On: "Depositors Beware: Theft is Legal for Big Banks, and Your Money Will Never Be Safe"

Ellen Brown is correct when she offers up the following:

It is time to pry open the black box, get educated, and get organized.  Here are three things that need to be done for starters:

  • Protect depositor funds from derivative raids by repealing the super-priority status of derivatives.
  • Separate depository banking from investment banking by repealing the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 and reinstating the Glass-Steagall Act.
  • Protect both public and private revenues by establishing a network of publicly-owned banks, on the model of the Bank of North Dakota.

For more information on the public bank option, see http://publicbankinginstitute.org

via Depositors Beware: Theft is Legal for Big Banks, and Your Money Will Never Be Safe | Global Research.

Ellen's exact notion for public banking may not jibe with mine, but the idea that public banking is better than not under the current mixed (socialist/capitalist) economic system is completely correct. I won't go into detail here concerning my idea of the best public-banking model pending the moneyless society. I'm for one bank for the whole US. I've written about it at length on this site already.

What I want to say though is that while Ellen is right to point out the problems with derivatives, it would be wise that we avoid sounding as if a total economic collapse around derivatives is somehow imminent. I'm not suggesting that Ellen is doing that, but there are people on the Internet who are sounding pretty much that way—doing what I consider Libertarian-Capitalist fear-mongering.

If a worst-case scenario were to unfold, the United States government would not allow all American depositors with deposits under $250K in FDIC insured banks to lose their money to "bail in" derivatives holders. Doing that would be no different than using taxpayer money all over again. A worst-case situation concerning derivatives at a TBTF bank would ripple through the whole economy causing more damage than the 2008 crash. There would be zero point in the US not covering the FDIC in full.

The only reason the US government might not do it were if the government were not even going to pretend not to be stealing the taxpayers'/depositors' money to give to the derivatives holders. That would be blatantly asking for revolution (violent if non-violent weren't to work).

Are there people in government who are so bought off and so stupid that they'd actually risk that? I believe there are, but I believe there are too many people who while being bought off, aren't THAT crazy and stupid.

It's a judgment call, a gut reaction.

So, let's work toward reform and restoration of sounder principles and practices, but let's not risk ourselves overstating immediate risks. The US is not Cyprus, and the US so-called TBTF banks really must walk a tightrope much more now than before 2008, at least until memories fade and older folks die off and are replaced by new adults who are green, wet behind the ears, and a new pack of suckers for the con-artists on Wall Street, the spiritual offspring of the banksters of yore.

See also:

  1. Don't just cede the definition to the banksters: Does the Bank "Own" Your Deposited Money?
  2. See the related links at the bottom of this one too: A Must Read: "The Austerity Delusion | Foreign Affairs"
  3. You may also use the search feature on this site to search on terms such as "United States Notes."
  • Subscribe
  • Tom Usher

    About Tom Usher

    Employment: 2008 - present, website developer and writer. 2015 - present, insurance broker. Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration. Volunteerism: 2007 - present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.
    This entry was posted in Monetary Reform. Bookmark the permalink.