Sure, there is more money than they know what to do with. It won't buy you diddly-squat, but you will be able to withdraw it.
Remember Zimbabewa...there you have $20 and $50 Billion dollar notes. It costs about 1 Billion to buy an orange.
More "government speak".
Buy gold and silver, it will be the only true hedge against this inflation and deflation!!!

Longer I watched, the more I got annoyed at how she constantly bobbles her head from side to side. Kinda like a pendulum, I thought.

Very interesting. I've talked to some of my 'Merican friends, and they say it's ridiculously easy to start up a bank, eg here:

http://www.smartmoney.com/investing/economy/how-to-start-your-own-bank/?hpadref=1#

Many of these smaller banks are on shaky ground in the US now because of larger banks' lending practises.

Let's not forget the leveraging ratio, or whatever they call it - where historically most *commercial* banks would lend out based on 10:1 of their assets - but all of a sudden *investment* banks (non-banks) like these crazy institutions like Lehman's etc could leverage up to 40:1

That just flooded the system with so much money, and since Wall Street employees get most of their scratch from bonuses, the more they leveraged (or Ponzi-ed) the system, the better their own take home pay - but like all Ponzi schemes, they collapse under their own weight.

Add to that the fact that 66% of the US economy is based on consumer spending (thanks China for helping out) - not real production - we have a system based on borrowing, with an amplitudinal effect based on those borrowed dollars that are really gonna be tough to pay back in the future.

How do that ever come to happen???

Gold and silver - I don't know. I really don't know anything anymore.

But I've been saying to my friends in my darker moments that I'll tell my wide-eyed grandchildren that when I was middle aged, I could buy strawberries in winter.

IMHO the US has a couple of options - either print baby print, or default.

I should stop now - but think of states, cities, municipalities, whatever. They can't print their own $$. It either comes through taxes or from the federal government.

It seem ugly to me.

I stand corrected by myself - according to quick follow-up reading some of these institutions using derivatives leveraged to more than 100:1

Ouch

She's in the red.

As for Zim: I bought my kids the 10, 25, 50 and 100 trillion dollar Zim banknotes on E-bay. $7.00 Now we can't run out of money.

Hey. It's only money! You print it,they will come.Now excuse me while I go feed my unicorn,and water my rainbow.

They can't run out of money as long as the economy produces enough goods and services that they can sponge off for taxes. If it goes in the tank due to excessive taxes and regulation, they'll run out of money soon enough.

such a good idea Jay, I just went to ebay and bought myself a 100 trillion in Zimbabwe dollars. I will never feel broke again.

This is wonderful news - epecially for lazy socialists. Sheila Bair has discovered the long-sought after money tree! Granted, seedlings are exceedingly costly, but the returns are endless!!

Back to reality - the message itself is not as disturbing as knowing that many people who view this will actually believe that the FDIC "cannot run out of money". Must be nice to be head of a company where uncontrolled external factors - e.g. terrorism, blackouts, natural disasters, fire - will not affect your bottom line.

However, would you expect a different oratory from the head of a company? If she said anything else (i.e. reality), the affect on small banks as well as financial markets would be incredible.

I have seen some media reporters question Federal Reserve officials about the US defaulting. Sure it's a reasonable question, but like this Sheila Bair statement, there's really only one answer. Imagine, if you can, waking up Monday moring to learn that one of the Federal bank officials (certainly not Bernanke) indicated that the US might default. My guess is we would not be going back to sleep for some time.

So while I agree with most posters about Bair's hypnotic speech - it's pure BS; if it's effective (i.e. most people believe it)- that's actually good.

My wife believes the same thing, money grows on trees and can never run out. Oh well im off to put in some overtime.

WTF is with those weird head movements!?! It was so distracting and annoying I couldn't even focus on what she was saying!

"not one penny of taxpayer's dollars" except maybe that 500 billion line of credit that will be leveraged twice - once when FDIC goes to get it, and once again when the the surviving bank customers pay it back to the FDIC through the FDIC's recovery from the banks. I'd like to use my money two or three times before I actually have to lose it.

"Sorry, you're no longer allowed to smoke in front of that mirror"...

The head-swaying was mesmerizing, but I found the now children, just because mommy and daddy aren't going to be living together for a while, that doesn't mean it's your fault, and we both still love you very very much tone more than grating enough to keep me awake.

Dave in Mississauga must be right, though; if everyone panicked and pulled their investments, that couldn't possibly be good. So I guess it's nice that the FDIC is lying to everyone; and that people seem to be able to believe in the Washington Money Fountain.

