I agree of course,
The right government policy is hands off, it should be the market to decide.
For the EU, so much is wrong .. ..
For the Swiss National Bank, that decision to upcap is correct.

I disagree that devaluing is ever the right policy. Devaluing is a nice way of saying counterfeiting, which means stealing from you citizens.. It is also the worst kind of Government top down meddling and always helps some people at the expense of other people and always hurts the economy overall.

The Swiss have a reputation as not always 'nice'. But they have a good record of looking after themselves. If you cannot preserve and enhance the interests of Number One then good intentions are worthless.
The Swiss National Bank is simply confirming that they are aware that the EU policy of 'quantitative easing' implies devaluation. Devaluation is the right measure for the EU given the state of the economy but for ideological reasons they do it by money printing rather then letting the market find the level.

Saving and Loans pre-bank-contrived crash. Isn't banking still a state charter and therefore could be done without being a part of the federal system? No FDIC guarantee, no fractional reserves.

Welcome to Economics: The Video Game v2.0! Is anyone with any knowledge in a position of power anymore? I think my teenager caused this with his Ipad!

Banks are so highly regulated I do not think that would be possible. The closest was the money market funds with checking features.

I'm sure there are a group of globalists who are *not happy*.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r2eBlCpm...

I think there is a lag time in the votes.
Sometimes it takes a minute or so for them to be registered.
Which is why sometimes you see posts and comments initially at 0 when the should be at 1.

Would this also be an opportunity for someone outside the system to provide that service and no charge for it? (Banking as a free market service, what a concept.) Who has liquid assets to do this without being in the federal system: China.

it was at 0 and I gave the comment a point lol

search and seizure laws also unfortunately encourage that -negatively. Large amounts of cash caught on your person is a no-no. Why should you have to declare you have 10K on you? ah, thanks war on drugs

I just read that the interest rate that the Swiss are paying on their francs is NEGATIVE. That is mind boggling!

But in the meantime, my Au rockets up in price - finally!

Makes sense to me. However, there is value to having your money in a bank even if it charges you. For instance, it is much easier and safer to pay someone using a bank transfer (check) than to drive across town with a $1000 or $10000. A bank that only does this function is called an exchange bank and one of the 1st banks in northern Europe did exactly this.

The counts look right. Do you mean the post or the comment?

I remember just a month or so ago, Jim Rogers was encouraging people to buy Swiss francs.

who down voted this?

I fear so. It was my hope that this would happen as fast as possible, so people might understand that it is not a good idea to elect a socialism muslim as a president..

I had the same thought. The only thing I can think of is the secrecy factor. Big money folks may feel it's worth it if they are avoiding a huge tax burden.

The house of cards just had one fairly large pillar taken out. I am not looking forward to this game of Jenga playing out. It's going to get a lot uglier before it gets better.

More reactions to the change:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-01-15...

Perhaps I am naive/ignorant, but if banks depend on customer deposits as a basis for their reserves and banks start to charge customers for holding/borrowing their funds instead of paying for those loans, wouldn't banks expect to see massive withdrawals and a corresponding reduction of their reserves?

Go Old Yeller!

A strange development. This seemed to take most analysts by surprise and the reaction has been mostly negative. This could be domino #1.