You should never trust banks

[ewonardo]

I am unbelieve in bank, because just rich people can make bank under his foot. But, anyway bank still needed for me, because every transaction i did from exchange bitcoin to fiat directly into my bank account. Although, never i use to saving money, because prefer to hold cash and bitcoin.

[1715643751]

1715643751

[1715643751]

1715643751

[1715643751]

1715643751

[gekon]

I think your situation is the special one, bank is created by the trusted and verified of the goverment, so everything they did have to be in law. Maybe you're lack of knowledge about the rules in your case. Hope you can find a way to solve this problem out.

[Basmic]

I think your situation is the special one, bank is created by the trusted and verified of the goverment, so everything they did have to be in law. Maybe you're lack of knowledge about the rules in your case. Hope you can find a way to solve this problem out.

The government is composed of corrupt officials. For a bribe, they turn a blind eye to the troubled banks. Remember the scandal with the banks in America that have filed false information on his condition. How many people suffered? I do not trust any banks.

[Haiduongbg]

I don't trust banks or Bitcoin. I only want cash and invest in Bitcoin

[PokerFace3]

Its scarywhen you found out that the bank you in trust your money got bankrupt. But its more convenient to still put your money in the bank than just save it at home or what. My mom's bank was close 4 years ago good thing she got her money back.

“let banks die” lol, I keep laughing the $hit out myself whenever I remember that word by the op. well, I don’t just open an account anywhere, I choose the best and popular bank that is never likely to close down or go bankrupt.

Yes, it’s too bad when they take/seize your money without giving reasons. But, banks don’t do that without reasons. I believe this guy was involved in something else (something very bad) that’s  the reason they closed his account. He doesn’t want to tell the full story, he’s hiding something.

[voztata]

I trust my banks and for me they are the most safest places for saving my money.

the safest place for what? you can explain the reason so we all understand, Safety deposit box made of steel also good to save money.

Lol, rather far better than banks because the box does not demand any tax, interest etc. banks are now becoming commodities of past and people are reluctant to use them since they provide all your information to the state government and they can anytime grab your all money if there are some legal issues with you.

[Doamader]

Banks arent bad but i dont like their behaviour and abusive power, i remember my mother trying to withdraw all the money from the bank and bank ask for what she wanna the money for.... this made me think why we need to say for what we wanna our money, if we did work and were able to save we should be free to use and spend anytime we wanna and for anything doesnt matter. I dont trust banks because they put a lot paper with several things hiden from your eyes, and we dont read the full contract usually, i remember some bank closing the doors and people savings gone with it, since the funds were above the value the country will pay.

[eloymjb]

 yes, you definitely never trust the bank. i have a lots of experience in bank, that may balance will gone and have a illegal transaction. then i go to the nearest bank then ask and complain. then the bank said he have a investigation about this matter. until a couple of months will passed nothing will happen and my money was totally gone.

[Astvile]

You should trust banks why? dont you think that there alot of millionaire that strores their money in banks?Being deactivated by the bank operator cannot be done if there no such reason and must be a valid reason

[Sand King]

My bank closed my account last year for no reason, and all money in my account was gone. I argued with the bank, even contacted the local government, no use. My bank just stated that "Pursuant to the CMA Disclosure and Agreement, 'THE BANK, at its discretion, may elect not to accept an account, terminate the account agreement and the account agreements of any related parties'. Both parties to the agreements have the right to end the relationship at any time and neither is obliged to provide a basis for such a decision to terminate". No single word explaing the termination was given to me. I contacted all banking lawyers online, and they were all representing the bank, not the customers. The money I lost can buy a new Mercedes. However, banks around the world now are too powerful. They are too big to fail. When you open an account in the United States, and probably also many other countries, you voluntarily give up the rights to sue the bank under their arbitrage clause. Even worse, they define the financial laws and enforce them. They can close your account, freeze and steal your property and evict you from your house. The more money you deposit into your bank account, the more you are helping the evil. I'm glad to see Bitcoin is changing all of these. Let banks die!

Maybe you have just missed an important rule when you read the terms and conditions applied when you have signed with the agreement of opening your bank account and you have just mistakenly forgotten that it is important to always check in your money so that your bank account will be cotinuously active.

[Strught85]

It is absolutely concerning observing some of the concerns banking institutions around the planet are getting. I try out to not get trapped in the crypto damaging lender echo chamber but it appears pretty bleak at occasions.

[nkarm1]

Every time you join a group or company, you should always understand and read the TOA. Don't try to convince us that you've done nothing and the bank just closed your account for no reason. For sure you have done an action that is inimical  to your Terms of Agreement. It's just like all those online bitcoin wallets, if you entrust them your coin for sure you will agree to their TOA that every time they can cease your account if you have done something wrong. 

