Europeans drain billions from banks, fed up with shrinking savings
reuters.com
reuters.com
My current banks in the EU? One charges up to 1% percent per transaction and yes, that includes going to the bank to make a withdrawal. Another charges 40€ per month for a basic savings account. A third will probably kick me out soon, because I’m not an EU citizen.
My first guess would be that Europeans have a perception that their banks are exploiting them, and given any other rational option they will try it out.
The biggest rip-off in American banking is that narrow banking is effectively illegal (not the banks' fault), but HYSAs are starting to get around that.
An important qualifier! I get the impression that probably 95% of consumer deposits in the US either earn zero interest or some comically low rate like 0.00121% that all of the big banks offer on their savings, Interest Checking, and even "money market" accounts. And they also exploit people with monthly fees that can only be waived with minimum balances or by jumping through hoops like debit card usage. And "using other ATM" fees from 2 banks at once usually.
But apparently it could be worse with transaction fees and negative interest!
I feel like the few in the US who are savvy about personal finance have found the banks/CUs (i won't list them to avoid sounding promotional) that don't do any of the above. It doesn't say in the article where they are seeing these outflows actually go. I wonder if Europe also has good banking options that not everyone is aware of.
Sure, and those worst banks have massive market share[1]. I'm sure maybe 50-60% of the people with these accounts actually manage to correctly avoid the fees by minimum balances or direct deposits or the "use your debit card 10 times a month" policies. But like, Chase, BofA, Wells Fargo, Citibank... combined, their market share is massive. Chase, BofA and Citi are $12, Wells is $10. All require you to do certain things each month to waive the fee -- which seems easy to me with a steady job and savings, but a lot of people don't have that.
[1] https://wallethub.com/edu/sa/bank-market-share-by-deposits/2...
Coincidentally, just two days ago I commented on the distinction to someone suggesting this kind of service: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35790913
The Fed, for various reasons, implicitly disallow this type of narrow bank. Several people have tried but the Fed always denied their application to join the system.
It’s in general very hard to open a bank account in some EU countries even though you’re a lawful resident. There’re some “money laundering laws” that prevent no money laundering.
And the quality and quantity of additional services the banks offer sucks. I actually like banking super-apps in other countries, something you won’t find here.
Are you a US citizen? American laws make US citizens costly to have as customers.
Roughly speaking Congress was worried about Americans hiding money abroad to avoid taxes so they passed extremely punitive laws. This ended up being mostly pointless because the real tax evasion is done by people who pay lawyers and lovbyists to make sure it's all legal.
If a foreign financial institution has a US depositor they have to fill out a ton of IRS paperwork. If they mess it up the IRS can impose an extra 30% tax on all the institution's US income.
The bank I expect will kick me out doesn’t want non-EU citizens who are not EU residents. The bank that did, I think it was because of my citizenship (I was a German permanent resident at the time) but I’ll never really know as they didn’t give a reason, just 60 days notice.
Banks will deal with you, but not all banks, and some banking products (like brokerage accounts) are off limits.
Give them a hard time about it.
"If you are legally resident in an EU country you are entitled to open a basic payment account".
https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/consumers/financial-pr...
Doesn't seem ideal while simultaneously repeatedly begging the same rare US nationals with Swedish residence permits to move to work their mainframes, but who am I to judge.
In the UK Monzo and Revoult have quick access free bank accounts. I don't pay anything to have debit cards and saving accounts.
1 account in Germany, I pay 2€ per month for the account, includes a saving account, but no debit or credit card, only online access.
2 accounts in Poland where I also don't pay anything, unless I don't spent 300-350PLN (65e) per month using the debit cards. If I don't use debit card enough banks subtract 14PLN (3€). My saving accounts in PLN are 7%, 8% and 10%.
Maybe talk to your coworkers about better banks and deals, you're being taken advantage of.
Then you go to Greece and you pay exorbitant transaction fees for everything. 3E for any incoming transfer, regardless of amount. 10-15E to transfer 10k between banks in the country. Sky high interest rates for lending, unreasonable guarantee requirements and it's still really hard to get a loan. And then you get 0.25% for saving accounts. e-banking that may be pretty looking but a shame functionality wise. And you only have 4 banks (+1 zombie bank). The bankers are still making bonuses like it's 2007 and the public is funding them with transaction fees. The traditional banking business model of making money from the spread between lending and savings rate is pretty much dead.
