Bumping this.
As it could be relevent now.
As it could be relevent now.
Bumping this again, as it could be somewhat relevant given the recent collapse of SVB.
Topic: Report: More Than 50% of the Worlds Banks May Be Too Weak To Survive A Recession (Read 413 times)
March 18, 2023, 04:08:53 PM
Bumping this again, as it could be somewhat relevant given the recent collapse of SVB.
April 11, 2020, 06:22:11 AM
Some Banks' bankruptcy is inevitable event. People can't trust banks as they do before 2008 crisis. Don't forget that the situation has changed since 2009 a lot. Now cryptocurrency gives us financial freedom. We appreciate the concept of being our own bank, so banks are becoming weaker.
April 11, 2020, 03:07:44 AM
That is why if you want to keep your money in banks, you need to choose from the list of the top 10 largest banks, or invest the amount that insurance agencies can return to you in case of bank bankruptcy. You can also distribute your funds to different banks and be sure that everything will be reimbursed to you also with interest.
"Not your bills, not your cash".
You should save/invest/HODL some of your net-worth in Bitcoin, then convert your money back to fiat if that's what you truly want.
April 11, 2020, 02:56:05 AM
Given the fact that large companies such as Apple, Amazon, Ping An have begun to provide financial services, and their credit cards are especially in demand, then in this case, bad times really come for banks. According to competent analysts, in order for the banking system to remain operational and many banks to survive after the next economic crisis, banks will have to introduce new technologies, as well as use outsourcing and large-scale mergers with other banks and structures. Otherwise, such banks simply run the risk of disappearing.
Nowadays banking is considered the key to economic success so that banks are imaged as important for developing the economy even though what is key to the economy is banking, not banks. But because there is already a doctrine, so entrepreneurs and academics see the bank as the most important and must be protected. Whereas the bank was designed only for the rich because those who can borrow at the bank are those who have collateral (asset-based loan), even though the bank collects funds from most people but the allocation is only for a group of people.
Banks are a sunset business because now banking can be done by non-bank institutions such as Paypal and many financial services that were initially provided by banks are now provided by many digital platforms.
April 04, 2020, 06:04:50 AM
Bumping this.
As it could be relevent now.
As it could be relevent now.
this is the first USA bank failure since the coronavirus hit: https://www.marketwatch.com/story/fdic-announces-first-bank-failure-of-coronavirus-crisis-2020-04-03
are the first dominos beginning to fall? we should expect an uptick in bank failures as the crisis pushes banks who were already financially stressed over the edge. this may not indicate larger systemic issues though.
FDIC data shows that banks overall were well capitalized heading into the pandemic. months of lockdowns could change that outlook though as people start defaulting on loans. https://www.americanbanker.com/news/will-coronavirus-lead-to-a-wave-of-bank-failures
April 04, 2020, 02:40:04 AM
I don't even think it would be 50% , it is way way more than that for sure , it is dependent on the place where they are situated. If they are more localised around a developing country and are local banks , not national then they have the worse case scenario , I have seen people loosing money , with the banks being torn down and trust me it wasn't even a recession . It was just any normal turn of events which the less flexible banks couldn't afford to take care of.
Banks are weak , the government is weak , we have to be independent for a while , till the time they find out how to use authority and intelligence together.
Banks are weak , the government is weak , we have to be independent for a while , till the time they find out how to use authority and intelligence together.
April 03, 2020, 11:37:00 PM
People shouldn't panic when that happen, deposits of each individual are insured no matter what happens when they are in the bank. I don't see a problem when it happen to big banks but if you are with them and you are on the small banks then just make sure that the bank you are inare covering your savings with insurance.
April 02, 2020, 07:03:50 AM
However, now we have the opportunity to observe for the first time how Bitcoin and other decentralized cryptocurrencies will behave when the global economic crisis sets in. It is assumed that Bitcoin appeared after the previous economic crisis of 2008 as an alternative to existing traditional payment systems, namely, as an inflation-free currency. It seems to me that we cannot avoid a very tough economic crisis, and therefore we will have such an opportunity.
