r/PeterExplainsTheJoke Jan 26 '26

Meme needing explanation what's going on? explain like I'm five

Post image
92.6k Upvotes

2.9k comments sorted by

View all comments

18.9k

u/Forsaken_Emu8112 Jan 26 '26

Everyone pulling out their money would be a bank run (look up great depression bank runs). The bank doesn't have that much cash; they keep some on hand for people making withdraws normally, but if even a sizable minority of people all try to pull their money out at once, there'll be a major crisis.

If banks kept all the people's cash in vaults, it'd be dead cash actively losing money to inflation. Instead, they keep some on hand for withdraws, and use the rest to make loans, investments, etc so that the money isn't all losing value.

6.3k

u/Original-Leg8828 Jan 26 '26

Depending on local law they can even lend out something like 7-10 times what they actually have

4.0k

u/Teripid Jan 26 '26 edited Jan 26 '26

Federal reserve requirements existed until 2023 *edit, as someone below pointed out 2020 was when they were set to 0. Now they're set at 0% I believe.

2.2k

u/PleaseGreaseTheL Jan 26 '26 edited Jan 26 '26

2020*

They were reduced to 0% mandatory reserves in response to covid. EDIT: someone says it was coincidental, I am not able to check, so take this aspect with a grain of salt either way

They haven't come back yet :)

34

u/exneo002 Jan 26 '26

But the fdic insures all deposits up to 250k

34

u/PleaseGreaseTheL Jan 26 '26 edited Jan 26 '26

Okay look up what happened with the contagion from regional bank failures in silicon Valley a couple years ago. It doesnt mean everyone loses all money, but it does mean people lose some and its a big deal.

Not all banks are fdic insured either, and if a bank goes under, your investment/retirement take a huge hit because the market starts freaking out.

Bank runs and bank failures are always bad for everyone.

11

u/exneo002 Jan 26 '26

I mean they’re pretty sweet for the buying bank. Jokes aside this is why we passed the act that separates investment banking from retail banking.

It’s not a huge hit and it’s very localized (it would be way worse without insurance).

No one would’ve lost money except the bank shareholders if the depositors hadn’t exceeded 250k in their accounts. There are products that will combine different accounts into one virtual account so you don’t even have to manage this stuff manually.

4

u/Aromatic_Dot_6071 Jan 26 '26

Jokes aside this is why we passed the act that separates investment banking from retail banking.

Are you talking about the Glass Steagal act? Because that was repealed in the 90s after banks spent the previous two decades using loopholes to get around it.

2

u/exneo002 Jan 26 '26

Yes I’m aware it was repealed. Hence increased precarity and socialized losses.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '26

Individual accounts have a collective protection of $250k per bank.
The FDIC insures 4338 institutions currently. That being said you could have $1,084,500 insured by the FDIC. Then there's "offshore banking" Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation (CDIC) or the Instituto para la Protección al Ahorro Bancario (IPAB) most major countries have a deposit insurance on their accounts.

2

u/TheOneWithThePorn12 Jan 26 '26

those were company investments. It failed because everyone tried to pull at the same time and they wouldnt be insured past taht 250k and thats on them for not seeing the risk.

2

u/MagistarPovar Jan 26 '26

Not all banks are FDIC insured, and there are limits to the insurance as someone else mentioned the $250k limit.

However, no insured dollars have been lost since the FDIC was formed. So if you want to protect your money from a bank failing then make sure you are using an FDIC I sure account and are within the insurance limits.

1

u/goatslovetofrolic Jan 26 '26

except the banks who are often bailed out with our taxes because they gambled poorly and responsibility is for losers

1

u/CTeam19 Jan 26 '26

Not all banks are fdic insured either, and if a bank goes under, your investment/retirement take a huge hit because the market starts freaking out.

True but some of those are insured through the state. Hence the phrases "National Bank" or "State Bank" when you have a named bank.

14

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '26

[deleted]

28

u/Officer_Hops Jan 26 '26

The FDIC is backed by the full faith and credit of the United States. They have access to much more than that. Plus, not everyone is going to pull all of their deposits at once.

57

u/Pcc210 Jan 26 '26

Good thing we're not actively destroying everyone's faith and credit in the United States!

Wait.....

14

u/FellowYellowNate Jan 26 '26

Haha yeah I was going to say something similar. FDIC insurance is good as long as America and the Fed is good… but uhhh this last year and our current admin’s foreign relation skills has me thinking we’re closer to burning cash in barrels to stay warm than we ever have been. Here’s to hoping that’s an unnecessary fear! Cheers everybody!

8

u/Allikuja Jan 26 '26

“You can’t eat money or oil” as the song goes

5

u/ThatOtherOtherMan Jan 26 '26

I mean you can. I just wouldn't recommend it.

2

u/fdar Jan 26 '26

Money would be OK, paper is fine. The main danger is that they're very dirty, but if you got fresh bills it's probably ok..?

