Tag Archives: bank deposits

Growing Political Deception On Bank Deposits Theft

4 Jun

Truth-Lies

On All Fool’s Day 2013, this blog published the exposé — since cross-posted on globalresearch.ca — that G20 Governments All Agreed to Cyprus-Style Theft Of Bank Deposits In 2010.

It is telling to observe how politicians (and the media) worldwide are using the deceitful art of sophistry to obscure this truth.

As they all begin to pass the necessary legislation to enact what they have already agreed to — in secret, without providing clear and transparent advice to the public — they are seeking to subtly imply that these measures are needed as a result of what happened in Cyprus.

When the truth is, little Cyprus was just the first test case for implementing the Goldman Sachs-headed internationalist Financial Stability Board’s new bank “bail-in” regime, agreed to by all G20 Prime Ministers and Presidents nearly 3 years ago.

Ponder carefully the emphasised passage in the following Reuter’s news story:

EU draft bank rescue law would not shield big deposits

(Reuters) – A draft law that a group of European Union lawmakers voted for on Monday would shield small depositors from losing their savings in future bank rescues, but customers with more than 100,000 euros in savings when a bank failed could suffer losses.

A group of lawmakers in the European Parliament’s economics committee overwhelmingly voted that, from 2016, large depositors in the EU might suffer losses if a bank gets into serious trouble. The plan was similar to a deal in Cyprus, where wealthy depositors at two banks took hits to save the country from bankruptcy.

Under the EU proposal, a bank would dip into large deposits of over 100,000 euros once it had exhausted other avenues such as shareholders and bondholders. But deposits under 100,000 euros would be spared.

“The case in Cyprus showed how important it is to have clear procedures for making shareholders, bondholders and ultimately depositors foot the bill,” a press release from the committee said after the vote.

See what I mean? The Cyprus “bail-in” test case, deceitfully used as an example of why governments supposedly need to pass legislation for “similar” actions in their own countries … legislation that they already agreed to pass anyway, nearly 3 years ago.

EU finance ministers agreed last week that large, uninsured depositors should be subject to losses but some countries may still seek some flexibility on how they wind down their banks.

The “finance ministers” agreed, “last week”?

This is a deception.

As shown previously, the Prime Ministers and Presidents of the G20 nations all agreed to the policy framework laid down by the Financial Stability Board (FSB) at the Seoul G20 Summit, way back in 2010.

A framework that explicitly includes “bail-in” of banks, using the deposits (i.e, savings) of bank “creditors”:

“Carry out bail-in within resolution as a means to achieve or help achieve continuity of essential functions…”

Click to enlarge

Click to enlarge

There is something else that is very important to note.

The FSB, politicians, bankers, and bureaucrats all want you to believe that these new procedures might only place at some risk the savings of so-called “large” or “big” depositors.

This is untrue.

The FSB-recommended “powers” for the G20 nations’ new bank “resolution authorities” exhibit Orwellian deception and moral relativism at their finest. Embedded within their recommended “Safeguards”, is a caveat allowing those “resolution authorities” to act with impunity when it comes to the theft of depositors’ money:

“Resolution powers should be exercised in a way that respects the hierarchy of claims while providing flexibility to depart from the general principle of equal (pari passu) treatment of creditors of the same class…”

Click to enlarge

Click to enlarge

In other words, whether you have more than (say) 100,000 Euro/Dollars/Pounds deposited in a bank, or less, it is recommended (by Goldman Sachs’ FSB) that G20 governments legislate powers enabling their “resolution authorities” the “flexibility” to treat you any way they see fit.

“Equal treatment” is only a “general principle” to these people.

You may be wondering, if G20 governments all agreed to this way back in 2010, then why are we only now seeing nations from Canada to Europe beginning to draft and pass bank “bail-in” legislation, behind a smokescreen of lies and deceit?

As can be seen from the FSB press release of November 2011:

“Implementation of these measures will begin from 2012. Full implementation is targeted for 2019.”

Click to enlarge

Click to enlarge

Some nations’ politicians are simply moving faster than others, in the coordinated drive towards the ultimate goal of stealing your savings, in order to “bail-in” so-called “systemically important” banks:

Earlier on Monday, Bank of England Deputy Governor Paul Tucker said the EU law on bank recovery and resolution would be a milestone towards a global system.

Advertisements

FINMA: Stealing Depositor’s Money An “Elegant” Solution

27 Mar

5680140164_53f49cea09_z

More from AFE, following on from yesterday’s client note:

…today we have been sent a paper from one of our clients which was distributed by [Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority] FINMA all the way back in June 2011 regarding the Swiss SIFI banking policy framework which calls stealing depositor funds to save a failing bank an “elegant” solution. The mindset which accompanies this attitude is frightening to contemplate.

