>>>>Others (like me) would rather assume an average snowfall based on history and do an assessment when the blizzard comes.
>>>>
>>>>Why?
>>>>I'd rather hold my money than let someone else hold it.
>>>
>>>And then they promise you interest and growth. To which the response here was, traditionally, "only one thing grows in someone else's hand, and money it is not" (the translation is politically rectified, but if you have someone to translat it for you, here's the original: "у туђој руци само курац расте").
>>
>>...not to mention the money ends up with 3 times as many people. If you have $100 -- then put it in the bank -- now you and the bank have $100 -- then the bank loans the $100 to someone else so now they have $100. Sort of key to how economics work lol.
>
>Actually, bank doesn't have that money, except on theory that we have a deal that she can play with it while I don't, and pretending that it's now hers, loans someone $1000 and expects to get $1200 back. Then I get my $100 back and the bank now has $200 based on nonexistent value it produced.

Well yes. And this is all fine and dandy -- assuming the bank is able to collect the $1200 (or at least the original $1000) -- if not then the whole system breaks down. Of course Trump and the GOP are rolling back all the regulations put in place to keep this from happening --- gee guess what will happen next lol.