than the buyer and knowing the needs of the buyer should reveal all pertinent facts. This was necessary because the nature of what was being bought and sold was becoming far more complex. A simple example; if I was buying a printer for an Apple computer and I am sold one which only works with Windows, and the seller knows or should know that it was not appropriate, then I am entitled to take it back and get a refund under current law. In the past, it would have been my responsibility to know. The vast majority of Americans would reasonably think that a deposit is basically the bank taking care of my money-saving me (and everybody else) from getting a physically safe and perhaps managing my money at home. It is a far more practical solution and provides the basis for credit creation for business and private purposes in the community. The average person would never think that their wealth was at risk when they deposit money in a bank, especially after the Government response when they basically backed the banks with the American Government balance sheet. The point I am leading to here is that I think that a massive asymmetry of information exists with the proposed legislation. The banks understand what it is all about. Basically means they can undertake high-risk activity because they know that they can always grab deposits if things go pear-shaped. Bank executives are risking other people's money for their own bonuses with no accountability for losses. The government is just being led like sheep by the world power elites without a real understanding of where they are taking us. People need to be informed that their deposit is actually a loan to the bank for which they may or may not get interested and indeed may have to pay the bank for keeping their money safe. Additionally, and most importantly, it is at risk. People need to fully understand this new paradigm before it is implemented so they can consider what alternative arrangements they might make. This can't be just sprung on us in the '' middle of the night'' in the same shady backroom deals. The changes are so substantial that the Government and ADIs owe a duty of care to the Australian people before they can consider the passing of this legislation. I don't think it would be sufficient to have just a change in the Terms and Conditions as it is such a fundamental change to people's understanding of what a deposit account is. There is a principle in law that, in matters such as this, the average person (the man who rides the Clapham omnibus) needs to fully understand the implications of this new law. American Consumer law enacted in the 1970s extended this further to accommodating the 'man who missed the Clapham omnibus,' which means to say somebody with perhaps less than average understanding of matters of the world. Diversification of deposits remains vital, and one important way to protect against a bail-in is owning physical gold. Taking delivery of gold coins and bars and owning bullion in allocated and segregated storage in the safest vaults in the world is a prudent way to protect against the deposit bail-in regime. The FED, banks, and the government are worse than the mafia! As an expat living overseas, any funds beyond $10,000.00 in my foreign bank account are reported to the IRS and Treasury. So much for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. If you don't hold it, you don't own it! Fractional Reserve Banking. Print money from thin air for me, lifelong debt for thee. The Fed, Probably. Leave monthly bill money in your bank account, and put everything else in physical wealth, I am betting it all on silver. This was The Atlantis Report. Please Like. Share. Subscribe. And please take some time to subscribe to my back up channels, I do upload videos there too. You'll find the links in the description box. You will also find a PayPal link if you want to make a donation. Stay safe and healthy! Thank You.









The Financial Armageddon Economic Collapse Blog tracks trends and forecasts , futurists , visionaries , free investigative journalists , researchers , Whistelblowers , truthers and many more