Of note is that depositors are being referred to as creditors, and that deposits are considered debts of the bank. The theory they are operating on here is that any account which bears interest is actually an investment, subject to any risks the bank is willing to take. This is a huge paradigm change from the traditional view of most people who believe that the banks are there to safe-keep their funds.

The people have been led – like sheep to the slaughter – to believe in this. Now, which coven of high priests have preached that traditional view, down through the previous century or two, from their High Altars of Authority, do you think?

Simon Heapes, AFE’s Treasury Director says, “In Australia and NZ, you cannot have an account that does not accrue interest. They simply will not open the account unless you sign the agreement which indicates the account will bear interest. Therefore you have legally become an investor with the bank, and your deposits are liable for helping to bail out your bank if it gets into trouble. Because you are a joint investor with the bank therefore you have effectively given the bank your money for investment purposes which is an unknown risk by most depositors if the investment or investment entity (bank) fails!

Additionally, the moral hazard created here is that lawmakers are forcing the liabilities for risky decisions taken by bankers directly onto innocent depositors who ultimately pay with their savings for irresponsible behavior of bank decision makers.

Should these policies be written into EU law, it will make losses for large depositors a permanent part of future banking crises. Of course the timing of this is quite good, just in time to bail out banks in Spain, Portugal, and other EU countries where the crisis has been put into stasis until some genius figured out hey, you can just steal it from the depositors.

As I have long argued, the “modern” global monetary system is fundamentally flawed – that is, if you hold the view that a system which is designed to enslave the people and nations of the world through debt, maximise income and real asset wealth inquality over time, and so enable a small ruling class of elite “owners” of all the world’s assets and resources, is a “flawed” design. Of course, if you are one of those in that ruling class, then you will see the system as inherently good. And if you are one of the many species of remora, attached by your sucker to the shark’s belly, benefiting from a free ride, and protection, while living off either the scraps of your host’s feeding frenzies, or, by eating its faeces, then you too will see the shark-like, predatory monetary system as inherently good.

The flaws are structurally embedded in the design.  Thus, it can not be fixed. It must be replaced in toto.

These flaws include fractional reserve banking, endogenous money creation (ie, banks create new money by making loans, “reserves” if any are acquired via the central bank later), centralised (private) control, and above all, usury (offering and charging “interest” of any kind). It is a system that is, by design, destined for exponential “growth” (due usury) of currency supply, and ultimate collapse … with the elite money-lenders – the system architects – acquiring all the real assets of the world along the way. And thus, enslaving the world to their every whim.

We can now see more clearly that end coming into view.

“Possession Is Nine Tenths Of The Law” The New Rule For Bank Deposits

20 Mar

quote-do-what-thou-wilt-shall-be-the-whole-of-the-law-aleister-crowley-44869

Pandora’s Box has been opened.

And all the demons of lawlessness – shrieking “Do what thou wilt” and “Might beats Right” – have flown out.

From the New Zealand Herald:

Kiwis with money in the bank could see their nest eggs and savings dwindle in a government move the Greens say is a “Cyprus-style solution” to help out failing banks.

New Zealand banks are readying their IT systems for Open Bank Resolution, a Reserve Bank policy that in extreme cases like insolvency would see a bank’s losses shouldered in part by its shareholders and creditors – including everyday depositors.

The Reserve Bank has the power to freeze bank deposits but up to now has lacked the technical infrastructure to implement it – hence their requirement for banks with retail deposits of more than $1 billion to change their systems and meet their requirements by July 1.

Under the policy, which can only be activated by the Minister of Finance, if a bank fails a statutory manager is appointed to calculate the bank’s liabilities.

The statutory manager can then freeze a percentage of customers’ bank deposits to cover those liabilities before it reopens the next trading day.

But the Green Party’s co-leader Russel Norman said OBR was a “Cyprus-style solution” that would see small depositors suffer to fund big bank bailouts.

“Bill English is wrong to assume everyday people are able to judge the soundness of their bank,” he said. “Not even sophisticated investors like Merrill Lynch saw the global financial crisis coming.

Prime Minister John Key said the OBR policy was a “last-resort facility” and when told that few people seemed to know about it he responded that it was unlikely to be used.

Yeah right.

Where have we heard that before?

Oh yes, that’s right. Cyprus.

Where the Finance Minister told the people on March 1st that: There is really no more stupid an idea even to consider […] a haircut on bank deposits.”

Only days later, a 10% “haircut” on deposits is a very ‘live’ option.

Now you know just how much you can trust the politico-bankster “unholy alliance” to safeguard your savings.

There is an old saying: “Possession is 9/10ths of the law.”

Clearly, this “logical rule of force that has been recognized across ages” is now the new (old) standard for law and order.

They have it. And you don’t.

Suggestion.

Find somewhere else to stash your cash.

%d bloggers like this: