A global recession is on the horizon - please read OP for mod warning

Bailing out banks is pure socialism for the rich all paid for by taxpayer. No matter how much money you print, socialism just isn't going to work.

I seen that on reeling in the years not so long ago. What a prick to say such a horrible thing. I am sure he never apologies for it either.

Equally the ones constantly predicting US/EU/Western economic doomsday is coming down the tracks at us are not exactly all knowing oracles. Yeah I'm sure they may be right some time (the train may arrive eventually), same as a stopped watch.

Some of them have their own agendas and biases.

It isn't obvious with all of them without reading the "output" for some time!!

errr emm, this is actually what this form of capitalism is, virtually everything is done to enrich the already rich, while making sure everyone else gets screwed, go capitalism!

Figures like this will make it more likely ECB will continue to hike.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2023/mar/17/markets-us-banks-first-republic-rescue-business-live

Nobody on here knows $hit at the end of the day. We take an interest but that's about it.

Posters continuously posting doomsdayers everytime a fairly notable incident occurs are just trolls. And the one on particular on here is a troll who thinks they're an oracle.

No sign of them in here reporting CS down 10% today. Clearly as much of an agenda as a doomsdayer.

It all depends. A bank may run into a situation where it's solvent but temporarily can't meet intraday needs, in which case, lending it money (a bailout) can prop it up during that crunch, mitigate the nasty effects and save depositors (rich or poor), as well as reduce contagion.

When it comes to a systemic crisis, like 2008, not lending any money to banks in that situation could (was) going to end up with people not being able to get money out at ATMs and some genuinely edge of the abyss stuff

If a bank has fucked up, no one really has a problem with it going down. But if it's a big bank, and it going down could trigger all sorts of unpleasant contagion and panic, which could cause collateral damage to normal or well performing banks, which could create really big problems (like 2008), that's when it can become harder to just "let it fail".

...ah no, i appreciate that, failing banks are very complex and potentially extremely dangerous due to those complexities, sometimes, maybe a lot of the time, it makes sense to bail them out, but theres clearly something deeply wrong with the whole process, by continually bailing them out, it sets a precedence of carry on, and engage in whatever practices you want, without repercussions, it creates an environment of endless risk taking without consequences, thats a major problem for us all, no matter where people are on the socioeconomic scale, we cant keep doing this!

Who said banking was complicated? Cause I certainly didn't. I've worked in Finance for nearly 20 years, I've never had a difficult job in all that time.

I still haven't a bulls fcuking notion what the next Lehman's is. Which is why I live in a 3bed in Dublin suburbia.

Id wager yourself and Dhonjoe are about the same, so yous dont know $hit either and we're all just in here killing time and speculating out of boredom and interest.

So, will anyone offer an opinion on the safety / integrity of the average Irish bank deposit at this point in time ?

...and again, credit is now hardwired to achieve primarily one objective, to aid asset price inflation, this is causing deep instabilities in global financial and asset markets, and serious social instabilities, rising wealth inequalities etc, we cant keep doing this, we cant keep playing this game, and expect things to remain stable!

oh and i advocate for a more deficit spending approach, in order to become less reliant on credit supplies, in order to try maintain some element of stabilisation, even though id imagine this to would introduce its own problems...

...and again, banking finances cannot be simplified and compared to house hold spending, theres clearly high levels of speculation and damn right dangerous behaviors within the financial sectors, and our unwillingness to accept these behaviors are causing serious problems for all, including for these financial institutions themselves...

again for example, there was a clear case of insider trading in davys post 08, and nothing happened over this, no major investigations, no law suits, no nothing, it was quickly bundled up and sold off, and nothing to see here, thats not normal! oh and according to some experts in the field, those that purchase such operations, are more than likely also up to no good! nothing to see here!

might interest some here...

Friday, 3/17, 4:30 EDT

https://umsystem.zoom.us/j/96278987370

What is the alternative to the current banking system?

the safest bank in the world would be a bank that doesn’t lend and keeps all its money in cash with the central bank. How would people buy houses cars etc as there would no longer be credit. Are you advocating the government will lend to consumers. Like it or not credit is the life blood of economic activity and is required. As for fraud in banking I dread to think the levels of fraud if this was managed by the public sector where nobody is accountable for anything.

Your entitled to your opinion by it doesn’t mean everyone needs to agree with it.

what I am saying is that banking is safer now and it’s unlikely to cause another GFC. Does that mean we won’t see another GFC no it doesn’t because as you describe it the snake oil salesmen still exist but mainly outside banking. Is there potential that a less regulated area outside banking that could implode and bring down the banks system because people loose confidence Yes of course that risk exists. And I have always highlighted that this is where I believe the real risk of another GFC would stem from.