Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 1/30/2006 2:19:08 AM EDT
I just read about this on another site...and found it curious that snopes has not yet put the boot to the story so far.... Link to Snopes on this topic

Makes me think twice about what I store where.
Not changing anything just yet...but depending on what comes out of this, some planning might be in order. It does sound like BS...I can't see how the fed would have the staffing or time to deal with the task of policing the number of safe boxes in America.

Thoughts?
Link Posted: 1/30/2006 2:31:02 AM EDT
Who do you think is going to go to work at a bank to let you in? Think customer service is poor now? Wait till the SHTF.
Link Posted: 1/30/2006 2:32:14 AM EDT
The Feds dont have to have the staff. They have the Banks do it for them.

That said, I'm skeptical. I personally dont have a Bank box anyways. I dont like the thought of having something I might need be on restricted access to me in the sense that I have to go to the bank when the bank is open. Well, if SHTF on a weekend what am I supposed to do? Cant exactly write a memo to the SHTF event and ask it to postpone itself for 72 hours till I can get to a bank..........
Link Posted: 1/30/2006 2:34:02 AM EDT

Originally Posted By JDeere_1530:
Who do you think is going to go to work at a bank to let you in? Think customer service is poor now? Wait till the SHTF.



I have often considered that point.
Depending on the impact to our financial infrastructure, there might not be a reason for a bank to be open in the first place. We have already seen an attack close our stock market. I can image that it wouldnt take much to close a bank as well.
Link Posted: 1/30/2006 2:39:01 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/30/2006 2:40:03 AM EDT by STRATIOTES]
Ask a great depression surviver about how much they trust banks.

When you sign the bank card you sign away all rights to anything in that bank, don't believe ? then sign the bank card all rights reserved with prejudice and see if they will open an account for you ? friend have tried, they refuse to open the account.

I had a bank manager say to my face as well as the account holder and a witness that the bank was first party holder in due course of the bank account.

That means if it is in their bank, it is their money/property if safe deposit box.
Link Posted: 1/30/2006 2:45:37 AM EDT

Originally Posted By STRATIOTES:
Ask a great depression surviver about how much they trust banks.

When you sign the bank card you sign away all rights to anything in that bank, don't believe ? then sign the bank card all rights reserved with prejudice and see if they will open an account for you ? friend have tried, they refuse to open the account.

I had a bank manager say to my face as well as the account holder and a witness that the bank was first party holder in due course of the bank account.

That means if it is in their bank, it is their money/property if safe deposit box.




+1 Once you sign it's their money.
Link Posted: 1/30/2006 2:47:28 AM EDT

Originally Posted By STRATIOTES:
Ask a great depression surviver about how much they trust banks.



They didn't trust banks because there was no FDIC back then.
Link Posted: 1/30/2006 5:20:32 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Tomislav:

Originally Posted By STRATIOTES:
Ask a great depression surviver about how much they trust banks.



They didn't trust banks because there was no FDIC back then.



And the FDIC can cover what percentage of bank deposits? 1% if I recall...hardly a drop in the bucket. It's merely a feelgood measure.
Link Posted: 1/30/2006 5:24:09 AM EDT
When you open an account with a bank, whether it is a safety deposit box, checking or savings account or a CD it is THEIR money you loaned it to them. To compensate you they give you intrest. This is how banks are able to loan people money for credit cards, home and car loans.
Link Posted: 1/30/2006 5:24:32 AM EDT

Originally Posted By macro:

I can't see how the fed would have the staffing or time to deal with the task of policing the number of safe boxes in America.




uh, Feds just call or fax all the major bank chains, issue the order
Link Posted: 1/30/2006 5:29:01 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/30/2006 5:47:39 AM EDT by krpind]

Originally Posted By billclo:

Originally Posted By Tomislav:

Originally Posted By STRATIOTES:
Ask a great depression surviver about how much they trust banks.



They didn't trust banks because there was no FDIC back then.



And the FDIC can cover what percentage of bank deposits? 1% if I recall...hardly a drop in the bucket. It's merely a feelgood measure.



It is quite a bit more than that.

A lot of banks have failed since the inception of the FDIC.
Many more have been prevented from failing due to ploicies of the FDIC.
Those poilcies are kinda of a pain in the ass to some of us. Like I remember when I could decide I wanted to buy something on Tuesday, call the bank and write the check. The bank would cover the check until I could get to the bank on Sat, and sign the note. Banks don't do that anymore. (They still will they just don't like to)
NOT ONE DEPOSITOR HAS LOST A SINGLE DIME IN A BANK FAILURE OF A FDIC INSURED INSTITUTION.

ETA.....I know how to spell policy
Link Posted: 1/30/2006 5:31:25 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Tomislav:

Originally Posted By STRATIOTES:
Ask a great depression surviver about how much they trust banks.