"I'm from the government and I'm here to help you."

if this woman gets sacked she could hire herself out as a metronome. LOL !!!

Pour me more tequilla - Sheila! Sheila - you may not run out of money but let me tell ya - your money is running out of "value".

Their Hope and Change is going about as well as the Leaf's.

"In short, we cannot run out of money."

Where I come from those are called "famous last words."

I recognized that head tilting action. It is what elementary school teachers used to do to to try to come across to kids as a gentle caring person. You know ... like a puppy dog. It's cute on a puppy, but is socialist-condescension on an adult in government pretending to be a gentle caring person.

A body language expert would have a field day with this Obamabot.

What is most disturbing, is just 25 seconds in, she says, "....all deposits are safe...." as she is shaking her head, side to side, universally meaning NO. Maybe it's just habit, but, anything she says beyond that is just the TOTUS with a female face....

Momar...Black Mamba...
You guys are exactly right... That was the impression I got too with the head flopping and the phony "caring" voice. I could just imagine at the end, her pulling up the covers around the kids neck and turning out the light.... "Now sleep tight...mommy loves you"....don't worry...

PUKE...

Are there any adults left in the US and if so when are they going to take over the country?

Wasn't it Brg. Gen. George Custer that used to include a retinue of journalists and good -time hangers on etc. on his military forages into Indian Country.

While Gen. George allayed the faint-of-heart's fears of physical reprisal by the Natives as next to nil... and his military force technically superior (as his track record to date was exemplary))... there was nothing to fear.

Alas...In 1876 ,Boisterous George's curious crowd soon came to realize that just because something has "governmental assurance" stamped on it doesn't make foolproof!

...nor will all the wishing in the world make it so.

That was the single most disturbing video announcement I've witnessed.

Besides the bobblehead presenter with the measured voice tone and timing the condescending smile etc.

The substance of that message is that they have a magic money tree to go to so do not worry.

I especially like the part about asking banks to prepay premiums three years in advance to cover loses steming from banks being short of funds.

Did anyone else catch that part? About 2:30 into the spiel.

I feel a deep hypnotic belief coming on.

Yes! I see the light! The FDIC can borrow indefinately from the government of the USA, which has endless credit. All is safe! I can sleep at night now. Oh! poor mortals that we are, so lucky to be witness to the very miracle of the munificence of the Obamessiah now brought upon our Earth.

Now good night children.

The substance of that message is that they have a magic money tree to go to so do not worry.

OMMAG, you summed it up perfectly, much better than my poor mortal attempt :-)

That was BIG SISTER.
Black Mamba: sub-atomically precise analogy! Beautiful. EBD-like.

Book recommendation: Murray Rothbard, The Case Against the Fed. 150 pages. Mises.org
(forget Ron Paul's End the Fed).

If, like me, you've sorta understood how the Fed works, but not quite 'cos there seemed to something missing, this is the perfect antidote. Rothbard is a towering genius at making complex financial/economics related material understandable even to an intelligent high schooler, with zero dumb-down.
Here, you get a clear picture not only of the actual mechanics of the Fed but also an excellent short history of the collosal deceit of the big banks in foisting this legal counterfeiting machine on the American public after about 15 years of lobbying. You will see why the word "Central" was avoided (Americans never liked CENTRAL stuff). Aha! Federal Reserve System, regional banks. De-centralization!!! You will clearly see why we need a 100% reserve banking system, and how Friedman was wrong in recommending regular increases in the money supply.

Well, Kate, I gave up drinking not long after my first visits here, but I must, again, mildly and respectfully (and fearfully) chastise you as you didn't recommend a stiff drink during Rock Star (Charlie Rose's term) Alan Greenspan's tragic failure to remove the punchbowl even after warning us as early as 1996 of "irrational exuberance", which as it turns out was FULLY RATIONAL as the market cottoned on to the "Greenspan Put" (we can take humongous risks and Rock Star Al, The Wizard of Green, will save our smarty-pants asses).

"I especially like the part about asking banks to prepay premiums three years in advance to cover loses stemming from banks being short of funds."

Yep, caught that,OMMAG,and it set off the alarm bells! That statement says it all,they're broke, and are desperate to scrape up as much as possible.

Her "kindergarten teacher speaking to the children" tone grated on my nerves.

I'd call her a lying bitch, but don't want to offend dog owners.

