A couple of points I might clarify on the proposed Bail In by the IMF which is the organisation pushing for this because they don't want to lose their supply coming from the banks. I sincerely am not trying to be a smart arse here and Im not an expert on this by any body's determination. I have however done a fair bit of research on this.
Point 1: Most people having money in bank accounts are also tax payers, so they get hit twice.
Point 2: The government guarantee will still come into play after they have taken the bank accounts.
Point 3: The banks may not give shares and if they do it will most likely be at a much lower price.
Point 4: The banks may just give the victims of their theft Bank bonds. How much do you think banks shares and bonds will be worth after the bank has stolen everyones money and is financial distress.
Point 5: Know one will know the bank is in distress because the legislation they want to pass allows the banks to take the depositors money without even informing anyone. They will be able to take the money at the first sign of financial stress. Their is no need to even consult the Government.
Point 6: There is a very good chance there will be cross border laws in this le: if a bank belonging to the same parent corporation of an Australian Bank gets into financial stress then that foreign arm may be able to call on the Australian bank for funds.
Its scary shit and the Australian government is denying any type of Bail in. The problem is there are documents around that say different. There is also a document on the IMF website saying the Australian Bail in Laws are "in train"
