Live data from Hacker News

The End of Silicon Valley (Bank)

stratechery.com

141–145 of 145 posts

Re: The End of Silicon Valley (Bank)

#141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you mean "invest"? Most of this bank's customers are running a business and need a bank account, it's not an investment.

It’s quite simple, really. Startups should buy hundreds of millions in gold, then stash that under 160,000 different mattresses to diversify risk of a systemic bank collapse. If Bogglehead retirees can figure that out, why not startups?

A poor straw man.

Re: The End of Silicon Valley (Bank)

#142
post #2

>The federal government’s action is, in my estimation, the right thing to do for this moment in time. There will, though, be long-term consequences for fundamentally changing the nature of a bank: remember, depositors are a bank’s creditors, who are compensated for lending money to the bank; if there is no risk in lending that money, why should depositors make anything? Banks, meanwhile, are now motivated to pursue e…

> depositors are a bank's creditors, who are compensated for lending money to the bank; this is simply not true. if anything the bank charges me money to hold my funds.

You should currently be getting at least 3.3% APY from your savings account. If you're not, it would be in your financial interest to move it to an account (possibly even at the same bank) where you do.

Re: The End of Silicon Valley (Bank)

#143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That was true last week . https://www.marketwatch.com/investing/bond/tmubmusd06m?count...

Oof! Still hard to find a savings account that pays > 1%.

https://www.nerdwallet.com/m/banking/standout-online-savings...

Get 3.3%, at least.

Re: The End of Silicon Valley (Bank)

#144
"remember, depositors are a bank’s creditors, who are compensated for lending money to the bank; if there is no risk in lending that money, why should depositors make anything?"

No, depositors get interest to compensate for inflation.

Re: The End of Silicon Valley (Bank)

#145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's just a waste of capital and leads to zero business investments. It's exactly what happens in crypto because it's deflationary, and it's the main reason there is no crypto economy beyond the price speculation.

No it just increases the hurdle rate for valuable investments. It just means that entrepreneurs have to prove that their ideas are worth more than the security of knowing your money is safe. Is that so bad??

If you expect individuals to evaluate investments, then you're nuts - but if you're saying that the bank should do it for them, then you're suggesting the same system that already exists.
Post reply on HN