Mike wrote:
So they should contribute more because they've cashed in on the housing boom, and made a quick buck when the gravy train was running smoothly, therefore they have the means to contribute more to a bailout they will benefit from aswell.
Or maybe you think Cypriots should get a 100% bailout, the Cypriot Government obviously thinks the economy needs one?
Well you are making assumptions here that everyone with deposits made a quick buck. Sure i mentioned housing, but that was just one example of why some might have large deposits. There are a lot of other reasons/factors to consider. And not everybody made money on housing either ofc, someone for example might be inbetween houses and parked the money and so on, or they sold a property and made nothing on it, perhaps even a loss.
Some have worked hard and saved hard, for a long time. Some self employed people even rely on savings as their pension or retirement funding, or it is their insurance policy when they have no other, and so on.
As for what i think the result of this action will be, I think it will be worse for the banking sector, you will see why i think that by reading my posts here, or some of andys.
Mike wrote:
The EU is attacking bankers salaries, they are capping them at a certain limit, quite a progressive move I think you'll agree?
sure, yep.
Mike wrote:
The last point has nothing to do with Cyprus, if we take the distinction earlier made by the Cypriot government in the rate of the levy : over 100k pays 10%, over 20k pays 6% less than 20k pays nothing, then this was specifically an attack on the upper level of depositors, what they settled on was more overtly putting the burden on the richest depositors in Cyprus:
Cyprus agrees to tax 20% on deposits over 100,000 and 4% for all other deposits.
So basically you're wrong if you think middle class is somebody with bank deposits over 100k imo.
I disagree, imo 100k is not a large amount in this day and age.
I see it as middle class territory regardless of your opinion.
To take 20k from a 100k account leaves even less.
If the 20 percent was applicable to balances much higher than 100k then i might be inclined to agree with you.
And given the interest rates in recent times, no one with 100k or more in the bank has made anywhere near 20 percent clear (after tax) in interest unless its been sitting for a very long time, so they lose by using banks. They are behind, not ahead.
If you do something financially and end up losing/behind, are you inclined to keep doing the same thing?
So...I think people who do have money to invest are much more likely to invest in other areas now because of the 20 percent grab, property, gold perhaps, and this will eventually add to the banks issues as andy has talked about.... but having said that bankers kicking the can further down the road doesmt suprise me in the least anymore tbh...its either that or they want things to fall apart.
? 
