Not An April Fool's Joke

Safe America For Everyone This newsletter powered by: Mad Mimi Unsubscribe instantly from these emails by clicking here. Email look weird or can't download pictures? View it on the web here. Click HERE to go to the SAFE home page. Click HERE to go to the SAFE FaceBook page. Click HERE to go to Ark Two. Click HERE to go to list of Ark Two Videos Forward this email to a friend. This newsletter is Copyleft: and may be used by anyone. SAFE Ark Two Newsletter March 31st, 2013 Not An April Fool's Joke Lots of news this week about North Korea and such but I am going to focus one subject. Cyprus on Easter The lead says "Big depositors at Cyprus' largest bank may be forced to accept losses of up to 60 percent" But - the numbers in the text add up to 100% Deposits of more than 100,000 euros ($128,000) at the Bank of Cyprus will lose 37.5 percent in money that will be converted into bank shares, according to a central bank statement. In a second raid on these accounts, depositors also could lose up to 22.5 percent more, depending on what experts determine is needed to prop up the bank's reserves. The experts will have 90 days to figure that out. The remaining 40 percent of big deposits at the Bank of Cyprus will be "temporarily frozen for liquidity reasons," but continue to accrue existing levels of interest plus another 10 percent, the central bank said. [So - 37.5 percent plus 22.5 percent more adds up to 60% plus the remaining 40 percent of big deposits adds up to 100% even if they say it is your money but you just can't have it. - Bruce] You can also see the Cyprus story here. The BIG news for Canadians, although I have not found anywhere else that you can read it, is in The Canadian 2013 Budget The Canadian federal budget for fiscal year 2013–2014 was presented to the Canadian House of Commons by Finance Minister Jim Flaherty on 21 March 2013. It was entitled JOBS GROWTH AND LONG-TERM PROSPERITY. On page 29 it talks about the 'successful' renegotiation of the Greek bailout plan and on page 144 under Supporting Jobs and Growth Helping Manufacturers and Businesses Succeed in the Global Economy it discusses how the same plan may be applied to Canada. Establishing a Risk Management Framework for Domestic Systemically Important Banks Economic Action Plan 2013 will implement a comprehensive risk management framework for Canada’s systemically important banks. [The term 'systemically important' is bureaucratese for 'too big to fail' and that term itself is used in the last sentence of the section. The new catch term is also 'bail-in' rather than 'bailout'. Changing the terms makes it all okay. -Bruce] Canada’s large banks are a source of strength for the Canadian economy. Our large banks have become increasingly successful in international markets, creating jobs at home [Love all the new jobs. - Bruce]. The Government also recognizes the need to manage the risks associated with systemically important banks — those banks whose distress or failure could cause a disruption to the financial system and, in turn, negative impacts on the economy. This requires strong prudential oversight and a robust set of options for resolving these institutions without the use of taxpayer funds, in the unlikely event [Yeah - unlikely event - you can believe that - Bruce] that one becomes non-viable. The Government intends to implement a comprehensive risk management framework for Canada’s systemically important banks. This framework will be consistent with reforms in other countries [like Cyprus and New Zealand - Bruce] and key international standards, such as the Financial Stability Board’s Key Attributes of Effective Resolution Regimes for Financial Institutions, and will work alongside the existing Canadian regulatory capital regime. The risk management framework will include the following elements: Systemically important banks will face a higher capital requirement, as determined by the Superintendent of Financial Institution. p. 145 of the Budget (page 155 of the pdf) The Government proposes to implement a 'bail -in' regime for systemically important banks. This regime will be designed to ensure that, in the unlikely (sic) event that a systemically important bank depletes its capital, the bank can be recapitalized and returned to viability through the very rapid conversion of CERTAIN BANK LIABILITIES [Emphasis mine - Bruce] into regulatory capital. [The bank liabilities are money that it owes to its depositors - in other words the depositors savings and checking accounts - just like in Cyrus and New Zealand - Bruce] This will reduce risks for taxpayers. The Government will consult stakeholders on how best to implement a bail-in regime in Canada. Implementation timelines will allow for a smooth transition for affected institutions, investors and other market participants. [Although maybe not so smooth for bank depositors - Bruce] Systemically important banks will continue to be subject to existing risk management requirements, including enhanced supervision and recovery and resolution plans. This risk management framework will limit the unfair advantage that could be gained by Canada’s systemically important banks through the mistaken belief by investors and other market participants that these institutions are -- too big to fail. Meanwhile - in the UK Bank of England - 10 December 2012 (numbered paragraphs in the above document) 3 across all jurisdictions in which the firm operates. To be successful, such an approach will require close cooperation between home and foreign authorities. 