Almost as bad as the BS propaganda that was flung about by the Canadian Deposit Insurance idiots a couple of years back.

Somewhere, recently, I read that the target reserve rate for the FDIC was 1.5% (?). At one point (?yr), when this ratio was reached, the banks were actually given a fee holiday.

OMMAG, I caught that part. This lady must have been a union boss at one time. You know the type. Capitalists always have loads of money stashed away somewhere that they are trying to keep from the rest of us.

Mike T:

Almost as bad as the BS propaganda that was flung about by the Canadian Deposit Insurance idiots a couple of years back.

Care to expound on this, perhaps with the addition of a fact or two? Considering that there hasn't been a Canadian bank failure since 1923, and that in the 40 years of the CDIC's existence, it hasn't had to pay out a dime to bank depositors (there have been only two payouts of any kind, in the failures of Standard Trust and Allied Capital, neither of which were banks), I would like to know what you consider BS. In addition, in 2005, the limit on insured earnings was increased from $60,000 to $100,000, and the CDIC embarked on an awareness campaign to inform the public of that. I don't consider that propaganda, but perhaps you do. If so, please provide an explanation of why that's so.

KevinB:

A question for you: Do you believe that we conservatives/libertarians should be BIG and admit that Chretien/Martin were right to disallow those bank mergers?

At the time I was quite angry about this, but, with considerable humility now, I'm not so sure! The banks, after all, are not really private businesses in the strictest sense, as of course they are all engaged in legalized, government-coordinated counterfeiting, which must be highly regulated.

1985
Canadian Commercial Bank
Northland Bank of Canada.

By definition the US is now a failed state. Criminals are running the Federal Reserve and the Treasury, with the legislative and executive branches serving no other purpose than to facilitate the continued theft of the nation's wealth by the criminals - the lobbied interests of bankers. Now with deficits too large to finance without money creation, the US has no alternative than to buy its own debt in order to delay the inevitable collapse of the dollar. Iceland is a good example for what is in store for Americans once the reserve status of their dollar runs its course ...high unemployment and high inflation, which will lead to political instability. Interesting times ahead indeed.

It may help to recall that this current situation was purposefully set up by America's socialists. Despite repeated efforts by the more sensible Americans to put a stop to it, we have created an entire two generations of mathematical numbskulls with our deplorable schools and the entretainment industry. Many of us tried to stop this. Many of us will not bank with institutions that were playing fast and loose. Penny Pritzger and the Sandler family, both bankers heavily involved in this scam, were supporters of the Current Occupant (Obama).

But that's not the point of my comment. My point is this: that this current situation was purposely engineered. The potential for this collapse was purposefully built into the system with many years of effort. The current collapse was purposefully triggered in June, 2008, leading into the Nominating Conventions for both political parties, here in the U.S. For those not familiar with the deep level of scum that is New York Senator Charles Schumer, you may need to look more deeply into him. For myself, when he did this, and he did do this, I knew that it was not an accidental public release of a document that was intended to be addressed only to the regulators involved:

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/878809/did_senator_chuck_schumer_cause_indymac.html?cat=3

Charles Schumer purposely pulled the trigger on the bank runs that his party had set up, by first weakening the banks. He and his cohorts forced the banks to make worthless loans. He was backed by the scum, such as Pritzger and the Sandlers, that created the heavily leveraged mortgage-backed securities that were used by the banks to attempt to off-load these worthless loans. They then pulled the trigger to collapse the house of cards that they had built.

Nothing that scum like Schumer does, is by accident. He pretends to innocence, but only when it's convenient for him to lie. Otherwise, he is only too quick to remind people that he scored a perfect 1600 on the SAT exam, used for American colleges. Amazing how clueless he can suddenly be, when his letter causing the run on the banks bcomes public. He knows he is smart; he's convinced that that is an adequate substitute for morals.

My spidey sense's been saying for years that we're going down due to the greed of the money grubbers.

My mom once knit me a heavy-duty, 100%-wool sweater which I HATED. I kept it around, however, at the top of my cupboard, calling it my "Bosnia Sweater" -- you know, the sweater I'd wear when we had to start chopping up the furniture for kindling.

Unfortunately, I put it in a rummage sale a few years ago, obviously prematurely.

She is correct in saying FDIC cannot run out of US dollars. They own the printing press. True, the dollars may not be able to buy much but the depositor will have them.
Me No Dhimmi is spot on that the government of the day was, in hindsight, right in not allowing the merger mania of the late 1990s. Banks create money and, with fiat money, must be closely regulated.