[Kasabus]

You should trust banks why? dont you think that there alot of millionaire that strores their money in banks?Being deactivated by the bank operator cannot be done if there no such reason and must be a valid reason

Banks can be trusted if you are only saving your money, they will used your money for whatever purpose they have in their
program but I am pretty sure the moment you want to withdraw you can get your money.
They would not close account for no reason, you saw them if they do and you will get your money back.

[Casdinyard]

Every time you join a group or company, you should always understand and read the TOA. Don't try to convince us that you've done nothing and the bank just closed your account for no reason. For sure you have done an action that is inimical  to your Terms of Agreement. It's just like all those online bitcoin wallets, if you entrust them your coin for sure you will agree to their TOA that every time they can cease your account if you have done something wrong. 

So true and this is also your liability once you signed the TOA. It means you understand and agreed all the rules written there, so maybe you did something against with the agreement. Otherwise, the bank have also counts to this as they should advise or warn their customers that he didn't abide the rules written in their agreement so they will close the account.

[mharz]

You should trust banks why? dont you think that there alot of millionaire that strores their money in banks?Being deactivated by the bank operator cannot be done if there no such reason and must be a valid reason

Banks can be trusted if you are only saving your money, they will used your money for whatever purpose they have in their
program but I am pretty sure the moment you want to withdraw you can get your money.
They would not close account for no reason, you saw them if they do and you will get your money back.

I'm trusted with the bank, but my problem is their given interest because most of the bank was give interest on regular savings of 0.0025% less 20% taxes while in bitcoin your income or savings have no taxes. Even how long you hold your money in the bank you earn a little bit interest compare to bitcoin that when you have savings and hold it for long time you can surely that you can earn income. 

[jaysabi]

I guess you should rather try to defend your point

Instead of claiming that I don't understand (or misunderstand) something and should ask for help. You basically claim that Bitcoin has value because there is a working banking system (wtf, I seem to have repeated you words one by one). As to me, this is the point you should specifically address first (before asking me to go for help or elsewhere), namely, how can Bitcoin get its value from an existing banking system if Bitcoin itself is a banking system in its own right? In other words, it can exist even if the fiat banking system dies one day, and this is exactly what happened at Bitfinex. Anyway, this exchange is the largest Bitcoin exchange out there so you can't possibly discard it as a "small data point" (in short, the gods are closer to you than you think). If it really were so (as you speculate), we wouldn't see the Bitcoin price rising half a thousand dollars in a matter of two weeks (and then consolidating there). This you can't discard either and have to address as well. To sum it up, you can't discard reality for your wild fantasies

You didn't address anything of substance. You simply continued on without addressing the fact that you are claiming that trouble at bitfinex should tank bitcoin under my theory, which flat out isn't close to what I wrote. I said specifically, "when the next international financial crisis happens, people will flee bitcoin for safer assets, and the price will crash hard." You responded with 'but bitfiniex and price appreciation.'  So would you like to continue propagating the delusion that bitfinex constitutes a global financial crisis so you can try to conclude me theory to be inaccurate, or would you like to let a little more reality color your views?

It is not me who should address anything (in the first place)

It is you who said that "Bitcoin has value because there is already a robust international banking system" (as can be seen above). This is what I disagree with and which I made clear in my reply. Now you flip-flop and start claiming that "when the next international financial crisis happens..." and so on. I don't think you can jump from your first claim to the other as easily as you do (since this is not what my point is about). For example, it is like claiming that stocks derive their value from fiat (while it should be clear that their value comes from the success of the companies behind these stocks) and then proceeding to claim that when a crisis happens, the stocks will plummet. They will certainly do (and Bitcoin will likely crash too), but this, first, doesn't in the least prove that their value all of a sudden depends on "a robust international banking system" (at least, not in any meaningful degree). Second, fiat itself will likely get heavily wasted in such circumstances (in terms of its purchasing power) with the "international banking system" disintegrating (in the extreme case). And, finally, this is not what I challenge. Anyway, stocks had existed long before there was any international banking system (or just banking system, for that matter), so there is no reason to claim that "Bitcoin has value because there is already a robust international banking system". This is what you should prove, not that Bitcoin will crash in case of an economic meltdown. Hope this helps

As far as stocks go, since the market is a forward looking construct, stocks trade on anticipated future earnings. When a financial crisis hits and those future earnings are in doubt, stocks trade down towards their actual worth, and many times below book value. This is entirely different from bitcoin, the value of which is entirely made up of economic excess because there is no inherent value in bitcoin. The inherent value of the stock is the liquidation value. Trading above the liquidation value is speculative, which is why that excess disappears in a financial crisis. Bitcoin is entirely speculative. In a global financial crisis, the only people holding bitcoin will be those who can still afford to speculate, and stocks will trade near book/liquidation value, also with any excess by those who can still afford to speuclate on the recovery.