12 Under the strategies currently being developed by the U.S. and the U.K., the resolution authority could intervene at the top of the group. Culpable senior management of the parent and operating businesses would be removed, and losses would be apportioned to shareholders and unsecured creditors. [Unsecured creditors is the buzz word for bank depositors, in other words your bank account. - Bruce] In all likelihood, shareholders would lose all value and unsecured creditors should thus expect that their claims would be written down to reflect any losses that shareholders did not cover. Under both the U.S. and U.K. approaches, legal safeguards ensure that creditors recover no less than they would under insolvency. [Meaning - NOTHING -Bruce] [While the Bank of England document says that this in the also the US approach, I have not been able to locate any official US Government document that says that it is, so US depositors can be assurred that their money is safe (sarcasm off). - Bruce] 13 An efficient path for returning the sound operations of the G-SIFI to the private sector would be provided by exchanging or converting a sufficient amount of the unsecured debt [You do surely understand by now that the phrase 'unsecured debt' is code word for saying your bank deposit. - Bruce] from the original creditors of the failed company into equity. In the U.S., the new equity would become capital in one or more newly formed operating entities. In the U.K., the same approach could be used, or the equity could be used to recapitalize the failing financial company itself — thus, the highest layer of surviving bailed-in creditors would become the owners of the resolved firm. In either country, the new equity holders would take on the corresponding risk of being -shareholders in a financial institution. Throughout, subsidiaries (domestic and foreign) carrying out critical activities would be kept open and operating, thereby limiting contagion effects. Such a resolution strategy would ensure market discipline and maintain financial stability without cost to taxpayers. [I cannot explain how the Bank of England document can so thoroughly explain about the US policy when I can not find a US source that does. - Bruce] International Financial World War Three The intrigues that I am reading and hearing about between the US / Russia / China and others in this International Financial 'cold' World War Three are astounding to me but I won't go into them. In my opinion - these are just the types of things that eventually lead to a 'hot' war. Readers Comment Hi Bruce, In the latest newsletter you wrote under Radiation Questions "As the man says, "all of the above is above my pay grade", so perhaps better on to something that I understand a bit more about. I nearly wrote this email a week ago when you referred to readership resignations, but your statement in this newsletter made it a bit easier. I wholeheartedly recommend you do just what you said, concentrate on something that you understand a bit more about. Remove the stuff you don't understand and shorten your newsletter considerably rather than increasing the detail. I am still a subscriber but I skim read the newsletter now as I inform myself about many of the things you write about from other, more knowledgeable and thorough sources, the gold story being an example which is very old news to me. I don't really need an uninformed weekly digest about this stuff. I look to your newsletter for information about that which you fear the most - nuclear war, the likelihood of same and precautions and actions I can take to protect myself in the event of such a catastrophe; and yet I hardly ever see is information on this. I feel that if you want to serve the best interests of the subscribers that remain and, perhaps encourage previous subscribers to return, the perhaps your newsletter should provide something along the lines of a cohesively reasoned series of articles joining up the dots that you see leading us to war. Maybe a red-orange-green warning level as things warm up and hopefully, cool down around the world. Other aspects could be those that arise from fallout and the topic about protecting the thyroid is a good example. Permanent links to good sources of information about this is always helpful. I'm sure that if you did this it would generate more questions on that topic in a positive feedback loop that would make your work more meaningful to those that still subscribe. By all means provide a list of click through links if you absolutely must but spare the commentary because if it isn't informed it isn't worth writing it, and certainly not worth reading (hence the resignations I suspect). It would, I'm sure, make your job and life a lot easier by giving you more time to complete the various aspects of your Ark Two project. It would also bring the newsletter back onto the focus of surviving a nuclear war. Kind regards Brian Bruce's Reply- Well, Brian, as you can see by today's newsletter - I am incorrigible. It may be that some reader's follow all these details in more depth than I do - but I suspect that there are many more who do not. I do not find the discussion in the general press and when I mention these things to people that I meet casually they appear totally unaware and disinterested. On the other hand - there are others who agree with you. I received one lengthy email this week blasting the fact that I write from Canada and saying my letter is not suitable for Americans because the things that I write about are not from an American perspective. Strange - because people in Canada complain that I am not a Canadian citizen. So- I please no one. This week at Ark Two was an exciting and enjoyable week. The weather finally broke and we had the first couple of days of real Spring. In another week the temperature is supposed to go permanently above freezing and the temperature combined with rain should take away the snow and again allow us access to Ark Two. We had a delghtful dog Easter Egg Hunt on Good Friday and the couple of inches of snow on the ground kept everyone from getting muddy. The next day we attended the regional robotic tournament where Adam's group was competing. Delightful story but I won't include it. Grandson came to move the wheat, cut firewood, and water the batteries. Earlier in the week I worried the worms, and Fred is talking about coming today to finish the firewood, so I am hoping to get on to new tasks next week. Peace and love, Bruce DawnSayer@webpal.org Bruce Beach 161 Main St. Horning's Mills Ontario L0N 1J0 Canada This is a link to the book everyone needs now - and which we hope they will buy and support our cause. This is a link to the book everyone will need the day AFTER the Great Catastrophe - but which they need to buy and read NOW!.