They didn't trust banks because there was no FDIC back then.



Uh, the FDIC protects the bank, not the depositor.
Link Posted: 1/30/2006 5:40:09 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/30/2006 5:40:56 AM EDT by krpind]

Originally Posted By ar-wrench:

Originally Posted By Tomislav:

Originally Posted By STRATIOTES:
Ask a great depression surviver about how much they trust banks.



They didn't trust banks because there was no FDIC back then.



Uh, the FDIC protects the bank, not the depositor.



Uh.. the Feds know that the public MUST have confidence in the banks.

The FDIC protects depositors money up to whatever the max is now. But again NO depositor has EVER lost a dime no matter how many millions they had deposited in a FDIC protected institution that failed. PERIOD.
Link Posted: 1/30/2006 5:43:22 AM EDT
Your deposit are guranteed up $100,000 by the FDIC if it is a FDIC bank, which most are. However in total break down, the government will not be able to cover all losses from every bank. Individual banks are easily covered, but if you are FDIC bank you are strickly audited. I work at a bank, total SHTF and I won't be here I will have drained my account and gotten any needed items out of my box yesterday.
Link Posted: 1/30/2006 5:44:33 AM EDT

Originally Posted By ar-wrench:

Originally Posted By Tomislav:

Originally Posted By STRATIOTES:
Ask a great depression surviver about how much they trust banks.



They didn't trust banks because there was no FDIC back then.



Uh, the FDIC protects the bank, not the depositor.



Is that why it is called Federal DEPOSIT Insurance Corporation?
Link Posted: 1/30/2006 6:08:08 AM EDT
Gee didm't we do this last week...
Link Posted: 1/30/2006 7:05:54 AM EDT

Originally Posted By erickktm:
...in total break down, the government will not be able to cover all losses from every bank...



My way of looking at it has always been, in the event of a true, total breakdown...or as some here put it, SHTF....the 'dollar' could be devalued to the point where paper currency is useless to begin with. In an environment where the conceptual value of the currency trends toward zero, the only medium of exchange will be items with intrinsic value. To put it another way, in a complete meltdown of the banking system, we would resort to barter and trade. Beyond that, we would resort to force. Those from families that lived through wars (meaning in war torn countries, for example a family living in Poland in the late 30's) might agree that when the banks fail, ammunition becomes the accepted currency.
Link Posted: 1/30/2006 7:07:03 AM EDT
You can't ever trust what is under someone else's control
Link Posted: 1/30/2006 7:14:41 AM EDT
Will FDIC protect your loses?

Yes, but when is the question. Banks can take a week or more to process a simple check, how long do you think they will take to process an FDIC request, not to mention the .gov slow down.

If you can't live without it, don't let someone else controll it.
Link Posted: 1/30/2006 7:16:37 AM EDT

Originally Posted By erickktm:
Your deposit are guranteed up $100,000 by the FDIC if it is a FDIC bank, which most are. However in total break down, the government will not be able to cover all losses from every bank.



Sure it will. It'll make good on 100% of deposits - in worthless $100 bills pronted on rolls like toilet paper.
Link Posted: 1/30/2006 7:18:52 AM EDT
That's why my valuables are in my safe at home.

They have the best security system in the world, a slightly off big fat guy with a gun.
Link Posted: 1/30/2006 7:20:49 AM EDT
Documents are the only thing I keep in a Safe Deposit box. If the SHTF, then my insurance policy and IRA info is pretty much f'n useless, now isn't it? People who keep weapons in a safe deposit box are going to be among the first to submit to the Zombie virus, anyway...
Link Posted: 1/30/2006 7:26:29 AM EDT
Link Posted: 1/30/2006 7:26:34 AM EDT

Originally Posted By FunYun1983:
Will FDIC protect your loses?

Yes, but when is the question. Banks can take a week or more to process a simple check, how long do you think they will take to process an FDIC request, not to mention the .gov slow down.

If you can't live without it, don't let someone else controll it.



IIRC during the S&L problems, there were folks who 2 years down the road still didn't have access to their money.

But, thats OK, because they didn't "lose" it, afterall, "No one has ever lost a dime of money insured by the FDIC"


RIGHTTTTTTTT
Link Posted: 1/30/2006 7:32:33 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/30/2006 7:54:08 AM EDT by pyro6988]
I work in a bank.



Safety Deposit boxes are done as a service for customers. Yes banks usually charge a fee for a box but less than .01% of our revenue is from the fees.

There are a lot of Federal regulations about safety deposit boxes.

It is a common misconception that banks will compensate you if you safety deposit box is broken into. The contents of boxes are not insured by the bank or the Fed.

We have not received any requirements from the Fed regarding safety deposit boxes and SHTF scenarios. I also do not see this ever happening.