I can't believe there can be any other country worse than Greece in the EU. Change my mind =)
ING still has 7.5% offer.
See https://www.wired.co.uk/article/revolut-trade-unions-labour-...
I recommend Wise.com though. Free. Multicurrency. Pays about 3.5% interest on your money (via a market fund).
It's not like these companies that do this don't have extremely rough interviews and clarify expectations of 55 hour weeks prior to employment. If you don't find enjoyment in working long hours, seems like that's not the company you want to be working at? There are plenty of companies with a better work/life balance, but they tend to pay less.
Demanding you recruit hundreds of customers, for free, to even be considered for an interview is downright exploitative. I don’t think any but the most predatory companies do this and it’s probably not even worth the legal exposure.
I suspect however this acts as a filter. By making people jump through this hoop, you make sure you’re only keeping docile and compliant people in your pipeline who can be abused and overworked.
Not the world I want to live in and that’s why I point it out every time I can to hopefully sway customers away from them.
What is unfair about this? What is so wrong about dedicating yourself to a company you beleive in? Revolut is an awesome company, doing amazing things.
I worked at Tesla, and unless you had something fun to do for the weekend (Like tahoe or something) they expected you to be in the office. I LOVED working at Tesla. I ended up leaving to start my own company a few years ago, but i will remember my time at Tesla for the rest of my life.
>Demanding you recruit hundreds of customers, for free, to even be considered for an interview is downright exploitative. I don’t think any but the most predatory companies do this and it’s probably not even worth the legal exposure.
This literally makes no sense and I think you are conflaiting something here? How would i recruit customers if i didn't work at the company? Are you talking they hired a bunch of people who had very high referals to the company? I know they offer a bonus if you refer your friends, so looking through those logs and hiring all the people who have high referals sounds like a great business move to me.
> making people jump through this hoop, you make sure you’re only keeping docile and compliant people in your pipeline who can be abused and overworked.
Or you ensure you are hiring the most highly motivated people who believe in the mission. "Docile and compliant" doesn't work at high pressure, tech companies... You are eaten up and spit out pretty quickly at the brashness, demands and stress to perform.
Say no more. Let’s just agree to disagree.
> This literally makes no sense and I think you are conflaiting something here? How would i recruit customers if i didn't work at the company? Are you talking they hired a bunch of people who had very high referals to the company?
It’s the third paragraph in the article I linked:
> The instructions on the exercise said the applicants should recruit at least 200 clients in a week to have a chance at passing to the next interview phase.
Never heard of 40eur/month - that seems like you have some sort of super premium account with multiple credit cards or so.
> My first guess would be that Europeans have a perception that their banks are exploiting them, and given any other rational option they will try it out.
Because that's the case! Most banks are STILL giving you 0.001% as interest, which is a joke considering everything happening around. Some banks are promising 3% p.a. for X months only (for new accounts only) - they really don't want to lose a cent. What other option do we have? Burning money on the bank with inflation going up like crazy and banks getting, as usual, even richer.
The fee banks that do pass it on will only do so for newly deposited money.
Are you a resident though? If you pay your taxes in the EU, you should have access to advantageous deposit rates and you'll pay no charges for transfers (inside the EU). FWIW In France currently banks pay about 4% on deposits (up to a certain ceiling). The only charge I currently pay for my banking services is 2€/month, including a debit card.
There is literally no bank in my country that doesn't charge fat fees. Even credit unions want at least like 8€/month for just a starter account with online banking, plus the 1.5€ fee for each SEPA transfer, seriously. Back when I learned that this isn't standard procedure worldwide my mind was completely blown.
As for alternatives, there are pseudo-banks one might use like N26, Revolut, Wise and similar, but each one of those can at any point terminate your account for no reason, some don't even allow receiving money from accounts not in your name so you can't use them as actual bank accounts. They're not exactly a thing one can keep savings in.
From what I understand, Europe typically has postal banking that's minimal fee and should be a release valve against other banks' excess, which would for the "legit price" hypothesis.
