Could Cyprus happen in U.S. or is it happening now?

Despite saying last week that they wouldn’t allow money to be confiscated from private bank accounts, Cyprus caved under pressure from the EU, taking up to 40% from accounts that have more than 100,000 Euros.

The Cyprus progressives have gone wild, left with no solution except to take private funds directly from bank accounts. The progressive socialist political system is responsible for this turmoil – deficit spending for years without any concern for the consequences – sound familiar?

Read about the closing of banks, loss of thousands of jobs, freezing amounts over 100,000 euros here. Private bondholders have already lost 75% on their investments a year ago.

The U.S. government would probably not take savings directly from our bank accounts but read here how the government is currently reducing our accounts through inflation, quantitative easing by the federal reserve, etc.


This new money (Quantitative Easing) buys just as much as the money you sacrificed to save for years. More money in circulation, without a corresponding increase in output, means rising prices. Although the numbers in your bank book may remain the same, part of the purchasing power of your money is transferred to the government. Is that really different from what Cyprus has done?

Take a look at the tactics Cyprus is using to avert a run on the banks – total government control in action. The government is even investigating people who took large sums of money out of Cyprus weeks before the bailout terms were determined.

Just get used to these tactics by progressive governments as they head toward a fiscal cliff of their own making, they confiscate citizens money to pay for their fiscal mismanagement.



  1. truth hurts

    Simple answer ted is a disgusting yes.

    Lets look at IL for a small but realistic example.

    The gov with the legislators raised the state income tax by almost double.

    Did the majority of the people want it?
    Safely I can say no.

    Were there letters, calls, and other protests to the legislators and govn in advance? YES.

    Did it do any good? NO

    Did the legislators responcible keep their jobs? YES

    So really what hope do we have in stopping it at a national level if the current president and legislators got it in their heads to raise taxes, continue spending and then wanted to add a progressive tax on saving accounts while they by legislation or presidential order prevent us from removing our money?

    Not much unless people are willing to at the polls and other LEGAL ways to fight to stop them.

    Not much chance given the last election where more people watched american idol than voted.

  2. Carol Foster

    Nice to see you never give up blaming the President & all those supposed “progessives” for the ills of this nation.
    What’s so bad is you don’t even understand the real ills of this nation like the number of children you aren’t sure where their next meal will come fron on a daily basis. You don’t see those who still can’t buy themselves medical insurance until 2014 so they must go without it. Are blind to the number of people earning minium wage so they must be on SNAP to supliment their food needs. And how about the lousey education that isn’t preparing young persons for college and the cheating scandal down south with teachers who fudged the scores of their students to look good?
    You have real problems to worry about, Ted, not the ones you are making up with this column. At least “Truth Hurts” is correct about what you can expect from the voter turn out. Guess you’ll blame that one on this President as well even when stats show trun-out has been very low for such a long time prior to Obamas term in office.
    As long as folks like yourself who have columns make foolish statements about places like Cypress and try to compare it to the USA, the real problems will always go kicked to the curb in favor of political nonesense.

  3. I don’t blame the President alone, but “Progressive” (socialist/Marxist) policies are the major cause, not just in economics, but in crime rates, as well. A few decades ago, single-parent families were relatively few. Most children grew up with supervision and guidance by a nuclear family unit.

    Then government welfare programs forced the fathers to become no more than transient sperm donors. Today, well over 70% of black children are born out of wedlock. For Hispanics, that number is about 50%. The rate for poor white women has also increased dramatically. With reduced supervision, and lacking a strong paternal role model, these children are at a much greater risk of remaining in poverty, and being involved in crime. Welfare has created a dependency on these government hand-outs, referred to as “entitlements”. They deter ambition, and encourage living at a minimal survival standard, milking the system for all that they can.

    We have to break this generational dependency cycle, to have any hope of restoring fiscal and moral stability in this Country.

  4. Many of those problems that Carol describes could be solved with a growing economy and lower unemployment?

    Who should get the blame for teh anemic economic recovery and persistant high unemployment if not Obama?

  5. Carol Foster

    SNuss, you’ve got to be writing an April Fools Joke with your comment, right?
    You don’t expect anyone to take what you’re shoveling seriously do you?
    Do you even understand how little as a tax payer you contribute to social programs to feed those chidren?
    How convenient it is to blame them for how poorly we educate them or see to it they get good medical care. You are a collassal buck-passer in the responsibility departmenti in life.
    And yes, Terry, a much better economy would be helpful for everyone in this nation but unfortunately this nation isn’t the entire economy we live with that influences our lives. We do live in a world where what happens in Asia etc. weighs heavely on our own economy and we don’t control it all.
    Gentelmen, please note even in the “good times” our education system has stunk and failed our up coming generations of children. Our middle class has shrunk in those supposed good times as well. OUr aging population has suffered and our children have been going hungry at an alarming rate. We have been poor planners for our nation’s future in a changing world because we’ve been far too greedy with living in the moment for the now buck in our hands.
    Nations smaller than ourselves pay far higher tax rates but have much better living conditions as well as better educated populations and healthier ones. We still can’t decide what we want to pay for or how it benefits us as a whole nation.
    What’s immoral is allowing those children to go hungry or complain the aging shouldn’t have Medicare benefits. That has nothing to do with were you raised in a one parent family but it has a great deal to do with greed.
    We recently inherited some money. First thing we did was to have a financial talk with our son & daughterinlaw over dinner at their home. Now this wasn’t a large amount of money by some standards, but by others, it was a nice chunck of change. For us, being retired, a nice cushion to add to our retirement accounts. We told them (they thought we were announcing we’d gone broke over buying our retirement home and fixing it up) we intended to share the inheritence with them and do something for them they had wanted for a long time. And we wrote them a check for an amount to cover their dream project. Then we wrote a check and sent it to our youngest grandaughter’s college account. Told our eldest grandaughter when she got into nurseing school, we’d pay for those expensive upfront costs so he wouldn’t need to take out loans. Then we went shopping for investments with the balance of the funds. We weren’t selfish in hoarding it all for ourselves. We invested in our family’s future. In education that will benefit this nation. And in the midst of this we got a letter from Heifer International, who had a fundraiser with a corporatate sponcer who did matching funds. Sent them a check to buy goats for poor families in South America to improve their lot in life.
    I didn’t spend our money based on politics, but I do get the most value from it. Maybe it’s time you all considered this column can be so much better used than sexist comments about one parent families being the cause of our problems or that one President should take the blame for why the world as a whole isn’t doing so well.
    The only “dependency cycle” I see is that of greed from those who espose the me me me attitude and are short sighted in what it will take to bring this nation back to really being important and offering a better life for it’s people.

