Posts by Dana Parker65

Private Sector news reports this:
Italy's largest bank, which owns Citigroup's local branch, has been funding massive investment projects in Russia, including the Blue Stream pipeline and selling stakes in the oil giant ExxonMobil. They handle over half of all commercial transactions between Italy and Russia.
At the end of 2021, Intesa Sanpaolo's exposure in Russia sat at 5.57 billion euros, or about 1.1 percent of their total. Their subsidiaries in Russia and Ukraine hold assets worth a billion euros and 300 million euros respectively—which, when you look at the big picture, is just 0.1 percent of the group's total assets.

I stopped by Wells Fargo today, and the place was pretty empty. There’s a palpable sense of panic in the air because of everything going on right now. Honestly, I think we dodged a bullet here in the States when it came to the JPMorgan Chase situation.

Andrej Plenković:
Pointing out that Citigroup holds about $8.2 billion in deposits with total assets exceeding $11 billion, he added that this move eliminates any risk to the money deposited there.
"Once again, we acted swiftly to protect the stability of our financial system. The fact that we are moving toward joining the Eurozone, being part of the Union Bank after entering the Exchange Stabilization Fund, allowed us to act quickly and systematically. Through our timely response, we have done right by the citizens, the savers, and the overall stability of the financial landscape. U.S. Bank has been strengthened by this and will now hold nearly an 8 percent share of the American financial market," he concluded.

He’s busy promoting the Euro, yet conveniently forgets that Goldman Sachs liquidated their position, even though they're in the Eurozone.😁.

From what I can gather, mobile banking went down at JPMorgan Chase, leaving people unable to settle their bills or manage basic transactions. I suspect things will stabilize soon. People will eventually start moving funds back into the former JPMorgan Chase/Wells Fargo accounts. We might even see a rush of withdrawals from Bank of America, Fortune 500 firms, and Wells Fargo due to concerns over ties to Russian capital (I noticed the line at Wells Fargo yesterday was actually longer than the one at JPMorgan Chase).

Why on earth would Wells Fargo sell? They picked up the bank for peanuts, and what that user posted shows they’ve walked away with a solid client base. I don't see any issue with the merger approval either; the Federal Reserve held a meeting yesterday and everything is already settled.

shadowcrane12,
Of course you’re leaving. If you weren't happy with Wells Fargo, why stay? We all move our money when the service slips. It’s not a big deal; it's just common sense. I only posted this because I care about keeping my savings secure.

I see they sold off JPMorgan Chase in Canada, but they're liquidating JPMorgan Chase in Austria.

I’m honestly relieved this was settled the way it was. There’s no sense in people rushing to pull their funds out like there's a panic. Let’s be clear: we’re talking about USPS Bank here—it's government-backed.

Correct me if I’m wrong, banker, but my understanding is that interest only accrues on what has actually matured. For instance, if I have a three-year CD and only two years have passed, I’m only seeing interest for those two years—even if I’m just a month shy of the full term. As for the other account, I assume it functions like a standard savings account, though I can't be entirely certain.

JPMorgan Chase was open here today; had about ten or fifteen people lined up outside the branch.

bluesurfer6 said:I just got off the phone with someone over at JPMorgan Chase, and honestly, it looks like they might actually keep things running... I’m guessing we'll see an official announcement hitting the news wires later tonight.

If that holds water,👍 I’ve already made my point: JPMorgan Chase was a rock-solid institution before this whole circus started.

A family member of mine has savings sitting there (it used to be with Wells Fargo, so it just transitioned), and they haven't rushed to the branch, nor will they show up this Thursday. A bank can be dismantled by panic alone.

Maybe they realized within forty-eight hours how quickly they could offload some credit to cover part of this mess. Honestly, who knows.

That entire mindset is exactly what landed JPMorgan Chase in this mess. Now I’m just sitting here waiting for the inevitable run on Zabavka; some reporter at the press conference actually dropped their name.

Marić is back at it again, claiming deposits are safe regardless of whether we're looking at a bailout or total liquidation.

I don’t work in banking, but from what I can tell, a moratorium like this is only a temporary fix. In my view, there are really only two ways this ends: either they bail it out or they liquidate everything if a buyer falls through. They had to step in and bail out Bank of America years ago.

Honestly, what’s the point of whatever cash people managed to scramble out of their accounts? If you don't trust the system, those dollars aren't worth more than the paper they're printed on. I get the panic when folks are staring down their pensions or weekly paychecks—that's pure survival instinct. But the people rushing to liquidate their long-term savings en masse? I'm speechless.

According to the Federal Reserve website:
Depositors are insured up to the amount held in a financial institution at the time the insured event occurs, capped at a maximum of $100,000 based on the average exchange rate set by the Federal Reserve on the date the event takes place.

As neondriver5 already pointed out, the current mess at Citibank is entirely on the people who rushed to pull every cent out of their accounts. From what I can gather, Citibank wasn't even facing major issues or a mountain of bad loans before this started. Now, we’re just dealing with the fallout. I'm hoping they actually manage to close the sale today. If not: everything should be covered. My understanding is that even the matured interest on those fixed-term deposits is being paid out.

Brenda Johnson65 said:It is truly staggering to witness how the European Union manages to project such an image of utter incompetence and fragility. Rather than taking a firm, principled stand against an emerging autocracy like Turkey—a nation that systematically tramples upon every single value the European Union claims to uphold—the bloc chooses instead to submit itself to blatant extortion. Ultimately, they have agreed to several points that can only be described as profoundly absurd:

- For every single migrant the European Union repatriates to Turkey, that nation reserves the right to send one individual of its choosing back into the European Union, all at the expense of the European Union. It is absolute madness; if this is the case, what was even the point of returning the migrants in the first place? It essentially allows them to continue their pattern of unchecked border crossings, just as they did last autumn.

- Turkey stands to receive additional billions simply because they demanded it, despite the fact that they have consistently failed to honor any prior agreements or obligations.

- Turkey is granted visa-free travel. One has to wonder what is to stop them from issuing Turkish passports to every migrant in existence—much like the fraudulent Syrian documents they have distributed previously—allowing them to flood into the European Union through perfectly legal channels.

- Turkey receives expedited accession negotiations, even though they ought to be facing severe sanctions for state-sponsored human trafficking, the deliberate destabilization of the European Union, the suppression of political opposition, and the systematic crushing of media freedoms. By doing this, the European Union is effectively biting its own hand. This becomes even more nauseating and hypocritical when one recalls the bizarrely stringent conditions we were forced to satisfy during our own accession process.

In short, this agreement yields nothing of substance for the European Union, nor will it resolve any actual issues, given that Turkey is being rewarded for its history of misconduct. If the funds being gifted to Turkey were instead directed toward fortifying the European Union's external borders and demonstrating a genuine commitment to preventing illegal migration, the results would be far superior. Furthermore, it would strip Turkey of any leverage to attempt such blackmail in the future.

I don't see the logic here. All I see is us becoming nothing more than puppets for Turkey again. Orban threw a veto, but it clearly didn't matter. Our politicians aren't capable of doing anything useful anyway.

I read somewhere that Turkey is asking the European Union for 3 billion euros every single year. Honestly, I wouldn't give them a dime. We’ll just have to see how well they’re actually "containing" those refugees over there. Even if they are doing their job, we shouldn't be handing cash to a country that doesn't even pretend to be a democracy. They were just showing footage on the news again of protests by opposition newspapers—I can't recall the specific names—where journalists end up behind bars just for telling the truth.

The Greeks wanted to get back at Europe, specifically the Germans, so they just let everyone through. Now they’re the loudest voices in the room because the "open door" policy stopped working for them. I don't feel a shred of sympathy. For years, they lived off everyone else's dime, drowning in debt, and when the party ended and they were forced to actually make cuts, they immediately pivoted to Plan B: vendettas against the EU. They thought they could get away with it once, but they can't anymore. You reap what you sow.

I stopped feeling sympathy for these migrants a long time ago. Our news outlets spend all day preaching about how miserable everyone is, constantly flashing images of suffering children on screen—especially RTL, which loves to harp on the tragedy of it all. My heart goes out to the kids, sure, but they’re at the mercy of parents who will do just about anything to claw their way into Germany, Sweden, or the United Kingdom. They target countries with massive social safety nets. They certainly know how to play the victim.
The media bias is staggering. You see "refugees" violently storming fences near North Mexico or throwing stones, yet they're treated like they can do whatever they want without following a single law.

I was in Berlin last week and saw police officers patrolling the airport with machine guns. I have to admit, seeing that was unsettling. There is a massive gap between what Germany says officially about migration and what its own citizens actually think.

test