But if it's very very difficult to start new banks, or for existing businesses to start serving this demand, that would favor the cartel hypothesis.
Haven't heard of any postal banks, but digging a little it seems like we did have at least one... which merged with a commercial bank a decade ago. Sounds about right.
But generally speaking, my European friends all have an animosity towards banks I have not seen in other countries.
Mostly real estate that can be bought in cash without a mortgage. Everything that's under 300k seems to be bought instantly in cash and put on the market for rent.
In case you wonder why real estate prices haven't dropped significantly in Europe that's why.
The demands is still high and many people with inherited wealth are still liquid enough.
So then where are the sellers putting their cash? This is a closed system.
Or something else - people sell houses for lots of reasons.
For sure there is a slowdown and some markets are dropping (Sweden, Luxembourg).
They aren't. In my Euro area the highest interests on savings accounts I can find at banks is 2,5% and that's as a special offer for new customers.
We in Europe are being fleeced from all sides, while banks, energy, real estate, food companies are having their most profitable quarters ever. Something's gotta change.
In Romania I’m getting 7% in the local currency, but inflation is much larger than in the Eurozone so it doesn’t really mean anything.
I doubt it. The RON has been stably held to the Euro. It's still 5 RON = 1 Euro like before. So the RON inflation should be tracking exactly the same Euro inflation.
How much that matters to you is another thing - it matters a lot to a poor/average wage person, I think it doesn't mean much when you're making a SWE salary.
We all know "the real inflation I'm feeling is higher than the one reported by the government" trope but there's nothing we can do about it here and now.
The RON has not moved against the EURO.
Your savings are still vanishing at a highest rate in the last 30 years even with this savings rate subtracted.
Highly liquid money market ETFs[0] are paying ~5%, that's hard to beat with minimal risk. Individual equities are..not doing so well.
[0] https://www.purposeinvest.com/funds/purpose-high-interest-sa...
this is more of a lazyman tax than anything else
there are instant access savings accounts offering 3.5%
and if you lock it up for a year you can get 5%
https://personalbanking.bankofireland.com/app/uploads/Custom...
if not they're just ripping you off
(t-bills exist though!)
Obviously, markets are volatile and are in "search of direction", but quite a few dividend-paying stocks are trading at near 5-10 year low, so picking them up is not that much of a gamble if your investment horizon is long.
If I take short term 3M bonds and they become due, then I pay taxes where?
- DE: https://www.boerse-stuttgart.de/de-de/tools/produktsuche/anl...
- HU: https://www.boerse-stuttgart.de/de-de/tools/produktsuche/anl... (investment in tranches of 1k, 2k, 10k, or 100k)
- IS: https://www.boerse-stuttgart.de/de-de/tools/produktsuche/anl... (investment in tranches of 100k)
So would Europeans buying Verizon which was the example that your parent replied to.
One should probably default to making returns in the currency they buy things and pay taxes in unless there's an obvious reason not to. Trying to make an extra ~2% on short term rates seems like picking up nickels in front of a steam roller. Euro is up like 16% from the bottom last summer, and when it trends it can go for a while. Sounds risky.
Causality in econ is hard.
Stock dividend of 5-10% is pretty much unheard of here.
US withholding taxes only apply on dividends and other fixed income.
For instance, Albemarle has a revenue jump of 119% YOY% with a 33% Profit margin. but it's trading four time book value. That's insane to me. It has tech company growth, but since the price of lith is at all time lows investors are scared. Even with lith at this price, they are making a huge margin and are scaling up production. But if you beleive Lith will be in short supply in the future, it's a great opportunity.
When they started QE, the effectiveness was heavily limited by the small size of the securities market relative to the broader banking sector (this is why they did TRLTOs and things you didn't see elsewhere). So international borrowers started issuing in EUR realising that the ECB would buy their debt, and this has only accelerated now that US rates are rising (it has also led to massive growth in private credit and other extremely inadvisable products).
The problem with this is that it isn't possible for the EU to suddenly have US-style, open financial markets where savers get paid a fair amount. It undermines the system of pensions, undermines the heavy corporatism, it undermines the whole economic model of most of Europe (even countries like Italy that have larger financial markets, it is largely due to the needs of govt finance...their govt debt cannot be financed without extraction from domestic savers...this becomes impossible if they have options).
