barack wants to raise FDIC limit to $250k

[thomsbrain]

A 20% down payment on a starter home greatly exceeds $100,000, and you bet your ass I want it insured in the account I'm writing the check from.

 

[Capt Caveman]

Originally posted by: thomsbrain
A 20% down payment on a starter home greatly exceeds $100,000, and you bet your ass I want it insured in the account I'm writing the check from.

Yep, when I bought my last house. I had to draw from multiple bank accounts for the down payment b/c I didn't want to exceed $100k in any single one bank.

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: thomsbrain
A 20% down payment on a starter home greatly exceeds $100,000, and you bet your ass I want it insured in the account I'm writing the check from.

not around here. hell $100k would buy a very nice starter home.

 

[spacejamz]

so who pays for this when the bank goes under?

oh, we do...

 

[T9D]

...

 

[mugs]

$100k is fine for individuals, not for small businesses.

 

[StormRider]

I support this. My parents have more than 100K in their bank account so this would help them.

 

[zoiks]

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: nkgreen
Because he's a Muslim!

...and a Communist!

And McCain is a maverick.

 

[abracadabra1]

The limit should absolutely be raised. 100k is not sufficient anymore.

 

[Gibson486]

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: thomsbrain
A 20% down payment on a starter home greatly exceeds $100,000, and you bet your ass I want it insured in the account I'm writing the check from.

not around here. hell $100k would buy a very nice starter home.

Not even in MA (and it cost alot to live here). 100K down payment would be a 30% down payment on a starter home...that is...unless you are talking about Welleselley or boston, where prices go above 500K in a heart beat.

 

[Anubis]

Originally posted by: thomsbrain
A 20% down payment on a starter home greatly exceeds $100,000, and you bet your ass I want it insured in the account I'm writing the check from.

WTF kinda starter home is that

 

[pontifex]

Originally posted by: BlahBlahYouToo

Originally posted by: TallBill
I don't see the issue with it.

there's no issue. just seems useless to most as i'm sure a large majority of the population does not have more than $100k.
and those who do have $100k in liquid assets probably do not have it in a commercial bank account.

do the "vast majority" incur any negatives from this? if not, then what's the problem with increasing insurance for people who do have that much?

 

[mcmilljb]

Originally posted by: spacejamz
so who pays for this when the bank goes under?

oh, we do...

No, the FDIC's insurance fund pays for the failure. The banks HAVE TO BUY insurance from the FDIC. Banks pay the FDIC a premium to insure their deposits. It's not some special free money that banks get. Plus the FDIC can change management if things start going south.

Also a IRA is insured up to 250k since 2005.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fdic

Do a little reading. We have enough BS going around that we don't need another uninformed person spreading more.

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: krunchykrome

Originally posted by: BlahBlahYouToo

Originally posted by: TallBill
I don't see the issue with it.

there's no issue. just seems useless to most as i'm sure a large majority of the population does not have more than $100k.
and those who do have $100k in liquid assets probably do not have it in a commercial bank account.

small businesses do have that kind of cash sitting in bank accounts

there's nothing left to argue

No, no, let's continue to argue it based on the fact that BlahBlahYouToo is sure that most people don't have more than $100k in a bank account--that's all the evidence I need!

 

[Eeezee]

Originally posted by: Anubis

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: Platypus
<------- Doom & Gloom (P&N)
Kickass Waterslides ---------->

**Fixed**

fixed it again

fixed once more

 

[Eeezee]

Originally posted by: BlahBlahYouToo

Originally posted by: TheSlamma
P&N?

just because a politician stated it does not automatically make it P&N.
if anything it's finance, but we don't have a finance forum.

And I hope we never do, that would be the single most boring forum on the internet.

It's nice to have it mixed with OT

 

[goog40]

The limit should have been raised years ago. $100k isn't nearly worth as much as it used to be. They did just relax the rules on beneficiaries this past week though, so it's pretty easy to add a large number of beneficiaries (just make sure none of them would want you dead), for n x 100k of insurance.

Now you can add anyone as a beneficiary to increase your coverage, they don't have to be immediate family or even related to you. For up to $500k in coverage, it doesn't matter how you allocate the money (meaning you can leave your mailman $1, and it still adds $100k to your FDIC coverage). But for accounts over $500k, I believe they only insure each beneficiary up to the lower of $100k, or the amount left to that beneficiary.

 

[mcmilljb]

Originally posted by: Eeezee

Originally posted by: BlahBlahYouToo

Originally posted by: TheSlamma
P&N?

just because a politician stated it does not automatically make it P&N.
if anything it's finance, but we don't have a finance forum.

And I hope we never do, that would be the single most boring forum on the internet.

It's nice to have it mixed with OT

But what if... we added kick ass waterslides? Would that change your mind?

 

[HardcoreRobot]

BFD

 

[Eeezee]

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: thomsbrain
A 20% down payment on a starter home greatly exceeds $100,000, and you bet your ass I want it insured in the account I'm writing the check from.

not around here. hell $100k would buy a very nice starter home.

Not all of us can purchase a home for 5 cows several horses (ie just because homes are cheap in the middle of bum fuck nowhere doesn't mean they're cheap everywhere)

 

[Eeezee]

Originally posted by: mcmilljb

Originally posted by: Eeezee

Originally posted by: BlahBlahYouToo

Originally posted by: TheSlamma
P&N?

just because a politician stated it does not automatically make it P&N.
if anything it's finance, but we don't have a finance forum.

And I hope we never do, that would be the single most boring forum on the internet.

It's nice to have it mixed with OT

But what if... we added kick ass waterslides? Would that change your mind?

Yes, yes, 1000x yes

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: zoiks

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: nkgreen
Because he's a Muslim!

...and a Communist!

And McCain is a maverick.

...and a Sleeper Soviet Agent!

 

[freegeeks]

Federal insurance in Belgium on bank accounts is only 20.000 euro

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Eeezee

Originally posted by: BlahBlahYouToo

Originally posted by: TheSlamma
P&N?

just because a politician stated it does not automatically make it P&N.
if anything it's finance, but we don't have a finance forum.

And I hope we never do, that would be the single most boring forum on the internet.

It's nice to have it mixed with OT

OT is dying, P&N is here to Bail it out!

 

[DisgruntledVirus]

Originally posted by: thomsbrain
A 20% down payment on a starter home greatly exceeds $100,000, and you bet your ass I want it insured in the account I'm writing the check from.

Uhh where the hell do you live?

x*.2=100,000
x=100,000/.2
x=500,000 for a starter home?

Uhhh unless you live in CA, FL, NYC, or one of a few other select markets, $500,000 is not a starter home....

Starter home in my area is anywhere from $80k-$175k.... Granted it's in NE Ohio but from family throughout the rest of the country you can get a good starter home for <$200k in most of the country. In the remaining part <$300k covers the majority, with a few exceptions.

IMO $500k homes are not starter homes, unless you are in one of a few select areas.