5 ms·

"When banks are held responsible its the people who end up losing money." If a bank is insolvent, as it looks like Deutsche Bank is, you've _already_ lost your

"When banks are held responsible its the people who end up losing money." If a bank is insolvent, as it looks like Deutsche Bank is, you've _already_ lost your money. "You can't just let them be when they struggle because you'll end up paying double." Bailing them out means paying double if they lose your money making stupid loans or ridiculous bets and then they get bailed out with taxpayers' money. They were already in deep trouble eight years ago and were bailed out. What did they do with that lifeline? Placed even more ridiculous bets with it, bringing in the bonuses but expanding the bank's debt to a whopping $42 trillion. Besides, banks aren't special. They're businesses like any other. They need to go bankrupt if they make stupid business decisions. "It doesn't mean that banks don't end up "paying" especially if there was misconduct but it's not as simple as just giving them a cold shoulder." No of Wall Street executives prosecuted for the financial crisis of 2008: 0.

dogma1138 10y ago
There is lost your money, and there is lost your money. Technically once you gave money to the bank you've lost it, what you've gained is a body that would tell other people on your behalf "it's ok i got him covered". Once you can't use an ATM, can't pay bills with direct debit, can't do anything then you've effectively lost your money. The problem is that DB is a commercial high street bank, and not only that it's one of the biggest banks in the world and across Europe. Overall all the banks in Europe are in a mess http://ei.marketwatch.com//Multimedia/2016/09/28/Photos/NS/MW-EW741_wolfst_20160928053102_NS.jpg http://ei.marketwatch.com//Multimedia/2016/09/28/Photos/NS/M... and it's not entirerly due to their fault, the negative interest rates implemented by the central banks didn't really help. Please save us the sentiment which is actually likely to be out of place here because people have somewhat incorrect analogy to wall street and 2008 and say the banks are guilty, their employees/managers are criminally negligent and they should be put on trial. DB isn't LB on many levels, it's haunted by it's ghosts, but what plagues it and every other major European bank is not the same, and in this case they aren't the only body at fault, the policies of the ECB and the local central banks in Europe so far were pretty devastating for the banks.
sjclemmy 10y ago
> Besides, banks aren't special. They're businesses like any other. They need to go bankrupt if they make stupid business decisions. I disagree. Banks form the foundation of the infrastructure of the capitalist system. Failure of banks has a large effect on the businesses that rely on that system to operate.
- cmurf 10y ago
  Is it really a capitalist system if the foundational infrastructure is ultimately public (the state), not private?
  - sjclemmy 10y ago
    Yes it is. Capitalism doesn't mean an absence of government or make any distinction between private or public ownership, it simply means that the way resources are distributed is through a market system. In order for the market to operate a means of exchange that we all agree upon and trust is required. This is money. Banks manage the market system's means of exchange. If something happens that impedes the exchange, the system is compromised.
    - cmurf 10y ago
      capitalism: an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state. That's the dictionary definition. What you're talking about is "the free market" - which is not the same thing as capitalism.
      - sjclemmy 10y ago
        If we are nit picking... What I am talking about is free market capitalism. The definition you quote talks about trade and industry - which we can reduce down to calling the means of production. Capitalism is about ownership of the means of production for private gain. It doesn't exclude government ownership of resources / means of production or indeed and perhaps most importantly the money system. I think you could even argue that public ownership of the money system facilitates the capitalist economy. What does the central bank / federal reserve do?

dogma1138 10y ago

There is lost your money, and there is lost your money. Technically once you gave money to the bank you've lost it, what you've gained is a body that would tell other people on your behalf "it's ok i got him covered". Once you can't use an ATM, can't pay bills with direct debit, can't do anything then you've effectively lost your money. The problem is that DB is a commercial high street bank, and not only that it's one of the biggest banks in the world and across Europe. Overall all the banks in Europe are in a mess http://ei.marketwatch.com//Multimedia/2016/09/28/Photos/NS/MW-EW741_wolfst_20160928053102_NS.jpg http://ei.marketwatch.com//Multimedia/2016/09/28/Photos/NS/M... and it's not entirerly due to their fault, the negative interest rates implemented by the central banks didn't really help. Please save us the sentiment which is actually likely to be out of place here because people have somewhat incorrect analogy to wall street and 2008 and say the banks are guilty, their employees/managers are criminally negligent and they should be put on trial. DB isn't LB on many levels, it's haunted by it's ghosts, but what plagues it and every other major European bank is not the same, and in this case they aren't the only body at fault, the policies of the ECB and the local central banks in Europe so far were pretty devastating for the banks.

sjclemmy 10y ago

> Besides, banks aren't special. They're businesses like any other. They need to go bankrupt if they make stupid business decisions. I disagree. Banks form the foundation of the infrastructure of the capitalist system. Failure of banks has a large effect on the businesses that rely on that system to operate.

cmurf 10y ago
Is it really a capitalist system if the foundational infrastructure is ultimately public (the state), not private?
- sjclemmy 10y ago
  Yes it is. Capitalism doesn't mean an absence of government or make any distinction between private or public ownership, it simply means that the way resources are distributed is through a market system. In order for the market to operate a means of exchange that we all agree upon and trust is required. This is money. Banks manage the market system's means of exchange. If something happens that impedes the exchange, the system is compromised.
  - cmurf 10y ago
    capitalism: an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state. That's the dictionary definition. What you're talking about is "the free market" - which is not the same thing as capitalism.
    - sjclemmy 10y ago
      If we are nit picking... What I am talking about is free market capitalism. The definition you quote talks about trade and industry - which we can reduce down to calling the means of production. Capitalism is about ownership of the means of production for private gain. It doesn't exclude government ownership of resources / means of production or indeed and perhaps most importantly the money system. I think you could even argue that public ownership of the money system facilitates the capitalist economy. What does the central bank / federal reserve do?