I don't think so. As I understand it moving into a Money Market Fund means a bank can't loan out your deposit anymore. Think investing in a Vanguard Money Market Mutual Fund like VMFXX. Vanguard can't loan those funds out.
Yes it can, and that's the point of a money market fund. Money market funds invest in short-term debt securities. That's a mechanism for lending money.
The fund invests at least 99.5% of its total assets in cash, U.S. government securities, and/or repurchase agreements that are collateralized solely by U.S. government securities or cash (collectively, government securities).Okay, let's be serious. This matches Keynes' liquidity trap. Unlike time preference theory which predicts that people will simply consume once the interest rate is below their time preference. According to liquidity preference people actually keep cash or short term assets, because interest doesn't compensate for delaying consumption, it compensates for going from a more certain and liquid asset to a less certain and less liquid asset near zero interest. So what happens instead is that there is a crowding out effect at the zero lower bound. You could think of it as if the private economy stops and the only thing left to do is for the government to micromanage things.
The only private market solution would be to get rid of cash and just let interest rates be negative. That way the crowding in effect that e.g. Austrian Economists predict when the government spends less money actually happens.
So yeah we are stuck in this situation where the private sector isn't credit worthy anymore and everything has to be threaded through the government. People rightfully complain but what exactly is supposed to happen? There are no answers left. Economists don't do money so they simply assume this situation never happens or resolves itself automatically.
If you have the floor space, getting a high-quality fireproof safe and bolting it into concrete is a very wise investment. Keeping a stash of cash in it is far from stupid.
Indian communities around me were getting hit hard by home invasions and robbery some years ago once it became known that they hold and trade large amounts of gold in their homes.
Money attracts thieves like food attracts bears. Store it somewhere away from yourself.
Besides, no safe is fireproof. At best they are fire-resistant. Good luck getting to your money while your house is burning (lol) or after it collapses.
-
The reason they don’t want AI open to the internet (and public) is how easily one can identify money laundering and stock/real estate fraud.
What do you mean?
And this was with some sample data (meaning history gpt already had)
But I’ve been doing a bunch of tests on combining checks and tables and data from sources and it’s astonishing
The reason they are afraid of AI is because of it had actual access to online data - the world economy would be upended and we would be killing billionaires, companies, politicians in the streets given how blatantly obvious all their actions are and the colluding and corruption which is fingertips away.
-
YES
But *NOW* they are MINEABLE via AI to show any and all aspects.
DUH
Who would publish these results to a wide audience?
Who would actually pursue the perpetrators of these abuses?
NOBODY.
NO-ONE WHO PROFITS.
That was pointed at myself as I typed as I was thinking to myself. Please take no offense.
-
connect
2/3 > 1/3
lots of high-quality safes are more than capable of surviving a home fire
that doesn't mean paper stored inside is necessarily retrievable, but metal objects like gold or firearms would definitely be fine
some examples
https://www.sturdysafe.com/pages/gun-safes-survive-house-fir...
Regardless of insulation, when you put a container in a 1,500 degree environment, the stuff inside is going to be wrecked.
Maybe there are some models that would have worked, but I wouldn't trust any of them.
Keeping some money at home for emergencies is a completely different thing from keeping the majority of your savings in cash.
https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2021/10/more-and-more-banks-...
1. A storm rolls through and a tree fell down in your driveway. The power is still out. A guy with a chainsaw shows up and offers to move it if you can pay on the spot.
2. Same situation, but a blizzard and a guy with a snowblower.
3. Small contractors often offer a significant cash discount for home improvements / repairs.
The most important banking scandal was LIBOR.
They killed that scandal quicker than OWS
It will allow me to pay more into my pension and claim 20% higher rate tax relief back on that too.
Some of that long term debt interest is fixed at lower rates than current interest rates, so the banks can’t offer the same risk-free return on deposits as money market funds that collect the current rates from short term government bonds.
The longer the high interest rates continue, the more deposits will flow out into money market funds and treasuries in search of higher risk-free yield.
As time goes on, more and more banks are affected by this, potentially needing bail outs if they can’t cover the depositor outflows. They have higher cash reserves than before GFC, but if there are enough outflows, those reserves won’t be enough.
