A recent poll has concluded tax payers are still angry over the bail-out of the banking industry. I thought this was quite funny. It's as though the government and the people are a couple who's recently had a big fight. So the government leans over to the people and murmurs, "Still angry?" and the people turn away from the government with a curt, "Yeah."
I like to think of myself as the average American, for the most part. I have a great interest in economics, both micro- and macro-. I read economic news every day. From what I understand, if the Great Depression has taught us anything, it is that banks should not be allowed to fail because then everybody loses their money. What I don't understand, then, is where does FDIC insurance come into play? Quite frankly, I don't care if my bank fails, as long as it's FDIC insured and I still get my money.
So then what does it mean to have money that is FDIC insured? Does that even mean anything? I thought it meant my money is insured by the Fed, so if anything happens, the Fed can give me my money. I'm not so naive as to think the Fed just has all this cash lying around to cover all the deposits everywhere in the country. I think many Americans are led to believe this.
If my money is FDIC insured, does that simply mean the government will use my money to reward irresponsible parties who couldn't hold on to their own money?
I know this is a very cynical view, and I don't mean this to advise anyone one way or another. This is simply an opinion piece. If there is anyone, anywhere, who is actually happy with, or OK with, using their own hard-earned money for the bail-out, please respond!