I answered a few emails on this a week or so ago, but the issue seems to have come back again.
There was a change in the aggregation of accounts at the FDIC as of 31 Dec 2012. That change rolled back a consideration that had been granted for 'non-interest bearing transactional accounts' held at a bank. Such an account is what is normally considered a checking account. Those were to be aggregated with the other accounts of the account holder.
But in terms of aggregation, nothing else changed. Some people said the rule would aggregate ALL accounts at ALL banks to a single Social Security number in the amount of $250,000.
This is not what the FDIC said, not at all. And there updated information from 1 January 2013 confirms this.
The aggregation rules are still based on a 'per bank' basis. And within that bank, those rules are roughly as follows per the FDIC's webpage.
I do not know the future. Some will ask, 'well do you trust the ....?' Probably not, and I tend to trust in God, and look at the data for everything else. But there is a wide gap between blind trust and just making things up. And it is there that we must make our stand, on as firm a ground as we can find.
It is not unreasonable to believe that dollar debts will be paid in devalued dollars, and there will be de facto defaults as well. This has been going on for quite some time, and there is plenty of historical precedent. Much of the hoohah going on in politics revolves around the allocation of financial pain.
There are legitimate concerns, and fears, and phantoms. The difference between the first two is the difference between probability and possibility. And with regard to the last, it is a terror of the imagination that is inimical to reason and to a rewarding life and the refuge of despair.
We entering a time of rumour and hysteria. I have been hearing some rather crazy things, about the Mormons buying up all the real estate of California, and the Queen of England buying up Nevada. And some other things I do not care to even mention in this Café, from the usual repugnant sources of fear and hatred and violence about the usual victims of prejudice.
Because to do that is not to stand with the truth as we can know it, even if we think we are wallowing with those in the mud for 'the right ends' and things we may sincerely believe. That merely serves the madness, which serves none but itself.
If hatred and fear crowd out the reason, and love, in our words and our minds, we have probably gone off the path.