It is possible that the Fed might limit access to customers' money during SHTF.

All that said, I personally wounldn't keep any SHTF items in a safety deposit box and I work less than 100 feet from my box.


ETA:
I can speak from experience when I say it takes about 10 minutes to rip out a lock. When a customer looses there keys the locks are actually drilled and ripped out. Banks are never allowed to keep spare keys of boxes that are issued, federal law.

With a court order someone could gain access to your box, again only by destroying the lock or using your key.
Link Posted: 1/30/2006 11:45:34 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/30/2006 11:57:00 AM EDT by Tomislav]

Originally Posted By ar-wrench:
IIRC during the S&L problems, there were folks who 2 years down the road still didn't have access to their money.



You do not recall correctly. For starters, the FDIC did not insure S&Ls.
Link Posted: 1/30/2006 11:53:33 AM EDT
if you have something thats that important, buy a really good safe and keep it at home. that way you can guard it at night as well i'm sure that the average arfcommer is much more heavily armed than the average bank-ninja.
Link Posted: 1/30/2006 12:23:11 PM EDT
I work in a local bank and have been part of the Disaster Recovery Team for the past three years.

Have never seen any news like this from the Feds or DHS.

Don't believe everything you see on the 'net . . . .
Link Posted: 1/30/2006 12:27:56 PM EDT

Originally Posted By mucknuggle:
That's why my valuables are in my safe at home.

They have the best security system in the world, a slightly off big fat guy with a gun.





99%of Arf.com....myself included....
Link Posted: 1/30/2006 1:08:31 PM EDT

Originally Posted By VTHOKIESHOOTER:
When you open an account with a bank, whether it is a safety deposit box, checking or savings account or a CD it is THEIR money you loaned it to them. To compensate you they give you intrest. This is how banks are able to loan people money for credit cards, home and car loans.



That isn't accurate, and the common misperception that this is how the banking system works is extremely destructive.

Banks don't loan out deposits, banks use deposits as reserves.

The money they loan, they borrow themselves. They conjure it into existence by calling your signature on the loan agreement an asset, against which they borrow newly minted money from the fed at whatever the interbank rate (fed funds esentially) is at the time, and they make money on the spread.

When you borrow money from a bank, it isn't money that somebody somewhere earned and then loaned the bank so they could loan it to you, it's money they're "printing", and then loaning at interest.

All debt is inherently irredeemable, once the interest begins to accrue there isn't enough money created to pay the debt incurred by it's creation. If people all started paying off debt faster than others were borrowing new money the money supply would decline, even if we just stopped borrowing more, if total debt in the system stabilized, the money supply would decline as the interest consumed it. The total debt is about 4 times the current money supply.

There isn't enough money in the world to repay the debt, and there certainly aren't enough deposits to fund all the loans made by banks.

Almost everybody owes a bank FAR more than they keep on deposit, those who have lots of assets don't keep them in savings accounts.

Once debt is created, it can only be destroyed by default or inflation, the individual can pay off his debts, but the society must continue to borrow more and more money faster and faster forever or the system ceases to function.

That is the nature of a fiat currency regime, a system that makes debt instruments legal tender in payment of all debts.

It's a system that requires constant, exponential growth operating in a finite environment.

Free market capitalism requires a free market for capital. The federal reserve system has been slowly strangling the republic for nearly a century now.
Link Posted: 1/30/2006 1:23:47 PM EDT
tag
Link Posted: 1/30/2006 1:34:57 PM EDT
No actually we do loan funds based on deposits, it is ussually our cheapest money. Yes we do borrow from the fed fund only after we have loaned out all of our deposits. Are loan spread is based on a combination of both. We also have several customers that have way more in deposists than loans. Money is constantly being made, every hour you work, money is made, every product converted from raw material to product, money is made.
Link Posted: 1/30/2006 5:12:23 PM EDT

Originally Posted By erickktm:
No actually we do loan funds based on deposits, it is ussually our cheapest money. Yes we do borrow from the fed fund only after we have loaned out all of our deposits. Are loan spread is based on a combination of both. We also have several customers that have way more in deposists than loans. Money is constantly being made, every hour you work, money is made, every product converted from raw material to product, money is made.



I realize that, that isn't the point.

What is the ratio of deposits/money owed the fed?

What is your reserve requirement?

Money isn't created whenever value is added, wealth is.

Money and wealth aren't necessarily the same thing.

Wealth becomes money, new money that wasn't before in circulation, only when it's borrowed against. selling it only transfers money from one individual to another.

All new money is loaned into existence, there's no other mechanism to put it into circulation unless you just give it away...
Link Posted: 1/30/2006 7:25:43 PM EDT
gee the whole world SHTF, all the banks fail and people are surprised that the FDIC is going to have issues? What a concept.