" . . . must be closely regulated.
Posted by: norm at October 25, 2009 7:29 PM"

horror of horrors.

norm, did you vote for ronald reagan, famous for deregulation?

be careful now, you might be labelled a leftnut wingtard.

*they all do it*

Oops.

RockyT is correct; in fact, he's even more correct than he suspects! After further digging on the CIDC site, they list 43 financial institutions that have failed in the last 40 years. However, more digging did not unveil how much the CDIC ended up paying out on each, or on the total, of claims. I'm going to give them a call tomorrow to see what I can find out.

Thanks Rocky for pointing out my error.

I watched her with the sound off. She looks like she's reading a nursery tale to three year olds off a teleprompter.

Americans are all fractious three year olds is now the official policy of the United States government.

Where did they dig up this woman?

Normally I agree with everything I see on this blog, but this shallow analysis and the callow, ignorant comments are appalling.

The POINT of Sheila Bair's speech is that the FDIC will NEVER fail to protect deposits. It does not mean there will be a free lunch. It does not mean banks, bank customers, and perhaps taxpayers will have to make depositors whole. The POINT is that no one needs to run to their banks to withdraw funds because they're worried about their bank failing. Bank runs are devastating to banks and the economy. Try learning what the FDIC's job is!

The FDIC already has provisions set aside for much of the expected losses for the remainder of this year and next year. Those provisions are why the Deposit Insurance Fund (DIF) is in the red. It does NOT mean the FDIC is out of money.

The FDIC has a statutory requirement to replenish the DIF when it falls below a certain limit. The funds for doing so come from BANKS - it is an industry-funded insurance program. The ability of banks to pass on this cost to their customers is limited by competition, so bank OWNERS will bear most of the burden in the form of lower or negative profits. The right people are paying for their sins.

There was nothing to "catch" in the video about pre-paid assessments. This wasn't a hidden agenda. This was Sheila Bair's idea from earlier this year which was rejected by the Board. She doesn't make decisions on her own - the FDIC Board consists of the heads of all the bank regulators. As the crisis progressed, the other chairmen came to realize Bair's idea was the best of all possible alternatives. Those alternatives were additional special assessments, borrowing from banks, and tapping the credit line at the Treasury. Bair was adamant that banks must be the ones to pay for this mess, not the taxpayers. Her statement that she can draw on the Treasury credit line if she needs to is letting people know that if the pre-paid assessments aren't enough, depositors of failed banks will still be covered.

The pre-paid assessments will produce around $45 billion for the DIF which will more than cover the total $100 billion in expected losses (much of which has already been paid). Banks will carry the pre-paid assessments as an asset on their balance sheets. Banks lacking liquidity will be exempt from the pre-paid assessment. The remainder of the industry is flush with liquidity, so this isn't making the problem worse. Those pre-paid assessments as an asset can be SOLD if a bank needs immediate liquidity.

To the DOLT who called Bair an Obamabot, she is a REPUBLICAN. She has staunchly opposed Obama's power grab for a consolidated Consumer Compliance regulator which he will use to enforce enhanced Community Reinvestment Act requirements. Bair understands that dual Risk/Compliance examination responsibilities makes for better regulation. If management is failing in either risk or compliance, it is probably failing at the other.

To the other DOLT, the FDIC does NOT own or control the printing presses. The FDIC is an independent government agency with NO CONTROL over money supply.

It's a shame there wasn't more money in the DIF before this crisis, but the FDIC has a statutory MAXIMUM fund as well as a minimum. Any excess must be returned to banks. So if the DIF was not sufficient to cover the risk, it's because CONGRESS restrained the FDIC. Sheila Bair instituted risk-based premiums which raised assessments for banks involved in risky lending or using "hot money" deposits to fund growth.

People have an incomplete understanding of what bank regulators can and cannot do. They cannot and should not micromanage bank loans. When loans are performing, it is difficult if not impossible to determine that the bank has taken on too much risk. Examiners see only a small sample of bank loans and ONLY those still on the bank's balance sheet. They can't see loans which the banks already sold to Fannie or Freddie.

There are many people to blame for this crisis - Bair isn't one of them. She was warning about this crisis before it happened. She is also the only chairman in Washington who cares more about the safety and soundness of the financial system than protecting their own turf. If she loses her job, there will be hundreds of firms which will pay her 100 times her current salary.

Seriously, what do all you morons want from her? Do you want MORE banks to fail solely because of bank runs? Do you NOT want her to go to the Treasury if she must to protect YOUR bank deposits? Do you NOT want her to show confidence in her ability to protect depositors?

Blithering idiots! Do your homework before spewing nonsense!

What's the figure that America pays every DAY in interest on its debt - over 1 BILLION DOLLARS!!!

With that amount of US money floating around - well lets just say that you will soon need a wheel barrow to haul it in to have enough to buy a week's groceries.

But don't worry folks - every penny of your every "increasingly worthless" dollars are protected.

Hypo Amateur:

The ability of banks to pass on this cost to their customers is limited by competition, so bank OWNERS will bear most of the burden in the form of lower or negative profits. The right people are paying for their sins.

Uh, righhhhht. Banks that are prudent, that keep leverage ratios within reason, that demand borrowers have jobs, assets, and documentation, and that don't pay out obscene bonuses for short term performance - in other words, the banks that survive - are being asked to pay 3 years' dues up front to bail out depositors at banks that didn't do the foregoing.

Please explain how the "right" people are paying for their sins; seems to me like the innocent are being told to cover for the guilty.

Hypo Pro - I think most get what you are saying but you might not be catching some of the nuances here. This clip is meant to soothe and message folks into thinking that all is well. If all were well such a pronouncement by Ms Bair would hardly be necessary.

Fact is .43 cents of every dollar the US government spends is borrowed money. The US government is on course to run a Trillion (thats 12 zeros baby) every year for the next ten years. They already spend over a billion a day on interest now.

Just this week the US government is set to borrow 150 billion dollars just to be able to keep going and Congress will soon vote to up the overall borrowing limit. What if the world's creditor nations eventually look at the US and decide that they have reached their limit?

Despite your and Ms. Bair's assertion that the money will always be there folks in general do have a brain and can reason that there is a danger here. The danger comes when the US is so far in debt that their financial destiny is in someone else's hands.

How safe is folk's money then? Well, they could always fire up the printing presses and flood the world with increasingly worthless dollars.

You see - its not quite as black and white as you might believe it is.

But thanks for the lecture anyhow.

Different Bob:

Yes, it's meant to be soothing. Bank runs are caused by PANIC. She said there are signs of recovery. Many people believe that with good evidence. I do not. I agree entirely with all your dire assessments of our economy and debt. Nevertheless her point remains. No matter how bad things get or how long, there is no reason to believe your bank deposits are at risk. The government will no more let deposit insurance fail than shut down the military. Inflation will take some of your savings. A failed deposit insurance guarantee will take ALL of it. So it really is as black and white as I say it is. This is my industry. I know what I'm talking about.

KevinB:

I have no wish to violate Kate's stricture against flame wars, so I'll be as polite as possible. You do not have a clue what you're talking about. Fraud and mismanagement is widespread. The remaining banks don't have clean hands.

Pre-paying assessments is not punishment. The DIF is industry funded insurance and it must, by law, be replenished. The banks get to keep this as an asset. They can buy and sell that asset. The alternative is a SPECIAL ASSESSMENT which is an additional premium. Now THAT would be punishment.

So I ask again, Einstein, how does Sheila Bair replenish the DIF, as required by law, without either prepaid assessments, special assessments, borrowing from banks, or borrowing from the Treasury? How does she get liquidity to maintain deposit insurance intact?

BTW, she's already increased regular assessments by 5bps and changed the base from deposits to assets to charge larger banks more.

I work in the banking industry and I can tell you we were all pleased the FDIC Board took this route. It's a bitter pill but better than all other alternatives.

Different Bob:

Yes, it's meant to be soothing. Bank runs are caused by PANIC. She said there are signs of recovery. Many people believe that with good evidence. I do not. I agree entirely with all your dire assessments of our economy and debt. Nevertheless her point remains. No matter how bad things get or how long, there is no reason to believe your bank deposits are at risk. The government will no more let deposit insurance fail than shut down the military. Inflation will take some of your savings. A failed deposit insurance guarantee will take ALL of it. So it really is as black and white as I say it is. This is my industry. I know what I'm talking about.

KevinB:

I have no wish to violate Kate's stricture against flame wars, so I'll be as polite as possible. You do not have a clue what you're talking about. Fraud and mismanagement is widespread. The remaining banks don't have clean hands.

Pre-paying assessments is not punishment. The DIF is industry funded insurance and it must, by law, be replenished. The banks get to keep this as an asset. They can buy and sell that asset. The alternative is a SPECIAL ASSESSMENT which is an additional premium. Now THAT would be punishment.