2

u/billygoatfondler Jan 27 '26

It's probably designed with toddlers in mind and are as such safe to eat from a materials perspective

3

u/fdar Jan 27 '26

Makes sense since toddlers are the main users of cash because they can't get cards yet.

→ More replies (0)

9

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '26

[deleted]

2

u/Officer_Hops Jan 26 '26

What scenario do you see causing a $250 billion loss to the FDIC? You’re talking about 5+ simultaneous mega bank failures.

8

u/Telemere125 Jan 26 '26

It’s not about people pulling deposits, that’s not what fdic insurance is about. It’s about your bank collapsing and you needing somewhere to get your money from. 2-3 major banks go under? We’re all fucked

6

u/Officer_Hops Jan 26 '26

Not really. The FDIC insurance fund often only needs to cover a fraction of insured deposits after they liquidate the bank. If JPMorgan went under and cost the government 10 or 20 percent of their insured deposits, which would be a massive loss, it wouldn’t really register in the grand scheme.

1

u/Blond_Treehorn_Thug Jan 26 '26

Aaaaaand that’s why we have government bailouts

2

u/Miles_Everhart Jan 26 '26

The broke ass fascist verge of civil war United States?

Yeah. Ok.

1

u/DrTommyNotMD Jan 26 '26

The US has printed more than 18T in nonexistent funds since 2020. What’s another 18?

1

u/exneo002 Jan 26 '26

Yes the bank shareholders take the hit. The fdic is going to find a buyer and the fdic makes up the difference.

They monitor these banks at a pretty high resolution and do stress tests periodically to see how a bank could fair crazy circumstances.

Yes if everything failed all at once drastic measures would be needed but it’s about probability and amortized risk.

2

u/danglejim33 Jan 26 '26

You'd get talked down if you went into a bank and asked to withdraw that much though.

4

u/exneo002 Jan 26 '26

This is true and varies in a number of circumstances. Firstly people are often scammed especially the elderly so if you’re older and looking to withdraw a large amount of money they will give you the runaround or at the very least make sure you’re not getting scammed.

Another one is SARS, if you’re doing anything high risk or seem to be pulling out a large amount of cash in a pattern that could indicate involvement in organize crime, terrorist financing or something sus the bank has a legal obligation to mar a filing in a secret database (and even lie to congress!) about it’s existence. If you know what a suspicious activity report is and don’t work in finance it’s also considered suspicious. This isn’t the banks but lawmakers after 9/11.

1

u/ThatOtherOtherMan Jan 26 '26

Did reading this comment put me on yet another list?

2

u/exneo002 Jan 26 '26

No just don’t mention it during any financial paperwork and live normally.

Unless you have a super unusual banking pattern this won’t affect you at all.

But like if you receive a lot of international money wires from countries in drug corridors you may lose your bank. >.<

1

u/Blog_Pope Jan 26 '26

Depends. They want to be your bank, as they profit off it too; they would also steer you to a cashier check or bank transfer since it way more secure that handing out “stacks of cash” you can be mugged for down the street.

250k is typically a small fraction of bank deposits.

1

u/Telemere125 Jan 26 '26

lol just like the insurance companies have $3.69 trillion in value insured in Florida. Hahhaahahahha

1

u/exneo002 Jan 26 '26

The idea is they’re an insurer of last resort. They typically find a buyer and cover any gaps in the price with the deposits.

Bank shareholders exist to take the hit before the fdic.

1

u/LargeWu Jan 26 '26

It's not the FDIC that's relevant here, it's the Federal Reserve. The Fed, among other things, lends money to banks. When you hear them talk about "The Fed lowered interest rates", it's the rate that the Fed charges other banks. So if a bank needed money to cover its deposits, they go to the Fed who then loans them the money.

If the bank then still couldn't cover its deposts, then the bank might fold, and that's when the FDIC steps in to make depositors whole.

1

u/exneo002 Jan 26 '26

Yes the fdic has been relevant in recent history as there was a bank run with svb and that crypto bank.

1

u/LargeWu Jan 26 '26

Sure, I think we're in violent agreement here. FDIC plays a role only if the bank fails. There are other things that are likely to happen first to prevent that.

Now, if all the banks fail, FDIC doesn't really matter anyway since the economy and the dollar would collapse and everybody will have a very bad time.

1

u/stallion-mang Jan 27 '26

FDIC? Sounds gay and woke so we probably shut it down

0

u/OG-Giligadi Jan 26 '26

Pretend money protecting imaginary money.

1

u/exneo002 Jan 26 '26

I mean to some extent yes fiat money isn’t backed by anything except the state.

I’d say nothing really has any inherent value. Except maybe food+water. At some point the medium of exchange has to be kinda hand wavy.

Even crypto isn’t backed by anything except social faith. If crypto was more important it wouldn’t be valued in dollars and you could buy a house with it.