SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Snowshoe who wrote (81902)10/21/2011 5:08:06 PM
From: Cogito Ergo Sum  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 217744
 
it's the depositors only that are insured.. right ? gov cannot be liable to cover the derivatives.. so BofA is gone and one less headache for the government.. maybe not so bad.. sell Merrill unit to cover as much deposits as possible.... maybe just let them all blow ?

BTW aren't deposit taking banks supposed to be not 'doing' derivatives soon ???? They shouldn't be anyhow..

OWS really should be hammering this one, as should TP... one of their common threads...



To: Snowshoe who wrote (81902)10/21/2011 7:49:14 PM
From: TobagoJack2 Recommendations  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 217744
 
<<Here's Why Everyone's Freaking Out About BofA Moving Its Derivatives To Its Retail Banks>>

... the americans are very inventive and out-of-the-box

there is nothing like any trillion of derivatives in the chinese banking system

a bank can only lose so little money by making bad loans, much as one could get hurt by firecrackers

a derivative fusion bomb ... is out of the box and ... off the planet


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News