  6. Carol, you obviously missed the point. My concern is that this Leftist-created “entitlement mentality” is the CAUSE of poverty and crime. The purpose of welfare programs is supposed to assist people in becoming able not to need it, not to be a “lifestyle”. It should encourage a family staying together, rather than mandating single-parent households. You talk about being “invested in our family’s future”, but welfare, as currently operated, is a terrible “investment”. Remember the “War on Poverty”? Government-sponsored poverty won. It has created a generational under-class, dependent on government (read: taxpayers) benevolence, rather than providing what is needed to escape the dependency cycle. If you don’t understand that, you might be a Leftist Liberal.

  7. Todd A

    You are completely off your rocker and your head is in a place where it is doubtful to ever see light again.

    If you really believe that, why is it a fact that crime increases when the economy is doing poorly and funding for benefits is cut?

    If you don’t understand that, you may be a delusional conservative.

  8. Carol,

    “And yes, Terry, a much better economy would be helpful for everyone in this nation but unfortunately this nation isn’t the entire economy we live with that influences our lives. We do live in a world where what happens in Asia etc. weighs heavely on our own economy and we don’t control it all.”

    Wouldn’t it be nice if we had a president that at least try to put in good econoic policies in our country so at least we are trying to do our part?

  9. Carol Foster

    Terry this will be my last comment as I’m not a subscriber to this newspaper.

    Yesterday, it was announced car sales at an all time high. Last week it was home sales are up considerably, and our agent came by to see our home improvements recently, and told us values have risen enough,the improvements haven’t put us over the value of our home. That homes are selling in a matter of days in the market.
    I think we are seeing a positive change in the economy. As a Conservative, I thought you would be happy the President didn’t try to dictate the economy, but allowed business to do its’ thing and find most of its’ own remedies?
    We see the housing market between investors and low interest rates is moving agian.
    We see auto sales becoming positive as a sign people believe they can once again afford to buy a car. It isn’t just General Motors, who got gov help, but Ford who managed without the help, both doing OK.
    This President concentrated on those in need during difficult times. I believe that’s what we should expect from our government. Corporations wouldn’t be posting record profits and now expanding if this President fhad done something so wrong in his policies to keep us afloat. It’s really up to us to decide if we want better educated children and are willing to pay for it as an investment in our nation’s future. Up to us if hungry children are acceptable in our society as being commonplace. As individuals, we all have opportunites to help our own families at one time or another, but the choice is do we look at everyone in this nation and treat them as extended family?
    When my husband and I donate money for goats to Heifer International, those animals help one family in the beginning and than other families because Heifer’s plan is some of the baby goats are given to other families in the area so that others have an opportunity to improve their lives as well. That’s a very simple concept to undersand in impoverished countries, but here, some don’t understand by pooling our tax dollars we all help those in poverty in our own nation. SNuss only sees those who can’t or won’t pull themselves forward who are on programs. He doesn’t see that long ago programs were changes to encourage moving ahead. OUr President was raised in a non traditional family and he’s done very well as a responsible human being. You might not like his policies, but you can’t overlook he’s a product of divorce, twice, and raised by grandparents for the most part. I’m guessing he had to take student loans to get his better education. He seems to be a very good family man.
    No government program will ever be perfact and there will always be waste. That’s the nature of the beast. And, yes, someone in South America who gets one of my donated goats will surely not follow the program and eat it rather than turn it in an opportunity for themselves and their neighbors, but that won’t stop me from giving the goats. Greed is ugly and it makes its’s partakers lesser human beings. It’s not one political party or the other, but a condition where we have a choice in the matter. Either fwe decide growing poverty isn’t acceptable and we are willing to spend some of our tax dollars to help abate it, or we are truely greedy in nature and deserve the lousey education our schools put out and the hungry children some treat like excess garbage with unredeaming qualiities because they are of one race or another.

  10. Carol,

    If you think unemployment near 8% and trillion dollar deficits are the signs of a good economy, you are very easy to please. The recovery that started in June 2009 should have been one of the best in history. As anyone who has studied economics will tell you, the steeper the recession, the better the recovery. We should have had economic growth these past four years of 4% or better for the past 15 quarters; not this anemic 1 – 2%.

    Since you mentioned GM, let’s get back to Ted’s topic of Can Cyprus happen here. In fact, this is what happened to GM Bondholders – the gov’t came in and devalued their investment. It also just happened in Stockton California where their union workers took a haircut while their municipal bond holders went to a St. Baldrick’s fundraiser. So yes, the gov’t has come in here and devalued private investments.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *