Live data from Hacker News

Joint statement by the Department of the Treasury, Federal Reserve, and FDIC

home.treasury.gov

241–250 of 1001 posts

Re: Joint statement by the Department of the Treasury, Federal Reserve, and FDIC

#241

So depositors at banks taking on big risks get elevated interest rates or other perks for years, and when the shit hits the fan depositors that put their money in prudent banks get to bail them out through higher fees. And people wonder why turnout is low. There’s no way to vote for non captured politicians.

[deleted]

Re: Joint statement by the Department of the Treasury, Federal Reserve, and FDIC

#242

Yellen and the FDIC is in a tough spot. This is the important line, "Any losses to the Deposit Insurance Fund to support uninsured depositors will be recovered by a special assessment on banks, as required by law." Thus, on one hand, I'm glad they're doing this, as it should help prevent wider bank runs, and it ensures that banks are the ones that are actually paying for it. At the same time, this is yet another exam…

Vivek Ramaswamy? Is that you? He's currently on Mario Nawfal's Twitter space saying this exact thing lmao.

Re: Joint statement by the Department of the Treasury, Federal Reserve, and FDIC

#243

Yellen and the FDIC is in a tough spot. This is the important line, "Any losses to the Deposit Insurance Fund to support uninsured depositors will be recovered by a special assessment on banks, as required by law." Thus, on one hand, I'm glad they're doing this, as it should help prevent wider bank runs, and it ensures that banks are the ones that are actually paying for it. At the same time, this is yet another exam…

In cases where you can't predict the future appropriately, sometimes it's better to make prudent decisions that help everyone instead of attempting to punish the sinful. Keep in mind that bank shareholders and senior management are going to get wiped out and fired.

They should claw back SVB CEO pay and televise the moment the funds move. Show the CEOs number going down and some other public number going up. Bonus points if his face is televised at that moment at well

That's all that's really necessary in terms of handling moral hazard and public perception that this is yet another bailout. Let ppl see the CEO suffer and they will be fine with having taxes foot the bailout bill. It's sad but a spectacle is necessary here.

Re: Joint statement by the Department of the Treasury, Federal Reserve, and FDIC

#244

This is 100% a bailout and the wording that “no losses […] will be borne by the taxpayer” is a shameful misrepresentation. Just because a bunch of VCs and founders didn’t realize they were at risk of this happening if they kept all their money in one bank, they still bear the responsibility of their losses. Looking forward to this new future where uninsured deposits are actually 100% backed by the FDIC, so actually i…

Seriously, I really wished this were an inflammatory hippie talking point but unfortunately it isn't: the truth is that for saving the rich, the whole system moves. When the financial world is at risk, there is never ever a lack of money for bailing it out.

Now on the other side, the federal govenment has no money for paying its own employees decently: https://www.govtech.com/em/preparedness/low-pay-high-risk-le...

I'm not even american, but it looks like it's like that everywhere.

Re: Joint statement by the Department of the Treasury, Federal Reserve, and FDIC

#245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This probably sealed the deal: > We are also announcing a similar systemic risk exception for Signature Bank, New York, New York, which was closed today by its state chartering authority. Two closures in three days is a sign that you have to take this very seriously.

Curious there was nothing about silvergate?

Silvergate is tiny (assets-wise) compared to SVB and Signature and not worth a mention as it poses no systemic risk.

Re: Joint statement by the Department of the Treasury, Federal Reserve, and FDIC

#246
post #135

All bank deposits should be guaranteed by the state. Just like tap water is guaranteed to be drinkable, ... Bank accounts are the basis of many things.

SVB was offering higher returns by taking on more risk than was required. Those customers now lost nothing. The rest of us who went with safer banks offering market rate returns not only received less over that duration, but we have to pickup their tab.

Why should I or a bank ever do diligence again? I can just claim I misjudged the risk.

Re: Joint statement by the Department of the Treasury, Federal Reserve, and FDIC

#247

So they made their decision, everyone can move on. I just hope nobody forgets how prominent VCs behaved during the brief period of uncertainty. The idea of some noble class of investors championing disruption is dead. They're just a bunch of rent seekers like everybody else. For some silly reason I had some respect for the startup industry before this, now I see it as a joke. It's great at a personal level that "foun…

VC's and YC have burned a lot of credibility overnight with their tech employees during this mask-off moment. I wouldn't be surprised if this forum harbors long term resentment, lack of respect, and a more adversarial relationship going forward. I haven't ever seen such a large lack of respect for them as the past couple days. This industry has gone full Wall St. The next generation of individualist, regulation-disruption startup founders will be reconsidering the YC club a bit more...

Re: Joint statement by the Department of the Treasury, Federal Reserve, and FDIC

#248
post #135

All bank deposits should be guaranteed by the state. Just like tap water is guaranteed to be drinkable, ... Bank accounts are the basis of many things.

Yeah as long as the banks hold actually valuable things- SVB had treasury bonds- no reason the federal government can’t treat those as cash. I mean it’s their own issued assets!

The problem in this particular case is they already sold those treasury bonds, at a loss. But yeah, it would be ridiculous for a bank to go bankrupt because it bought it's own government bonds.

Re: Joint statement by the Department of the Treasury, Federal Reserve, and FDIC

#249

Yellen and the FDIC is in a tough spot. This is the important line, "Any losses to the Deposit Insurance Fund to support uninsured depositors will be recovered by a special assessment on banks, as required by law." Thus, on one hand, I'm glad they're doing this, as it should help prevent wider bank runs, and it ensures that banks are the ones that are actually paying for it. At the same time, this is yet another exam…

My read is that they see the shortage at SVB as relatively small and that they may be closing some marginal banks like Signature ahead of true insolvency/illiquidity to both protect depositors and minimize reactionary withdrawals across the broader market. And it sounds like they have the authority to just do this on a Sunday, so it doesn’t sound like any rules being changed. If I was a banker with a marginal portfol…

>they may be closing some marginal banks like Signature ahead of true insolvency/illiquidity

That seems unjust and probably illegal. What makes you think Signature isn’t actually insolvent?

Re: Joint statement by the Department of the Treasury, Federal Reserve, and FDIC

#250

This is 100% a bailout and the wording that “no losses […] will be borne by the taxpayer” is a shameful misrepresentation. Just because a bunch of VCs and founders didn’t realize they were at risk of this happening if they kept all their money in one bank, they still bear the responsibility of their losses. Looking forward to this new future where uninsured deposits are actually 100% backed by the FDIC, so actually i…

You’re being bailed out too. You just don’t understand how.

Signature Bank failed and they didn’t tell anyone. A half dozen more would be dead by noon on Monday. Good luck to rest of the financial system, and good luck to the rest of the economy.

Post reply on HN