Yes, this is an opportunity for Bitcoin to prove to the masses that it can survive the crisis. However, I don't think that the price will increase, more likely follows any other investment instruments, like gold, stocks, etc.The government will bail out banks if they face bankruptcy, but what will happen to Bitcoin? What will happen to the miners? Maybe we can answer these questions this year.
April 02, 2020, 01:18:16 AM
A recession occurs because of mismanagement, boom and bust cycle, geopolitical instability, etc., not because of Bitcoin.
I echo these thoughts. Even though bitcoin per se is considered as disruptive in today's standards, I still don't buy that bitcoin and other crypto are the reasons why there will be a recession. For the most part, banks and governments cause these recessions themselves until it creates a chain reaction on different parts of the industry because by then, everyone and their mothers would be in a hurry to get their assets out of a bank, causing it to implode from the inside and boom, money is gone.
Recession is an integral part of the economic cycle. It is not there simply because a failure is done somewhere along the way. It is there because it is part and parcel of the economic cycle. The economic activities of a certain country or even region constantly expand and contract. That is the norm in the market. The spending rises and falls. And when the spending falls way below the normal level, it is when recession takes place. It is as old as humanity. It does not have anything to do with Bitcoin.
April 02, 2020, 12:40:09 AM
That is why if you want to keep your money in banks, you need to choose from the list of the top 10 largest banks, or invest the amount that insurance agencies can return to you in case of bank bankruptcy. You can also distribute your funds to different banks and be sure that everything will be reimbursed to you also with interest.
March 24, 2020, 08:40:16 PM
Bumping this.
As it could be relevent now.
As it could be relevent now.
November 03, 2019, 12:01:04 AM
It is not going to worry the bankers. The tax payers will bail them out, just like the case during 2008-09. The amount mentioned in the bank bailout bill (Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008) was around $700 billion, but as per reliable sources the total cost for the treasury was much higher than that. And one year later, the bankers were going to Maldives and Seychelles for their holidays, as usual.
November 02, 2019, 11:39:18 PM
Yikes, that some scary stuff, I was always under the impression that banks were a lot more prepared and able to survive an attack like this, guess I am mistaken then.
I'm personally keeping a very minimal amount in the bank, most of the funds are either going into a cash spot I have, or paying off mortgages, or spent. Can't say I have more than 5,000 in my bank account at all times, the economy is really unstable so far and I like preparing for the worst.
I'm personally keeping a very minimal amount in the bank, most of the funds are either going into a cash spot I have, or paying off mortgages, or spent. Can't say I have more than 5,000 in my bank account at all times, the economy is really unstable so far and I like preparing for the worst.
November 02, 2019, 10:54:42 PM
The recession might not happen, Joseph Stiglitz said; "the world economy began a severe slowdown, but there will be no crisis."
If the world economic crisis will occur, it will be a good chance to eliminate 50% of the world's bank, let the weak falls and the stronger remain in the game.
Furthermore, the global recession will be a good test for bitcoin, whether it will hold on, rise or fall.
If the world economic crisis will occur, it will be a good chance to eliminate 50% of the world's bank, let the weak falls and the stronger remain in the game.
Furthermore, the global recession will be a good test for bitcoin, whether it will hold on, rise or fall.
November 02, 2019, 10:26:56 PM
That is true and one way that some banks will survive is thru Bank company merging in which banks will just merged to one another. In merging they could minimize operation and labors cost while sharing their common depositors and investors in which this strategy works many times before that is why some of them did not bankrupt and keep on surviving.
November 02, 2019, 07:38:17 PM
I hope that the economic crisis is a fear for ourselves where the currency does not mean for us all.
But they are based on the country they do. If doing a good one then it will be able to survive the recession.
If the country's many problems could allow the currency to be impacted by it and it would be good before the save in the cryptocurrency would be better.