If this is your definition of a tight spot ... I'd love to be in that sort of tight spot.
Large banks are broadly fine for now (cough Credit Suisse cough), but there are a lot of small/midsize banks that are more vulnerable, enough to have some contagion effect. If more start failing, spooked depositors with more small/midsize banks start pulling their money out and move it to large banks - possibly collapsing more of the smaller ones.
And we haven't even started seeing bad commercial real estate loans hit banks. https://www.ft.com/content/da9f8230-2eb1-49c5-b63a-f1507936d...
The next one in line could be this https://twitter.com/elerianm/status/1654073420328452096
If we zoom out, we could say it's a fairly inevitable second order effect of the last ~15-20 years - large deficits, low rate environment and money printing. As debt builds up, the system becomes fragile over time, and events like pandemics or wars (supply shocks, huge fiscal/monetary pump) can surprise, with a sudden spike in inflation.
This has forced central banks to swiftly reverse course and hike rates much faster and comparatively higher (from 0% starting point) than in a long while.
Problem is, when economy participants are hooked to low rates over decades, these hikes will likely break things - starting with banks, then commercial real estate, then who knows what.
Central banks can only hope inflation comes down fast before the dominos start falling - but it's not guaranteed it will, or that it will stay low, especially if central banks are forced to intervene with more easing in the event of some kind of crisis.
> 9.45 trillion euros held in current, or checking, accounts at banks across the euro zone.
Deutsche Bank, one of the examples, reported higher reductions in deposits, offers 0.4% interest with no daily access. [1, 19th of April]
One of the popular directs banks (DKB) offers 1% [2]
A popular free trading platform (trade republic) offers 2% for uninvested money [3]
So I wonder what the overall change in deposits actually is compared to those 9.45 trillion euros, it doesn't seem that surprising when the big examples in the articles have the lowest interest. Are people also leaving the higher interest banks?
[1] https://www.boerse-online.de/nachrichten/geldundvorsorge/pos...
The 1% and 2% examples are not from the article as one of the losing deposit examples, just my comparisons because I am familiar with them. So I wonder if they also report reduced deposits. (I am probably not even using the correct financial instrument to compare, it's just one easy to look up.)
So I wondered if consumers using the low interest banks (like Deutsche Bank with 0.4%) are mostly just switching to higher interest banks (like DKB with 1.0%) and the actual change to those 9.45 trillion euros is not in the tens of billions, as suggested by the article (e.g. Deutsche Bank with nearly 5% in change in deposits), but instead is closer to a few billions. In context of 9.45 trillion, that would be ~0.1%, which does not sound too worrying.
(those are vanilla rates offered to everyone, btw, nothing special)
2. Which bank, which country?
I can get 7% bonds for RON...
[0] https://finance.ec.europa.eu/capital-markets-union-and-finan...
That said, there's a pretty clear bifurcation between a lot of retail banks that are happy to make money off all the small accounts and lazy money in checking accounts and the brokerage money market and other accounts paying around 4% or so these days which are actively pursuing deposits.
Not to mention peoples money would smell like their beds. I prefer using safes for quick access things and deep unmarked holes for longer term storage. One of my methods is to pay extra for services so that I keep a credit on each account such as internet, power, etc... I also keep about 100 gallons of fuel with fuel stabilizer and SeaFoam.
I believe the logic is that if one has enough cash on-hand and their bank gets into trouble, they can still pay for food, fuel and other basic things to get by. It probably won't help for paying large bills like rent and mortgage unless people risk keeping a lot more cash on-hand. One can go into their brick and mortar bank to pay cash for their mortgage. It's good to do this periodically to pay extra towards the principal and shorten the loan duration.
For what it's worth, where I live (in Germany), it's usually just plain impossible to pay rent or mortgages in cash. The landlord or mortgage provider will instead use SEPA Direct Debit to pull the money out of your bank account directly. When I see a US-made movie where the landlord knocks on someone's door to collect rent in cash, it's rather bewildering. In Germany, any sentence that includes the phrase "paid rent in cash" probably starts or ends with "this is how I got scammed".
That might be the result of thinking movies bear any resemblance to reality. Approximately nobody pays rent in cash in the US, either. But movies are about telling stories, not describing how things really are.
