The FDIC is broke, out of money, in debt.

The problem with that is the banks being closed down are smaller ones that never got involved with the riskier type of business the big banks did when they were allowed to be involved in the stock market. The big banks which engaged in the riskiest behavior were bailed out. The smaller banks which are failing mainly due to a fall in real estate values are doing the same as they've done for years. Some of the small banks are failing because of the TYPE of real estate loans they gave, such as for big development projects, but even those which kept their business more diversified through use of good number of smaller loans rather than a few loans (cheaper to keep book on) involved in larger development projects, have failed.

I see the biggest problem since this whole mess started being the failed policy of "too big to fail" which may end up costing us more in the long run. My support initially of bailout was in belief it would be to expand funds for deposits, which was done by expanding how much deposit could be insured (raised from 100K to $250K). Then things started going stupid. I've yet to figure what basis was used to let Lehman Brothers and Bear Stearns fail, while rescuing other investment banks. What basis decided Citi Bank should be saved (since it had the worst financial record) but Washington Mutual should be raided by the govt. Were they really that pissed off by the TV commercials???

History is going to look back at who was saved and who was trashed and also wonder, or expose, the reasons behind some of the currently incomprehensible moves the govt made.

failed policy of "too big to fail"
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

That happened because of deregulation, as when banks could do "interstate banking". Once that hurdle was tossed, then banking became "regional, then national", they grew. If the banks remained as they were you wouldn't have a bank in Georgia supporting some business venture in Minnesota, etc.. Further, there are ventures besides real estate that got them into trouble, I'm sure. They were flush with cash and small banks didn't want to be left out. Sure some banks got caught in a deal that went sour, but all too often they ventured outside of their norms. Sure some banks got rich and did well and played actually the right way, but some didn't and many that were short, because they played too many deals or too big. Of course banks that did stocks as well once only brokers did, well you know the outcome. That was a regulation tossed too. -----Willy

They all started chasing the same "hot" markets and then those markets went "cold". Everybody started hurting the same according to the percentage they'd chased the hottest areas.

I would think that the majority are in debt. Thankfully I'm not in that position. My house and all vehicles are all paid off and I have no CC debt except month to month. Those in hock up to their ears might consider that "rich" but it came only from denying myself things they weren't willing to do without and purchased with debt. What things? Bigger TV's, bigger house (mine is 2000sqft), that speed or fishing boat, the more expensive vehicle, better vacations than every other year for a long weekend or two, and things I probably haven't considered.

My aim in life was always, "make your ground sure" as my grandad would say. Get your place, pay it off soon as possible, then you can start to add some comforts to life. We paid ours off in 15 years. Most take out a 25-30 year loan. It wasn't easy, it involved sacrifice, but life right now is fairly decent as I can see others starting to fail in this current economy. All I need to cover at this point is phone, water, electric, property taxes, and travel expense with an eye toward necessary upkeep on property.

Too many people have been living a lie, a lifestyle that was beyond their income. They shouldn't have been living in a McMansion barn of a home when all they really could have afforded using reasonable mortgage methods would have been a small rancher.

I don't feel like picking up the tab for their foolishness. Do you?

might have been advisable in that case, as in finding people who would be more willing and able to fit into the community. City "slickers" often have hard times fitting into rural communities, especially one as rural as that.

I've wondered in recent years, where lands are no longer used for farms, turned back to counties, states, why aren't they instead converted back to natural settings, perhaps with an eye toward creating a north-south migration corridor for the buffalo again.

That well be true being shunned but he wasn't trying to run a farm either if you think ND. Nope, he tried a small business(s) but they failed. Why? well maybe because there were too few customers to begin with. On top of that, yes you had to know people and the whole 9 yds. but he also started a business where there was already one present or similar. Too few customers and no traffic means hard business. being from Florida and then ND, well if you can't take the cold as usual expect to pack quickly. Regardless of gold chains and etc., he and family were different but the school system certainly missed the kids. Plus, no one else accepted the move but this one family, so they gave up alot to start anew even with perks. But, what gets me, they moved back to Miami, Florida and the reason they left was because of crime, etc.. But also to return to be closer to other family members too. -----Willy