It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
In all, 9,000 banks failed during the decade of the 30s. It's estimated that 4,000 banks failed during the one year of 1933 alone. By 1933, depositors saw $140 billion disappear through bank failures.
Originally posted by boncho
I'm still not sure the implications of this. Looking back at numbers from the great depression though is interesting:
In all, 9,000 banks failed during the decade of the 30s. It's estimated that 4,000 banks failed during the one year of 1933 alone. By 1933, depositors saw $140 billion disappear through bank failures.
How many executive and bank jobs were lost back then with that number of banks dropping off?
Source
edit on 13-3-2012 by boncho because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Vandettas
Anyone care to dumb it down for me? Like a lot?
I understand the threads on the resignations, and
I've read the OP, but Im not understanding what
the OP means...
This data does not show bank failures, but rather the number of resignations of top brass at publicly traded companies within the United States. I am a rather skeptical person. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, is a maxim that should be embraced more on ATS.
Originally posted by boncho
reply to post by LordOfArcadia
This data does not show bank failures, but rather the number of resignations of top brass at publicly traded companies within the United States. I am a rather skeptical person. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, is a maxim that should be embraced more on ATS.
I wasn't suggesting your data showed bank failures, just pointing out that the world already went through a great depression. And the data from the first one would be interesting to compare to the current economic climate.
I'm sometimes asked if I've noticed any change in Goldman, Sachs since the financial crash of 2008. I'd suggest that anyone who would ask that question simply check out this news item. It's not merely that Verschleiser appears to be a titanically entitled asshole of the Let-Them-Eat-Cake variety; it's also that this is a guy who was personally named in a number of major lawsuits involving exactly the sorts of tawdry behaviors that caused the crash -- like knowingly dumping "sack of #" mortgages on the market, or betting against your own clients after sticking them with millions' worth of defective products.