Don't get too comfortable with that 250K "guarantee" Sure they have a line of credit with Treasury in excess of this but even that won't cover a financial catastrophe. The following graphic is a few years old by now so it's likely even worse than this. 

Remember we discussed this previously.  

http://talk.newagtalk.com/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=377977

The quote below in green comes from this article. Red emphasis is mine.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-02-18/why-zirpnirp-killing-fractional-reserve-banking-forcing-deposits-gold

"All Governments have silently built in the “bail in” template for when the roof comes down. Where is the accountability of the politicians and bankers?

The US, UK, EU, and Canada have recently all built the new "bail in" template into their laws in order to avoid imposing risk on “taxpayers” (and politicians and bankers of course).  All taxpayers have bank accounts and therefore the avoidance argument basically is only important to get the government officials and the bankers off the hook i.e. their accountability! Under the new "template" all lenders (including depositors) to the bank can be forced to "bail in" their respective banks.  Most depositors naively assume that their deposits are 100% safe in their banks and trust them to safeguard their savings. And most account holders don’t know that by law, when you put your money into a bank account, your money becomes the property of the bank. Your title “downgrades” from owner of your money to creditor of your money with millions of other creditors. You become an unsecured creditor with a claim against the bank.  In other words if the bank goes bankrupt you share at pari (equally at fault) with other similar creditor/deposit holders. Great deal for the bank and bankers, no!"

More concerning is this Canadian proposal that Gottlieb previously posted on page 144 and 145