But they are based on the country they do. If doing a good one then it will be able to survive the recession.
If the country's many problems could allow the currency to be impacted by it and it would be good before the save in the cryptocurrency would be better.
November 01, 2019, 07:18:51 AM
I'm just curious, do you stay within the government-insured limit of deposit?
I do, but more so because I don't have enough in any of my bank accounts to exceed their threshold. I however wouldn't really pay too much attention to that because when you make the rules, you can break them too, which we have seen happen in various countries already. Never seen the government not pay the insurance in my country since there haven't really been a lot of bank to collapse but you do have the right approach. Have to be cautious with these. Especially if it's a large bank, the gov't can simply say they can't afford to pay all the depositors in one go.
October 28, 2019, 08:44:23 AM
Most probably I won't be storing my money in the banks, not during this expected collapse.
The problem I see here is that while so many people expect a collapse/recession to happen very soon, it might not happen for at least another 5 or so years. Perhaps even longer. I find the US stock market to be an exceptional collapse/recession indicator, because it shows what smart money thinks about the market and economy. Some of the biggest names in the tech industry such as Microsoft and Apple have reached new all time highs today, and some others are just a few percent away from doing so.
I will start to worry when we see the US stock market breaks below its bull trend that it has respected for so many years. Every dip is currently bought up because that's seen as a fantastic entry point, and thus far dip buyers did well.
We do need cash, at least that's one thing that banks are still useful for. Hopefully it don't get so bad that banks restrict the amount of money that can be withdrawn like what happened when Greece went bankrupt.
That's why people should hold some decent amount of cash at home hidden safely, enough to last them a couple of months at least. I'm just curious, do you stay within the government-insured limit of deposit?
I do, but more so because I don't have enough in any of my bank accounts to exceed their threshold. I however wouldn't really pay too much attention to that because when you make the rules, you can break them too, which we have seen happen in various countries already. October 28, 2019, 06:49:08 AM
Recession is an integral part of the economic cycle. It is not there simply because a failure is done somewhere along the way. It is there because it is part and parcel of the economic cycle. The economic activities of a certain country or even region constantly expand and contract. That is the norm in the market. The spending rises and falls. And when the spending falls way below the normal level, it is when recession takes place. It is as old as humanity. It does not have anything to do with Bitcoin.
That's correct. I was explaining the "economic cycle" and what could cause a recession in the "economic cycle."So, what caused economic crisis 1998 in SEA and financial crisis 2008 in Europe & the US? It's not a mere "economic cycle" isn't it?
So, it is the responsibility of the government to monitor banks to see weaker ones to be merged or bought over. That should be the first step instead of printing more money into circulation.
Banks failure should not be the burden of government. Let the unprofitable die or naturally merged with a "hands-off" policy. If the government starts to take part in the market, the market becomes inefficient. Banks will be overly risk-taker because they know that in the face of bankruptcy, the government will save them. October 27, 2019, 03:42:20 PM
I have experienced this situation where a lot of banks got liquidated in 1998 in Indonesia. Yeah, it was a mess, but from a business perspective, it's the way of removing unprofitable banks. The problem with this issue in the present day however, the Government of Indonesia now will "bailout" the users' saving account up to 2 billion IDR (about 142K USD) per person.
If that happens, guess how the government will pay? By printing more money from thin air, or in other words, debasing the currency.
If that happens, guess how the government will pay? By printing more money from thin air, or in other words, debasing the currency.
Lately or like 7 years ago, some countries started the merger system. Here, the weak bank is joined with the bigger bank and operation continues. I think this is better than pushing money to banks inform of bailouts. If monies are pushed that way without proper monitoring and checkmating by regulating agencies, it will lead to too much money in circulation which can lead to inflation.
So, it is the responsibility of the government to monitor banks to see weaker ones to be merged or bought over. That should be the first step instead of printing more money into circulation.
Jump to: