Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Warning: Get Your Money Out: “All Legal Bank Deposit Protections Are Now Officially Gone”

page: 3
25
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 12:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by litterbaux
Not sure if this was mentioned yet, I didn't read everyone's posts.

They came for social security, they got it.

They came for wall street, they got it.

Now they are coming for your 401k.

Writing is on the wall folks. They don't want the 20k in your bank account, they don't want the 10k in your checking. They want the 300k in your 401k.

Edit: Oh now I look like a moron cuz you guys were just talking about this in the few previous posts. You are right!
edit on 14-8-2012 by litterbaux because: (no reason given)


could be a possibility and could even relate to this thread as well.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

we're seeing an awful lot of puzzle pieces being thrown around, now it's just a mater of piecing them in the right place if in fact, they go together.

the Euro is a ponzi scheme and the IMF knows it. they are tied through global banking cartels to the federal reserve and it's members so if they have the great lie going on together, they have the lack of legislation governing them going on and they have the law enforcers in their pockets going on. this doesn't leave the citizens with any room to maneuver really.




posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 05:16 PM
link   
No, they are not. This is so misleading. FDIC covers deposits up to 250,000.00 which covers the vast majority of people in this country. This ruling is about brokerage firm investors and is limited to a specific type of non guaranteed deposits in "customer funds" accounts used for investing in a wide variety of financial vehicles. Legal bank deposits are covered by the US government and pose no threat.



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 05:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by AnIntellectualRedneck
Okay, I am confused here. I understand this concept, I suppose, but doesn't that mean that FDIC insurance for bank accounts of up to 100,000 dollars would kick in?


It's actually up to $250,000. The article posted by the OP is referring to a stock broker, not a bank. The FDIC covers all bank accounts. So, the OP's title is misleading.



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 06:38 AM
link   
So if I "improperly manage" my money and dont pay my taxes, will I not get in trouble now?



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 01:45 PM
link   
reply to post by LittleBlackEagle
 


That's what I'm thinking. Take the 10% penality now and have my money in hand. I'm young enough that if nothing happens by the time I graduate college, I can start over and still have some silver with what I bought from the 401k money.



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 06:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by andrewh7

Originally posted by AnIntellectualRedneck
Okay, I am confused here. I understand this concept, I suppose, but doesn't that mean that FDIC insurance for bank accounts of up to 100,000 dollars would kick in?


It's actually up to $250,000. The article posted by the OP is referring to a stock broker, not a bank. The FDIC covers all bank accounts. So, the OP's title is misleading.


not entirely, here's a piece of Blackmarketeers post on the first page. "the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act does put commercial bank deposits at risk, since it lets banks merge with brokerages and insurance companies."

the title is the title used by the source, so it's not my wording.

this applies to anyone who has money with the big firms, BOA, Goldman, CITI group and so on, as we're not talking about local banks at all. although i would caution anyone to know who exactly owns their small town bank because most these days, are owned by the big companies somewhere down the line.



posted on Aug, 16 2012 @ 01:04 PM
link   

No One Will Charged With a Crime for the MF Global Collapse





The company placed a grossly outsized bet (more than $6 billion worth) on the health of the European debt market last year and when it went south, the firm "borrowed" money from the accounts of its customers to try and salvage its own losses. Most of the blame for those trades fell on its CEO (and ex-New Jersey governor) Jon Corzine, and while his reputation and firm are ruined, it seems he will escape any legal sanction. He could still face massive civil lawsuits or fines from regulators who have a lower standard than a criminal prosecution, but jail isn't in the cards.


news.yahoo.com...


seems like even more news on this situation has come to surface and it's no different then the other stories.

so in other words if you break into someone house and borrow their money, it's ok as long as you're tight with the big wigs in DC.?

should we all be able to borrow bank money and not pay it back, would that be ok too?



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 03:27 PM
link   
reply to post by thepupils
 


Dear postpupils,
Is there any way I can get in touch with you by phone or email? I write for a blog and think this story is fascinating about your family. Let me know and I can post an email address for you to contact me out. All the Best.



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 03:44 PM
link   
reply to post by thepupils
 


Oh, and I wanted to clarify, that this is the post of yours that I read:
In tenessee, where my grandma lives, people don't use banks for savings.
They don't trust banks period. (Andrew Jackson was from there & beat the banks)
They bury their money. You don't go wandering around on people's property. They shoot first, & ask questions later.

They don't have this problem like they do in Chicago.






top topics



 
25
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join