RE: Pure Genius: Yellow Vests Plan nationwide BANK RUN…
They may be able to empty all the ATM's, I do not know if they use coins in france or not, but if I was a banker and a lot of people were lining up to do major withdrawals, I would let them withdraw there money, and give it to them in coins. What could anyone really do about it? The bank is not refusing to give the customer their money. Coins are after all legal tender. I don't know how much 2,000 French dollars would weigh in coin, but I imagine it would take a long time to count out 2000 french dollars or euro's in coins.
In America there is nothing that says a bank needs to give you your money in paper form. Also there is nothing that says they need to give you anything to carry your money in, nor any law that says they need to help you carry your funds to your car.
So if I was a banker, and I had warning of this possible bank run, I would make damn sure I had a lot of coins on hand.
Thanks for commenting.
Of course they use coins, but pls tell when the heck banks have used coins when giving deposits back to users at the window? Really? When depositors take out big amounts of their savings, it is usually not in pennies and nickles, no? I am not really sure what you are trying to get at with this "coins" strategy banks could opt for (even if legally they could). Thus, could you please enlighten me more on your line of reasoning? (as I don't understand the real point you are trying to make. Thanks.
A more realistic tactic on their part, if they wanted to, would simply be to reduce the daily withdrawal amount permitted.
For the limited withdrawal that would work on ATM's and Credit cards, I am not sure how other banks work in other countries, but in America I do not think they can say no to a person closing out or withdrawing a very large sum of money from their account.
The coin tatic work two ways, one the banks are required to count out your withdrawal, it is easier and faster to count out $50.00 at a time than to count out $0.01 at a time. Coins also weigh a lot more than paper. I have no idea how long it would take to count out $5000.00 in coins or how much they would weigh. But the point is the bank is doing nothing wrong. There is no complaint that the next person in line waiting to make a withdrawal can make.
A run would indicate people withdrawing large amounts of money, so the longer it takes to count it out, the fewer customers they can serve before closing time. The hours of banks are regulated, so once again when the time comes to close all those other people waiting have no choice but to come back the next day.
I was looking at it from a bank stalling the withdrawal tactic. There is always something that can be done to counter any action. Bank run get as much money from your bank as you can, to slow the rate of withdrawal, slow count use smallest denomination available, fewer people served, fewer withdrawals.
Again thanks for commenting/engaging.
I get your point about the coin tactic and how it could be effective. But it is not realistic, nor practical at all.
How many coins do you really think they hold in each branch? It would take only but a handful customers getting all their funds out for the bank to be completely emptied of coins. Even if this took a day or two, what would happen next? They would close for a week until they get more coins from other branches?
Be realistic my friend. Do you really think banks would be STUPID enough to employ such a tactic?
Be a bit more critical and objective. Were a bank to do this would only further demonstrate how they are NOT to be trusted (as they would create huge doubt as to whether they have sufficient funds on hand). Their product (fractional reserve banking) is already a fraud and ponzi scheme and, like fiat currency itself - the underlying product which it is "holding", it is all a matter of a CONFIDENCE GAME. In other words, the confidence depositors have in both the institution and its ability to render depositors funds (cash) back to them. Consequently, should a bank choose to go with a coin tactic like you said, don't you think it would take not-long-at-all before its customers/depositors would get angry and lose trust in them worsening the banks stance and good standing?
I was being critical, perhaps not of the banks, but of a planned run on banks.
A run on a bank means that people have lost complete and total confidence in that institution. Any delay tactic a bank or financial institution can use to slow the run on the bank would possibly allow for cooler heads to prevail or for the government to take action to curtail any adverse economic impact from the run on the bank.
Banks receive coins and paper currency on a fairly regular bases, from the mints. To slow the run it need not be all done in coins just smaller denominations, I still think coins would cause the biggest slowdown.
Personally if people of France want to do a run on the banks in their country, that is fine by me, they will become the European version of Venezuela.
Until the PONZI SCHEME is replaced, any run on the banks will do nothing for the middle class and below of a county, the upper middle class, the rich, and the politicians will still be in power.
If the people of France are that upset at the government and their money system, then a slow move to cash only society is what they need. They need to take their paycheck to the bank and cash it, not deposit it, they need to get rid of their credit cards, and need to sell their house, (or just give it back to the bank), and rent or buy some land and build bit by bit a home.
People need to look at the people calling for this Run on the banks. Who is calling for it, what is their agenda, and what are they going to replace the banks and government with? Blindly following anyone or any group, or organization will get people nowhere, other than in a bigger hole.
Present a solution/replacement for the banks to the people. Let's say the bank run works, how long are you going to be willing to stand in line for the government to count out how much they owe you if you are a government employee. If you are not a government employee, where is your boss going to get the paper cash and coins to pay you?
Critical and objective are relative terms. There is always a Devil's Advocate side to things that people just do not want to see or even think about. By ignoring the possible consequences of our actions we are not remaining critical nor objective, we are just blindly stabbing at ghost in the dark.
Any way it is a situation that has been on going since the 1920's. Banks are here, and I hear a lot of complaints about banks. I hear very little about replacements for banks or about people taking responsibility for their own financial decisions.
I agree with you that there would be "adverse economic impact from the run on the bank", no doubt. And that people should consider these ramifications. Sometimes you need to break some eggs to make an omelet.
But I do disagree with you when you say there are no alternatives. There are plenty. Bartering and private transactions have occurred since the beginning of time (in human existence).
Today, in this digital age we now have blockchain (an immutable ledger platform whereby transactions can be totally and transparently recorded - something which the current financial system lacks) and cryptocurrencies (some more private, some less). Although it is a nascent industry it will be the equivalent of the steam locomotive during the industrial revolution and the internet a few decades ago. This technology will improve and it is actually good that there are a lot of "growing pains" in the industry now (read - mostly a lot of manipulation by the banksters) but a lot of brilliant people are finding ways around this. Dash is but one example (look into how it has been used in Venezuela and other countries that have suffered from a destruction of their fiat house of cards).
If we do not demolish (or at least strongly challenge) the current financial/banking system, they will use these very technologies against us to create their own beast system (follow recent talks by the witch Christine Lagarde from the criminal IMF cabal) and we won't stand much of a chance against them. That is why we need to collectively act NOW.
And that is why I believe the planned run by the Yellow Vests, will at the very least wake up more of the masses, educate them, and in turn empower them to seek better alternatives whereby they can take their financial destinies into their own hands, rather than banking criminals.
Amen.
I suppose this is where we agree to disagree on the effects of a run on the banks, and on reality. What is say Apple Co. or IBM, or Microsoft, or any car dealer going to take in barter for one of their products. I agree in time Crypto may, may, be a solution, but it is nowhere near a mature enough industry yet.
Bartering is and always has been around, but what are you going to barter for a new car? For a new House? We are close to being a cashless society, why upset the apple cart just before the fruit stand? Does any one remember the effects and ramifications of the last big run on banks? Did no one learn from that era? Look at how much power the "international" "bankers" had prior to that run on banks. Look at the power the International bankers wrested from the local bankers of the time. Who stands to make immediate profit off of a run on the banks? It is unlikely the person taking their money out of the bank.
We didn't even talk about gold and silver which could still be used as the medium of exchange par excellence. They've worked well for over 5,000 years. And the only times they haven't is because banksters debased their currencies from them (like the Romans and Chinese and Mongols, etc. did centuries ago).
Today, gold could easily be put on the blockchain with 100% backing. This is possible. It is just a matter of not allowing the usual suspects of playing their old games. In fact, if you do some research you will find that several projects are attempting to do exactly this.
The challenge, though, of course would be to get the masses on board. But between failing fiat (in a failing banking system) and something tradable backed by something of value (gold, or other assets) which do you think they would prefer?
It is all a matter of education. That is the root. First, people need to learn about and educate themselves about what is WRONG with the current system. And then the next step is to know what can make it RIGHT.
Thanks for engaging in this discussion. It is very interesting (and most healthy) to exchange perspectives on this dynamic issue.