At least above a certain income level if they're not paying someone off the books or maybe splitting a bill with friends/family (and even that is often some digital payment or a check) cash is increasingly uncommon. I don't think I've withdrawn money from an ATM in a couple years. And, certainly rent/mortgage, it would be almost unheard of in most situations. No one wants to be handling thousands of dollars in cash in an urban area.
It's not like the "don't declare income" slice of the economy disappeared.
If you're paid in cash but not declaring it, you probably want to pay rent in cash too.
Quick search, but unbanked seems a good proxy for "pay with cash": https://www.fdic.gov/analysis/household-survey/index.html
From the above, somewhere between 4.5% (average) and ~8% (low income African-American and Hispanic) people do not have a bank account.
Add in some more who choose not to declare, and it's a small but significantly non-zero number.
It very well may be. Though the last time I had to survive without a bank account, it didn't mean I paid big bills like rent using cash, it meant I got familiar with the local check cashing place and used money orders a lot. My landlords didn't want to deal with me giving them a bunch of cash every month.
This only really happens in a friendly context with family or if someone is behind on rent.
You do know that not all movies represent reality, right? Iron Man, Bat Man and Spiderman do not exist, even though they're often seen in American movies.
Meanwhile in the real world of Germany, when I see the assistant at my dentist in Germany writing pacient appointments in a giant paper log-book instead of a digital calendar on a PC, it's rather bewildering.
Also bewildering, is the so called digital stuff being done through snail mail, and people paying in cash at restaurants so they can do tax fraud. Try asking them for a real receipt and not a hand written one and look at their faces.
My point is Germany is backwards in enough areas not to afford to take a high horse stance.
Right now things are slowing down, and have been for a while. Not so much because demands are declining, but because interest rates are increasing. Which means a lot of people are looking to put their money into safer options than what they have been for the past decade or so. Traditionally this would have been (or at least involved) banks, but because many banks have been slow to drop their negative interest rates on in-loans, they are also very unattractive options when you're looking to store your savings. At the same time, banks have been a little slow to react to the fact that there are now a lot of stable options for those €100K+ investments because their primary focus has been on loaning and not in-loaning.
I wouldn't worry too much about the banks unless you have stock options in them or work for one. Especially if you don't have more savings than what is covered by your government. But pulling money out to keep as cash would only really make sense if you're paying a lot of money to keep them in the bank, and if that's the case, I'd probably look for a different bank first. Depending on where you live in the world of course.
For investors, institutional loaners and people who have more money than what is covered by your country’s laws or the banks insurance, you will likely have to wait for a lengthy bankruptcy process to see what remains of your money beyond what is covered. Typically in-loans will be quite high on the bankruptcy priority list, but sometimes there won’t be enough money to cover much of it. Often there will also be various lawsuits in the wake of a bank failing, as investors try to get what they can.
Where it can be severely disruptive is if your company has money in the bank exceeding the “regular people” amount. Because that would mean your company would have to wait for the bankruptcy process to obtain access to its funds.
Someone is going to be subsidising all the largess the regulators are going to have to distribute. That might make the cost of sustaining Bitcoin's energy burn look like the cheap option.
It depends on faith in the system... if the green line stays green, why pull? same argument for any other market like the stock market or housing market.
> the cost of sustaining Bitcoin's energy burn look like the cheap option
No, this needs to have the plug pulled on it if we're to keep global warming to 2C.
There is also another aspect to banks which is to provide ability to exchange money. That part of banking doesn't generate a lot of revenue compared to loans so it receives a lot less attention.
Even with all of the inefficiencies of modern banking, by comparison cryptocurrency is like lighting oil wells on fire.
Bitcoin accounts for <0.1% of global CO2e and has one of the highest shares of renewables in any industry (since it competes globally for the cheapest energy).
It incentivises renewables (by being a location agnostic buyer of first and last resort which buys all excess energy 24/7), reduces CO2e (by making it profitable to combust CH4 instead of venting it), stabilises energy grids (by providing flexible demand response, i.e. can be turned on and off at moment's notice), provides banking services for the global unbanked and financially discriminated, shields from gambling bankers and inflation of the money supply, ...
