Black Monday

[dobby41]

yep bank deposits sure are not a safe investment

They may not be zero risk but they are low risk and could be considered safe.
Probably a similar risk to putting it under the mattress.

How good are other countries deposit protections? Anything that guarantees the deposit probably aren't a good idea as they remove the risk indicators and move any risk from the depositor to the Govt.
So you go for the highest rate and forget the risk.

[bull....]

not far to sp500 new highs , big news propelling things

Jamie Dimon says the US economic expansion ‘could go on for years

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/12/jami...for-years.html

China Exports Rebound After Holiday, Imports Warn of Fragility

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...d=premium-asia


yield inversion is an anomoly caused by QE

[Balance]

not far to sp500 new highs , big news propelling things

Jamie Dimon says the US economic expansion ‘could go on for years

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/12/jami...for-years.html

China Exports Rebound After Holiday, Imports Warn of Fragility

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...d=premium-asia


yield inversion is an anomoly caused by QE

QE = Federal Reserve guarantee that US (and world) will not be allowed to go into depression ever again.

So invest with confidence but invest wisely!

[Biscuit]

Jamie Dimon says the US economic expansion ‘could go on for years

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/12/jami...for-years.html

He also said it could end tomorrow, no one knows when the next recession will be. Which isn't really news is it?

[Toulouse - Luzern]

be a black day in nz for sure when depositers lose all there money

New Zealand is the only OECD country without some form of deposit protection. it means forcing all the mums, dads and their kids with bank deposits to take a financial ‘haircut’ to help shore up a failing bank.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/BU190...roposition.htm

yep bank deposits sure are not a safe investment

Thanks for posting this Bull,

I have strong views on this.
NZ is clearly out of step
The OZ banks Commission gave ample evidence the banks management can not be trusted.
Some would say fraudulent.

The positive is the Govt can reconsider this ... somewhere between guaranteeing everything in the past even the reckless eg South Canterury Finance
and guaranteeing nothing as now. Even today (DomPost article) I see ANZ refused to provide information to the NZ FMA that would have possibly identified earlier identification if Ross investments was a PONZI scheme without the funds to repay investors.

What do others think of no guantees for NZ Bank Deposits?

[GTM 3442]

Anybody who bought South Canterbury Finance bonds under the government guarantee scheme can tell you what a great idea that was. Whats not to like about buying at 70c on the dollar, with a guaranteed maturity of 100c on the dollar, and a yield of +20% in the meantime?

With the masters and guardians of the global financial system (OECD, IMF et al) consistently pressuring the NZ government to introduce some sort of deposit protection arrangement, it's only a matter of time. Expect it to be presented politically as "a move to protect Kiwis from the rapacious Aussie banks"

However, you can expect it to be done "on the cheap". . . forget the Australian 250k figure. . . think more of the Channel Islands arrangements.

[blackcap]

Thanks for posting this Bull,



What do others think of no guantees for NZ Bank Deposits?

I have no problem with it whatsoever. Why should I as a taxpayer bail out other investors who have not done accurate due diligence.

[NeverQuestion]

I have no problem with it whatsoever. Why should I as a taxpayer bail out other investors who have not done accurate due diligence.

Your missing the point perhaps. The world is moving to cashless. Soon you will not be able to keep funds anywhere but in a bank. Personally, all my daily funds are in a bank. "Bail in" means those funds are taken from you to keep the bank solvent. So personally, tax payers funds will make more sense. Or even better, QE. But no matter what way you look at it. You will be paying the bill for excessive risk taking of the banks.

I do agree with you tho. Why should reqular people. Who have no investment knowledge, but have to keep money in the banks for security and pay Bill's, have to bail out a bank? When it was the bank who either, through greed, or mismanagement, get to walk free from it?!

Pretty sure that following "Bail In" there will be limits on how much you can withdraw per week, or even per month. These measures will be in place to prevent bank runs..

Letting a bank fall over will just cause a knock on effect. Best option I see. Tax pay bails out. Nationalize the bank. Use it to pay back the debt to the public...Then sell it down the track to make a return to keep the National supporters happy!

[Baa_Baa]

I have no problem with it whatsoever. Why should I as a taxpayer bail out other investors who have not done accurate due diligence.

Presumably you have a bank account like most of us, possibly with some money in it? If so, it is you and all of us in similar circumstance who are exposed to the 'bail in' theory enabled by law in NZ.

It has little to do with taxpayers, unless there is precedent ... oh, like last time (GFC), the NZ government decided to selectively save some depositors (and the investors in those companies) by saving their bank, or investment company (or insurance company), while letting many others fail, losing millions of $ of depositors money and ruining peoples lives, those who had no power to to change their circumstances.

I agree that the taxpayer shouldn't have to bailout a bank which hits the skids, but unlike any other business that fails, this leverages the depositors (the customers) rather than their investors who made a poor decision, albeit not of their own volition. Perhaps like many, you are ignorant of the possibility that this could ever happen, that a bank could fail, let alone that it is you who is the depositor that suffers the consequences of a bank failure, using your capital to prop them up if the sh1t hits their fan.

The scheme currently is that depositor is the (or one of the) bailout mechanisms to save the investors. Imho, that's disgraceful and should be legislated against. On top of that the banks create over 98% of monetary liquidity in the system through their ability to create money out of thin air. They have become omnipotent, fat with profits, most of which go offshore and are able to manipulate the domestic and political system to such a degree that schemes like this leverage the depositor in bad times to keep their ponzi afloat.

It is far fetched to think the burden of failure of the business should weigh on the shoulders of their depositors, preposterous even! It is the investors problem, they are the owners of the bank.

[winner69]

not far to sp500 new highs , big news propelling things

Jamie Dimon says the US economic expansion ‘could go on for years

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/12/jami...for-years.html

China Exports Rebound After Holiday, Imports Warn of Fragility

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...d=premium-asia


yield inversion is an anomoly caused by QE

Makes the speculators happy ...the more speculating the better ...new highs soon