So I ask again, Einstein, how does Sheila Bair replenish the DIF, as required by law, without either prepaid assessments, special assessments, borrowing from banks, or borrowing from the Treasury? How does she get liquidity to maintain deposit insurance intact?

BTW, she's already increased regular assessments by 5bps and changed the base from deposits to assets to charge larger banks more.

I work in the banking industry and I can tell you we were all pleased the FDIC Board took this route. It's a bitter pill but better than all other alternatives.

Hypo - take a pill buddy - you're not talking to the uninformed. I have been in the financial services industry for the last 381/2 years so you have little to teach me.

I know how the system works. I have operated my own financial services business for a long time and have managed alot of money for alot of people. The issue is not how the system works. The issue has alot more to do with the mess the US has gotten itself into that shakes the confidence of the average investor.

It is more than a little unsettling that government debt levels have skyrocketed and continue to do so. It is precisely my career experience that gives me pause for concern - not comfort from the likes of Ms. Bair.

Intuitively we all know that the deposit insurance corp will be there but, and this is an important "but" and the point I tried to make earlier but kind of went over your head - the mess the government is in is and will continue to cause huge inflation that will erode the purchasing power of the money depositors have.

You don't have to be Einstein to understand how the system works. You've demonstrated that. It does, however, help to have a little insight as to the extent of the overall problem and how some of the effects on depositors cannot be protected by the FDIC.

Different Bob:

You should be well-aware that Bair's message was not targeted at YOU. She was speaking to shrivelled old ladies worried about losing their life savings in a bank failure.

Bair's actions should play no part in your concerns. I ask you again:

What should she do differently?
How else should she replenish the DIF?
Should she not reassure the public that deposits are safe?
Should she not draw on the Treasury line if the DIF busts?
Should she declare an end to banking as we know it and give up regulation and insurance?
Should she quit and let a real Obamabot run the show?

NOTHING went over my head. I read what you said and I said it concerns me to. But that has NOTHING to do with Bair, the FDIC or her speech. She is trying to prevent bank runs, not calm storm waters like Jesus. You're the one who needs the pill.

You see all the problems and have no solutions. If you don't understand the FDIC role, Bair's job, and the options available to do that job, you still have a lot to learn.

Yes of course .... No One who comments here understands.

Shrivelled old ladies..... yes that's where the real money is.

Banks MUST pay! Yes just like they were forced to lend money to people who would never pay it back.
quibble about that not not being the FDIC if you want.

And of course they will pay until there isn't one left that CAN pay.

Taxpayers won't pay! Sure the magic money tree at the federal reserve.......

Something tells me out visitor is a Government Employee.

And where was the FDIC for the last 20 years?

The head swaying was morse code. She said -
"Get out whilst you still can - buy gold!"

From an article posted on the FDIC website...

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.'s debt-guarantee program allowed banks and other firms to issue debt backed by the FDIC for a fee. This allowed banks to have access to short-term funding when markets were frozen last year. Issuing government-backed debt made the investments less risky because if the bank failed, the government would cover losses.

The "Government would cover the losses."
The "Government would cover the losses."
The "Government would cover the losses."

Just keep repeating that until you believe that "The Government" means someth other than "The Taxpayer"

ooops it's only the Wall Street Journal......Not the FDIC website....

Ommag - you'll notice I quit the back and forth with Hypo. I once read something written by someone with just a little more insight than me and it went something like this: "If you get into an extended argument with an idiot - you better stop before the casual observer can't tell who'se who.

I'm done. Best you be too.

I had some spare time to kill Bob .... Cheers!

Well, Bob, you didn't answer a single question about how we can maintain the integrity of deposit insurance. Everything else you said was complete balloon juice. How you connect pre-paid assessments to soaring money supply is a frothing conspiracy theory of monumental ignorance and hysteria.

I am the ONLY person here who understands bank regulation and deposit insurance. That is quite clear. Maybe it's because, oh, I have some sort of daily dealing with the topics. But if this discussion is going to devolve into me trying to explain the real facts while you mutter and sputter end-of-the-world musings, I can do nothing to help you.

Seeing stupid liberals spewing nonsense is normal. Seeing stupid conservatives/libertarians doing it is disturbing. I expect better from SDA folks. The articles I read here every day are enlightening. The comments are usually provocative and informative. This post has ceased to be rational and informed.