In comparison to all these use cases and benefits, mere "luxury" energy uses such as air-conditioning, tumble drying, video games, porn, ... all consume more energy and produce more CO2e (e.g. A/C ~100x more). Yet nobody calls to have the plug pulled on them.
Regulate the production of energy, not the consumption.
Computers, data centers and networks consume about 10% of all the world energy. [1] 4 percent of websites are estimated to be porn [2] a single gaming computer costs about up to 1400 kWh annually. [3]
So the porn websites are about 3X bitcoin and BTC represents around 8.7m gaming computers.
[0]https://www.moneysupermarket.com/gas-and-electricity/feature...
[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IT_energy_management#:~:text=S....
[2]https://www.statista.com/chart/16959/share-of-the-internet-t...
[3]https://computerinfobits.com/how-much-energy-do-gaming-compu....
Sure thing buddy. One of the ways the "little guy" can push back against big banks and big government needs to have its plug pulled because of some imaginary 2 degrees panic. What the hell happened to "Hacker" in "Hacker News", this place is a cesspool of the mainstream rhetoric. Note: I have $0 invested in crypto, but I don't deny its usefulness in "keeping the bastards honest".
What bastards has crypto ever kept honest?
This is your brain on constant high volatility.
In crypto, they lost FTX. That seems to have been about it. No rule changes required. I can self-custody if I don't trust the exchanges.
Of course it's stupid to keep cash with inflation at the current rate but you should always keep some emergency cash around. Then again some banks have such high fees you might as well keep the money in cash in a safe.
* 2 weeks supply of food, water, heat, and cash * 2 months supply of similar but in longer-term forms (often precious metals go here; ones that are "well known" are the best, like junk silver)
Beyond that it's up to personal discretion and location, but the two week rule is a good one, in my opinion. 90% of "hiccups" are done in two weeks.
So long as your investment horizon is on the scale of years and decades, it's never a bad time to buy an asset with constrained supply in exchange for paper that's constantly being debased.
When your ruler is getting shorter every year, you'll never stop growing taller.
For inflation proofing a fortune, sure, keep a large chunk in gold (or something else that is stable and movable). But for "emergencies" I'd try to keep some cash.
Now, with inflation running rampant, the percentages have reached up to 7+% (Central Bank interest rates are 7.5% and inflation measures at 9.9%).
I am in the privilaged position to be able to gain more in interest on a considerable deposit at a local bank (which is unlocked I might add) then what my total monthly mortage interests now come to (close to 1.8x). In addition since the mortage allows for direct deposits into the principal without incurring any additional cost, each Krona that gets put into it has effectively the same buying power as when the loan was initially taken.
It is a peculiar state of affairs.
Oh wait...
In the end though, they did get paid back all that they were owed. So all ended well.
I wonder if the same can be said about any of their former colonies though...
Needless to say, since then I've paid attention to how deposits are guaranteed for any accounts I open.
so, basically the same thing happening in the US
Wonder why real estate is so expensive...
There is some narrative I've seen here and on reddit that inflation is 2-4% because the government says so. People are so confident about it. Meanwhile big brains and small brain meme are saying "no way are these inflation numbers real".
Something something Bitcoin(no not other coins, just bitcoin, no not blockchain, just bitcoin), something something federal reserve/fractional reserve banking, something something we are supposed to believe inflationary currencies are good for me.
In Portugal I landed on "Certificados de aforro" which gets you on the road to 3.5% on EUR, secured, with liquidity. Would love to see more daily savings options beyond risky fintech apps!
It's not actually the money...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K_Foundation_Burn_a_Million_Qu...
>Deposits into MMF flow right back to the banking sector
Security my ass when deposits effectively evaporate given inflation rate all while banks rake up the profits.
Chip app with 3.71%
In Finland we are talking about 4-5% and interests are not deductible in your taxation(used to be, not anymore)
We'll end up with decentralized money on secure, decentralized platforms owned by communities of people, instead of banks, soon.
What's missing is simply scalability and user adoption of local community currencies.
If you are curious how it could possibly happen, here are the steps to actually get it done in any community: https://community.intercoin.app/t/rolling-out-voluntary-basi...
