Pages:
Author

Topic: My bank account's got robbed by European Commission. Over 700k is lost. - page 21. (Read 408455 times)

newbie
Activity: 35
Merit: 0
Paul Krugman can keep arguing that debt doesn't matter, but I'll stick to real world economics and keep an eye on US debt lest this happen to me.

It's a bit different. This would never happen in the US in my opinion.


Oh how wrong you are!  It's already happened in the US more than once. 

As a matter of fact, some think that the reason John Wilkes Booth shouted "Sic Semper Tyrannis!" (Thus Always To Tyrants!) right before he shot President Lincoln is because of Lincoln's issuance of the original "greenback" (unbacked by gold or anything other than "full faith and credit") that was used to pay the Union Soldiers during the US Civil War.  Try finding and spending one of those greenbacks today and see if you can get it accepted.

Another interesting factoid is, during one of the budget crises back when Timothy Geithner was still head of Treasury a few years back the federal government dipped into the federal employees' retirement system as a way to temporarily solve the crisis at hand at the time.  In other words, they temporarily stole the money from the very employees who were working right alongside them and for them rather than outsiders in order to balance the system . . . claiming to have put it back at some later date.  But even if they did put it back, the very fact that they would take it in the first place implies at the very least a "Cyprus/EU" mentality when it comes to funds on deposit.  Granted, it was ONLY (ha! ha!) federal employee retirement money and not everybody's money at all the banks, but still . . . it was a money-grab from a group of people powerless to stop it just the same.

Another thing.  There was a movement in the US to withdraw money from the so-called "too big to fail" banks by a certain November 5th (Guy Fawkes Day) as a protest against the bailouts sometime back.  There is video footage on Youtube of people being turned away from their local Bank of America branch by police officers even though they had CDs and other proof they were customers.  The banks simply refused to allow the customers to enter the bank to make the withdrawals and account closures under threat of being arrested as an effort to keep the collapse from happening.  There was a guy who originally stated that this action should be done based on what he called "Tank a Bank" as part of a political movement.  Congresscritters called him a financial terrorist because, unlike the B of A plan above, people were originally not supposed to just move the money to a credit union, but to take it home to remove it from the banking system completely.

Bottom line here is this.

These people will do whatever they think is necessary in order to keep the party going for as long as they possibly can, up to and including killing people whenever it suits them.  (Rumor is the reason for the attack on Iraq is because Saddam had demanded to be paid in Euros or gold for his oil instead of US dollars back before Desert Storm 1.0)
sr. member
Activity: 406
Merit: 250
When they get "replaced" is the event when anyone holding them gets bent over the kitchen table and azz-raped.
hero member
Activity: 924
Merit: 1000
$ or € won't blow up, they will just replace them with another currency just like they did before european union
sr. member
Activity: 406
Merit: 250
This would never happen in the US in my opinion.

If this were true, you would be able to point us toward some fiat currency used during the last 5,000 years of history which did not blow up. Smiley
legendary
Activity: 1330
Merit: 1003
Paul Krugman can keep arguing that debt doesn't matter, but I'll stick to real world economics and keep an eye on US debt lest this happen to me.

It's a bit different. This would never happen in the US in my opinion.

It probably wouldn't happen, but you get my point.
legendary
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1000
Indeed, Bitcoin is the ultimate weapon against looters. It requires you to study a bit and be informed to not get hacked, but it's the perfect money as you can even store it without any physical shred of it, like passphrase generated addresses.
sr. member
Activity: 406
Merit: 250
This is exactly why I intend to convert a larger and larger amount of our income to bit coin each month. I don't even trust that our privately held IRA and annuity accounts will be safe from the looters.
full member
Activity: 210
Merit: 100
Paul Krugman can keep arguing that debt doesn't matter, but I'll stick to real world economics and keep an eye on US debt lest this happen to me.

It's a bit different. This would never happen in the US in my opinion.

http://www.examiner.com/article/does-dodd-frank-set-up-bail-for-u-s-banks-to-follow-cyprus

were all fucked.
legendary
Activity: 826
Merit: 1000
amarha
Paul Krugman can keep arguing that debt doesn't matter, but I'll stick to real world economics and keep an eye on US debt lest this happen to me.

It's a bit different. This would never happen in the US in my opinion.
legendary
Activity: 1330
Merit: 1003
Paul Krugman can keep arguing that debt doesn't matter, but I'll stick to real world economics and keep an eye on US debt lest this happen to me.
legendary
Activity: 1330
Merit: 1003
IMHO the 700k is blocked as the 128k plus-some are the part that won't be touched.
you will not lose all the 700k, "only" couple of percent.

stop cryin, that's just TAX EVASION catching up to you.



Nitpick: tax avoidance, not evasion. Evasion is illegal, avoidance is just (arguably) unethical.

Whilst I don't generally cry a river for people with huge sums of money who end up somehow having slightly less huge sums of money, I do have much sympathy for the OP in this case. That was a business account - a bunch of people putting their time and talent into providing goods and services for a larger bunch of people. Who are now all fucked.

One thing though: how much of that is really 'blocked' blocked? That amount looks like a helluva lot more %-wise than all the newspapers I've been reading suggested.  Just read "Cyprus Finance Minister: Uninsured Laiki Depositors Could Face 80% Haircut". Well fuck that!

I was earlier going to express my disappointment with the tastelessness and over-the-top-ness of the OP's avatar. But now I can see where they're coming from, so quite frankly, Merkel can suck it.

Arguably, the insanely high taxes most people in the world pay are unethical.
full member
Activity: 210
Merit: 100
OP, I'm sorry bro, this is not legit.

Everyone else, here is your argument for the opportunity cost of not having bitcoin equating to intrinsic value.
sr. member
Activity: 336
Merit: 250
More 'cypruses' on the way.
sr. member
Activity: 406
Merit: 250
Dominica/Belize/Panama are winning.

Now there is one LESS business in Cyprus creating jobs, buying supplies, and providing value.

Keep up the Good Work ZeroDay!

newbie
Activity: 54
Merit: 0
Only for explain current situation in Italy:

We pay 0,2% per year over 5K deposit / investment net positions. No matter your condition, if you are jobless with a 100K deposit you pay. If you are invested with low interests rates (assume low risk interest is now very very low near 1,5% gross, and is falling !) you pay. Capital Gains are taxed of course by 26% ( 12,5% only for Italian debt BUT they introduce "CAC" witch sintetically means that debt can be remodel as they want). CG works like said above, you pay no matter your condition. They invented "tobin tax", much or less 0,1% of the net variation of your position in stock market. Add all the trading costs and you will see that here all private money in bank system is under ultra heavy but silent attak.
I mean, not only wealth above any limit, but all wealth !!!

legendary
Activity: 1330
Merit: 1003
Quote
I completely agree with what you are trying to say, cr1776.  But I think the Amorous Cow-Herder is confused by the word "own."  What does it actually mean to "own" something?

I think it is more accurate to say:

"If you aren't the sole controller of your private keys, you don't have any bitcoins."

It is obvious to a 5 year old what it means to have something.  It is still confusing to me in my 30s what it means to own something.

Ownership has been well defined in legal terms for a long time ... you need to have

- knowledge of the existence of the thing
- possession of the thing
- control of the thing

of a thing to legally own it.

Without all these three things you do not "own" something.

I'm pretty sure that you can entrust something you own to someone else without giving up legal ownership...
sr. member
Activity: 378
Merit: 255
A couple corrections:

* Yes, zeroday DID lose over 500k of his account.  Permanently.  Gone.
* Despite the outrage on zerohedge.com, ukraine appears to be doing what other countries do and tax all wealth above a certain dollar amount at 1.5% per year.  This is usually in lieu of capital gains taxes. This is currently being done (at similar rates) in France, Spain, Iceland, India, Netherlands, Norway and Switzerland.  So it is more realistic to call this Switzerland 2.0 than Cyprus 2.0, but it doesn't have the same alarm to it.
* Bitcoin was $86.98 (including Bitfloor fees) on the day he started this thread, because I bought some that day.
newbie
Activity: 29
Merit: 0
legendary
Activity: 3920
Merit: 2349
Eadem mutata resurgo
Quote
I completely agree with what you are trying to say, cr1776.  But I think the Amorous Cow-Herder is confused by the word "own."  What does it actually mean to "own" something?

I think it is more accurate to say:

"If you aren't the sole controller of your private keys, you don't have any bitcoins."

It is obvious to a 5 year old what it means to have something.  It is still confusing to me in my 30s what it means to own something.

Ownership has been well defined in legal terms for a long time ... you need to have

- knowledge of the existence of the thing
- possession of the thing
- control of the thing

of a thing to legally own it.

Without all these three things you do not "own" something.

If you have complete control of something, what does possession matter?

Well I think in some cases you might imagine having possession but not control .... e.g. not allowed to legally transfer that boat in your backyard because a lien has been slapped on it by your disgruntled ex-wife. Of course, there are probably many cases where the distinctions are subtle but important. If someone else has possession of your gold in a vault that is the classic 3rd party risk scenario ...
donator
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1007
Poor impulse control.
Quote
I completely agree with what you are trying to say, cr1776.  But I think the Amorous Cow-Herder is confused by the word "own."  What does it actually mean to "own" something?

I think it is more accurate to say:

"If you aren't the sole controller of your private keys, you don't have any bitcoins."

It is obvious to a 5 year old what it means to have something.  It is still confusing to me in my 30s what it means to own something.

Ownership has been well defined in legal terms for a long time ... you need to have

- knowledge of the existence of the thing
- possession of the thing
- control of the thing

of a thing to legally own it.

Without all these three things you do not "own" something.

If you have complete control of something, what does possession matter?
Pages:
Jump to: