91–100 of 201 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It was 0% interest rates before then that actually caused problems. Raising rates should have happened sooner but trump threatened to fire Powell if he did.
Not true. Powell raised rates, and then Trump threatened to fire him. Powell continued to raise rates anyway. The Fed takes no shit from the president or congress. edit: HN is rate limiting me, but to see why the commenter below is wrong, just zoom out the chart he linked to 5 years view.
Fed was late, should have stomped on inflation early.
This seems pretty knee-jerk, especially given, that the current glances that the business was probably too conservatively managed. The problem here was not holding safe assets - but the value of the government bonds depreciating dramatically because of the rising interest rates and a flush supply of higher interest rates due to massive government deficit spending. It’s also a reflection of the extremely aggressive ma…
It was 0% interest rates before then that actually caused problems. Raising rates should have happened sooner but trump threatened to fire Powell if he did.
This seems pretty knee-jerk, especially given, that the current glances that the business was probably too conservatively managed. The problem here was not holding safe assets - but the value of the government bonds depreciating dramatically because of the rising interest rates and a flush supply of higher interest rates due to massive government deficit spending. It’s also a reflection of the extremely aggressive ma…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
ELI5?
I can't remember all the specifics, but after the 2008 crash banks with a certain levels of holding have to pass stress test showing they can survive scenarios like this. I think the old limit was 50 billion but go changed to I think 150 billion which puts SVB below the threshold for the stress test.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can't remember all the specifics, but after the 2008 crash banks with a certain levels of holding have to pass stress test showing they can survive scenarios like this. I think the old limit was 50 billion but go changed to I think 150 billion which puts SVB below the threshold for the stress test.
Trump increased this to $250B in 2018. SVB as the 16th largest bank in the US at $209B didn’t trip this wire because the wire was moved.
This seems pretty knee-jerk, especially given, that the current glances that the business was probably too conservatively managed. The problem here was not holding safe assets - but the value of the government bonds depreciating dramatically because of the rising interest rates and a flush supply of higher interest rates due to massive government deficit spending. It’s also a reflection of the extremely aggressive ma…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can't remember all the specifics, but after the 2008 crash banks with a certain levels of holding have to pass stress test showing they can survive scenarios like this. I think the old limit was 50 billion but go changed to I think 150 billion which puts SVB below the threshold for the stress test.
Trump increased this to $250B in 2018. SVB as the 16th largest bank in the US at $209B didn’t trip this wire because the wire was moved.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Trump increased this to $250B in 2018. SVB as the 16th largest bank in the US at $209B didn’t trip this wire because the wire was moved.
You missed the part about "non-bank" exempted from ANY limit on March 14, 2014 in the FR Notice.
Maybe the parent post missed that but I was responding to that post.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Trump increased this to $250B in 2018. SVB as the 16th largest bank in the US at $209B didn’t trip this wire because the wire was moved.
You missed the part about "non-bank" exempted from ANY limit on March 14, 2014 in the FR Notice.