Or in PDF form: https://intercoin.org/communities.pdf
What if our money supply would come not just from bank underwriters guessing how a business will do in 10 years, and risk managers guessing what interests rates will be, etc. Instead, it will come form communities of all kinds. ("But how will we pay for it?" By removing money from circulation via taxes and fees.) Each community can be the source and sink of its own money supply, instead of the banks, who are motivated not by social good but by profit motive.
I know some people will knee-jerk downvote this because it's talking about Web3 again. I'm not talking about ponzi schemes or speculative bubbles. I'm talking about communities issuing their own currency to their own members, whether they're online (e.g. HN Karma) or offline (VegasCoin). Just because Web3 has been overrun by green and the profit motive doesn't mean the idea of communities having their own smart economies with their own monetary and fiscal policy is not good. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. (Look at my posts... I'm essentially a libertarian communist going back years, so someone like me might buck the trend of assholes who are just in it for the grift.)
Enough with this bullshit please.
1) Give the tools for any community to release their own coin
2) Communities pay the coin for participation or doing something (eg Hacker News karma). Maybe have a UBI to everyone so they can vote with their wallet. Upvotes are coin transfers etc.
3) Make the coin usable for local advertising or by local vendors. This is the WORK the community has to do (not us) same as VISA and Mastercard network had to do!!
4) Allow people to buy the local coin in a decentralized way. Now each coin becomes exchangeable all for other coins.
5) Intercoin network. Converts any coin to any other coin. Once your local farmer and electric company accepts YOUR city’s local coin, then you pay for food or your electricity bill, using hackernews coin, transparently.
Intercoin is to value what Internet is to communication. We are building an internet of value. It’s completely voluntary. If you don’t want to use it, don’t. If you want to shit on it, at least learn about it first.
Is anyone doing that? How far along are they, compared to VISA and Mastercard (or even just other crypto)?
If sufficiently large communities released their own coins, if enough people in each community decided to engage with it - and you know that crypto reputation is not the best - and they decided to put enough work into making it usable locally, if there was a large enough market... GP could use it to pay for their bills.
As it stands, though, this just reads like "draw the rest of the owl".
VISA was simply a project of Bank of America. They did the work. They got the merchants to accept it.
The CCP helped WeChat get all merchants to accept payments with WeChat. Maybe you like all your monetary policy being centrally controlled, by the Fed? Perhaps you’ll be welcome the new CBDC and National ID, that’s coming, knowing that the central planners have your best interests in mind…
HN is irrationally against Web3, thus many knee-jerk hate on decentralized networks. And they have never heard of communities having their own currency and being able to run their own monetary policy.
If our government had the guts to institute Pigovian taxes, then the Fed wouldn’t have to step in and use the only lever they have — interest rates - to squadh inflation. And all these banks wouldn’t be going belly up. This is just one example.
Personally, I see that the world isn’t HN. And with all these banks going belly up, they’ll gladly latch onto something else. Now if we don’t do anything, it’ll be CBDCs and National IDs.
We are at least trying to build a viable alternative that’s by the people. Historically Hackers were anti-establishment and against bootlickers. They very much support cypherpunks like Phil Zimmerman and other “crypto bros” as you call them. Maybe the “Hacker” ethos in Hacker News will shine through in the future, and you’ll realize that squashing self-sovereignty and welcoming more consolidation and centralization is not the way. Stop trying to ride the “cool” bandwagon of VCs that give you money to build a monopoly, and embrace the real hacker ethos of open source alternatives that are BY the people, not just FOR the people by the elites.
As I said, I am willing to make a wager. Happy to take the other side? If I win, you post the printed screenshot with your face next to it, and in giant letters “I supported fascism / authoritarianism / totalitarianism because it was cool”.
The PDF is a summary/introduction for a whitepaper.
The last page links to the whitepaper for more information. Using the word whitepaper. And you need to either go there or somewhere with the same content for a full understanding.
Come on, work with people. It's very clear what they meant, and their wording is reasonable.
I don't even need to go into how they were using quotes to be inclusive of things similar to whitepapers...
And comments that make no sense are funny, because the author has the same bias
Double standards for making sense are awesome
You're going out of your way to make this a communication problem when it was a really basic comment.
Stop wasting my time.