What are you keeping in there that you would need in an SHTF? If you can get in the door to get to the box, they will be able to fund you some money. If you really are scared that things will be so bad that the money won't be any good what do you think in your box will be any better?

Out here in earthquake country, most sane preparedness advisors recommend a few hundred in small bills at home, there are a variety of in place plans and preps to get emergency ATMs up and emergency banks and running in really badly fouled up places and contingency plans to get the banks back into communications with the outside world. Like any other SHTF you better have what you need where YOU are. Bank vaults are pretty much earthquake proof, you just might need to wait a few days until they get dug out.
Link Posted: 1/30/2006 8:00:35 PM EDT
This is another internet bs myth............

The banks don't have a "secret" plan to call in the
homeland-security-we-can't-find-illegals-on-every-street-corner-agents to
"monitor" safe deposit box removals, not saying those a$$hats won't try to do it
but, as of now, there is no "secret" plan to deny gold, silver, cash and weapons
to bank customers, and I'll personally laugh in the face of anyone that says its true
Link Posted: 1/30/2006 11:02:41 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/30/2006 11:03:54 PM EDT by PaDanby]

Originally Posted By BankerBilly:
I work in a local bank and have been part of the Disaster Recovery Team for the past three years.

Have never seen any news like this from the Feds or DHS.

Don't believe everything you see on the 'net . . . .



HAH, your part of the conspiracy. I bet you even have a flag with fringe in your office. You think I'm going to believe you, a co-conspirator when I can read it in the book I found in a website recommended by a guy who was on all night radio?

Besides everybody knows the Feds are going to be taking away the guns, so there Nyah
Link Posted: 1/30/2006 11:26:22 PM EDT

Originally Posted By macro:

Originally Posted By erickktm:
...in total break down, the government will not be able to cover all losses from every bank...



My way of looking at it has always been, in the event of a true, total breakdown...or as some here put it, SHTF....the 'dollar' could be devalued to the point where paper currency is useless to begin with. In an environment where the conceptual value of the currency trends toward zero, the only medium of exchange will be items with intrinsic value. To put it another way, in a complete meltdown of the banking system, we would resort to barter and trade. Beyond that, we would resort to force. Those from families that lived through wars (meaning in war torn countries, for example a family living in Poland in the late 30's) might agree that when the banks fail, ammunition becomes the accepted currency.



Your right about that. According to Newsmax magazine there is a law on the books that if there is a national emergency the government call confiscate individual owned gold and silver.
Link Posted: 1/31/2006 4:45:11 PM EDT

Originally Posted By copenhagen:

Originally Posted By macro:

Originally Posted By erickktm:
...in total break down, the government will not be able to cover all losses from every bank...



My way of looking at it has always been, in the event of a true, total breakdown...or as some here put it, SHTF....the 'dollar' could be devalued to the point where paper currency is useless to begin with. In an environment where the conceptual value of the currency trends toward zero, the only medium of exchange will be items with intrinsic value. To put it another way, in a complete meltdown of the banking system, we would resort to barter and trade. Beyond that, we would resort to force. Those from families that lived through wars (meaning in war torn countries, for example a family living in Poland in the late 30's) might agree that when the banks fail, ammunition becomes the accepted currency.



Your right about that. According to Newsmax magazine there is a law on the books that if there is a national emergency the government call confiscate individual owned gold and silver.



I don't suppose you can give us a cite to that law? Or is it like the secret Executive Orders that Clinton had putting all reporters on double secret probation?
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 6:20:09 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/1/2006 6:25:17 AM EDT by twl]
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 7:40:17 AM EDT

I realize that, that isn't the point.
Ok
What is the ratio of deposits/money owed the fed?
81% deposits 19% fed funds
What is your reserve requirement?
Not sure I assume you mean deposit resurve, not loan loss, maybe 1%.
Money isn't created whenever value is added, wealth is.
being pretty picky here. I work for money and so do you, we don't work for wealth.
Money and wealth aren't necessarily the same thing.
They aren't necessarily different, wealth can be money and money can be wealth. Assets are assets and some times thay are money.
Wealth becomes money, new money that wasn't before in circulation, only when it's borrowed against. selling it only transfers money from one individual to another. Not if I sell it for more than it cost to produce, anyways the fed is not making the money producers are buy adding value to products. Money and wealth is also being lost through depriciation and use every second.

All new money is loaned into existence, there's no other mechanism to put it into circulation unless you just give it away...
Link Posted: 2/1/2006 7:40:47 AM EDT
Living in NOLA, I've just gone through this first hand. Basically, the banks were more than happy to let people get stuff out but it took them weeks to get the staff to do it. Some banks fucking had their boxes on the bottom floor or in a basement. I have a bunch of family that still lost everything in their bank boxes because the banks had them too low.
Top Top