This isn't about FIRE really, but those closer to FIRE may have more of an understanding on FDIC insurance than me.
I understand the coverages - essentially 100k per person/account in a bank. Someone said something that bugged me yesterday. He said that some bank in Ohio failed and the gov't could only cover about 50% of the FDIC insured assets.
He's probably misinterpreting right? Or is it possible that up to 50% of what you thought was safe is not?
I do understand that massive bank failures could somehow lead to not being able to cover all the assets, but he said something about how this was a smaller bank - and still only about half the assets were covered. Even with all the bank failures (and I mean banks/mortgages being sold to each other) - most people have still not had to worry about pulling their money from banks in a big way.
Separately, but what got me to thinking more about this:
I had a very small amount of money in a fund at Ameriprise that I cannot pull out. Something happened with the fund where the NAV fell from $1/share to .97 and they quit allowing folks to pull their money out. Now that really bothers me. I am willing to accept all kinds of risk with my money, but I cannot accept that a financial institution/mutual fund company would not let me pull my own money out. I just wonder - is this a common right that mutual fund companies have?
I have not been too concerned over the past few weeks. To be honest, if something happened and it was all gone in the market tomorrow, I could live with it. I have years to build it back, did it once, and could do it again. I just need to know at least what I'm dealing with, and that doesn't seem to be nearly as clear as before.
I understand the coverages - essentially 100k per person/account in a bank. Someone said something that bugged me yesterday. He said that some bank in Ohio failed and the gov't could only cover about 50% of the FDIC insured assets.
He's probably misinterpreting right? Or is it possible that up to 50% of what you thought was safe is not?
I do understand that massive bank failures could somehow lead to not being able to cover all the assets, but he said something about how this was a smaller bank - and still only about half the assets were covered. Even with all the bank failures (and I mean banks/mortgages being sold to each other) - most people have still not had to worry about pulling their money from banks in a big way.
Separately, but what got me to thinking more about this:
I had a very small amount of money in a fund at Ameriprise that I cannot pull out. Something happened with the fund where the NAV fell from $1/share to .97 and they quit allowing folks to pull their money out. Now that really bothers me. I am willing to accept all kinds of risk with my money, but I cannot accept that a financial institution/mutual fund company would not let me pull my own money out. I just wonder - is this a common right that mutual fund companies have?
I have not been too concerned over the past few weeks. To be honest, if something happened and it was all gone in the market tomorrow, I could live with it. I have years to build it back, did it once, and could do it again. I just need to know at least what I'm dealing with, and that doesn't seem to be nearly as clear as before.