And how does that support you claim?

I don't get it, really. You basically say (in your previous posts) that a robust international banking system gives value to Bitcoin and stocks. I cannot possibly agree with this claim. As to me, it pretty much sounds like claiming that stocks and Bitcoin have value because an asteroid doesn't hit the Earth since otherwise (if it hit the Earth) the stocks (as well as Bitcoin) wouldn't have any value. Indeed, they would be quite worthless in that very case, but it doesn't in the least mean that asteroids give value to these assets

That whole paragraph is the support of the claim. To try and re-word it: a robust international banking system has created the wealth of our current globalized economy. The wealth and stability of our economy gives people the economic freedom and confidence to chase speculative investments (because they're not worried they need all their resources just to survive and can risk those assets to attempt to acquire more assets). If you withdraw economic confidence (such as in a massive recession/depression), all the speculative assets would decrease in value as people rush to protect their wealth against the backdrop of economic uncertainty. When the future is in doubt, there's outsized risk in speculation, so the only people speculating on risky assets are people who are not in financial jeopardy and can afford it. This contrasts to the current economic and market conditions where there are a lot of people who can afford to speculate

How can that possibly be?

Note that I basically agree that a robust international banking system contributes greatly to the creation of wealth but to say that it is directly creating wealth is along the same lines as pretending that money itself creates wealth or is the wealth in its own right. In other words, if you had all the required facilities for the banking system to operate but without the actual factories, plants, and people working there, this system itself would never create a penny of wealth on its own. Without actual production it would be utterly useless and wasteful

In that scenario, the asteroid doesn't give assets value; the lack of the asteroid does. It's because we're certain that there will be a future that anything has any value, because value is very future-dependent.

But that's outright bullshit. It is like claiming that everything derives its value from the lack of something that would destroy this value. This is tautology at best and casuistry at worst

It's not tautology, it's a truism. It's true because it's true. Obviously everything has value because of a lack of something that would destroy that value. It's so obvious it's not even interesting to point out. But that's the nature of value nonetheless, in that value is forward-looking. Remove the certainty of future survival and all assets lose value.

As for the first statement, I agree. "Creates" is the wrong verb; I should be saying it "enables." In this change, it is more accurate and the central premise of my point remains. The excess economic output enabled by a robust international banking system allows for bitcoin as a speculative asset to retain a lot of speculative value. And in a devastating international crisis or global economic depression, all speculative assets will lose value as people turn to guarding wealth rather trying to expand it by taking on risk.

[TIDOVEE]

Hmmm are making point anyway, moreso, the bank activities are controlled by human and not all are trustworthy. even though your experience is not general but its not unbelievable. i have also had issues with a bank and now i'm not having any issue. though they could misbehave and if they do. i will find my way off them if i wish.

[a4ndr3w]

No one should trust your money to another person or entity.

[deisik]

It's true because it's true

It is essentially the simplest example of tautology ("a logical statement in which the conclusion is equivalent to the premise"). Truism, on the contrary, is something which is basically a true statement but which has been repeated so often that it became boring

As for the first statement, I agree. "Creates" is the wrong verb; I should be saying it "enables." In this change, it is more accurate and the central premise of my point remains. The excess economic output enabled by a robust international banking system allows for bitcoin as a speculative asset to retain a lot of speculative value. And in a devastating international crisis or global economic depression, all speculative assets will lose value as people turn to guarding wealth rather trying to expand it by taking on risk.

Okay, so what creates value then?

Obviously, now you say it yourself, it is economic output which is the real wealth (excessive or not is another question). Could it be "enabled" by a payment system provided by crypto (though not necessarily by Bitcoin)? Hypothetically, yes, it could (if we discard technical issues). Would it change anything in the speculative nature of Bitcoin (or some other coin)? I guess, no, since just like people speculate with dollars or some other fiat today, they would speculate with bitcoins with no fiat around tomorrow (though the prices would likely be less volatile in that case). So why do you say that it is the fiat payment system which enables this speculation when, in fact, it is just an optional or facultative element of the whole system which can be replaced with a payment system provided by crypto itself (where excessive output is the central element required for speculation)?

[phr0stbyt3]

We all were aware that banks are not trusted the fees they charged us like withdrawing, transferring, cancelling our account and what other fees but we all were helpless we knew keeping money at our home is more risky so we preferred banks but now it's different we only need to keep little funds in our bank and remaining in bitcoin