Quote from: twiifm on August 05, 2014, 10:10:35 PM

Quote from: tee-rex on August 05, 2014, 08:49:40 PM

Haven't I already explained it that the Fed would print money for the FDIC after Congress would pass a corresponding act in case there is a need for such a legislation? Where did you get that the FDIC would be borrowing from the public? Please show me that part. Debts incur losses (if not paid indeed), they are just the two sides of the same coin. And if loss refers to income (according to your words), what the heck you began talking about losses when we were talking about debts?

Theres no protocol for FDIC getting money from the Fed. FDIC would get money from Treasury. I said this like 3 times already. You are explaining something you made up and does not reflect any factual evidence. Just doesn't work how you imagine. Accept it or go on being ignorant

Why do you read my posts so carelessly? In case the FDIC cannot cover the defaulted banks debts (which have become losses) by the available means (money from the Treasury), Congress would have to pass an act that would make the Fed print more money. It doesn't matter if this money is obtained by the FDIC from the Treasury or directly from the FED. You are trying to get away with petty semantics and particulars leaving out the whole point of passing debts (which are now losses) on to taxpayers indirectly. Read again, indirectly.

Quote from: twiifm on August 05, 2014, 10:10:35 PM

If FDIC borrows the money the debt isn't "socialized" because its the FDIC that holds the debt. You are claiming that FDIC borrows money and taxpayers has to repay the debt. WRONG. FDIC repays the debt. Theres no way for them to pass it off to taxpayers. They can pass it on to banks by raising premiums then banks can pass onto bank customers by raising fees.

You again failed to notice that I said "indirectly". How many times should I repeat it once you take notice? The FDIC repays the debt with the newly printed money, but the money which made up the debts didn't disappear into nothing. Is it that hard to understand?

Quote from: twiifm on August 05, 2014, 10:10:35 PM

Debt is not losses. Debt is an asset for lender and liability for borrower. If you borrow $1M to buy a house you didn't lose $1M. You have a liability. If the house falls below your buying price then you lose money. You can't even get simple concepts right

Uncollectible debts become losses and are written off as such. In effect, it means that you can't get back the money that has been loaned, but the money is still there, it just changed hands. This is just what happens when a bank defaults (read, has no more money). Gonna deny this?