[Taxacom] FW: ICZN procedure question

[dipteryx at freeler.nl]

-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu namens Doug Yanega

Money kept under a mattress will 
eventually be lost, stolen or destroyed (it could even become 
obsolete and worthless, if the currency undergoes a radical change). 
Data kept in one's office, on one's own computer, on floppy disks or 
hard drives or CDs or whatever will eventually be lost, stolen, 
destroyed or become obsolete. The idea behind calling things genBANK 
and zooBANK should, one would hope, clue people in as to exactly this 
concept: once in the BANK, the resources are from that point on 
effectively IMMUNE to all these problems. It is an entirely different 
system, from the ground up. I know lots of people who almost never 
carry any cash on their person; they carry cards that link to an 
electronic archive in their bank. Why? Because that electronic 
archive of their assets is SAFER than any hard copy. 

***
>From a historical perspective this is a weird analogy.
Recent history has amply shown that money in the bank is 
not particularly safe. Massive government intervention
(directly threatening the financial stability of those 
governments) was required to keep the financial system 
working (reports had it that at some point we were days 
away from a complete collapse). Nevertheless, banks have
been falling over left and right for years.

There is a surge in the price of gold, just because
it is widely felt that banks are not safe. 

Is it all that likely that there is to be a massive 
government intervention to save the Nomenclatural Bank 
if/when it hovers on the brink of collapse?

Paul