891–900 of 1001 posts
so many startups, in tech of all industries, seemed to have Banked most if not all their funds just with SVB: all eggs in one basket strategy.
talk about everything everywhere and all at once!
This situation is ridiculously unsafe, and avoidable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I just posted this on mastodon but I think maybe the community here knows better: If you ran a bank that required insurance on all deposits over the $250k FDIC coverage, and then offered 3rd-party insurance as a convenience for those who wanted it... your bank would be much less likely to suffer a blow up due to a bank run and therefore that insurance should be relatively cheap. Furthermore, people should prefer to b…
Which apartment block do you thing a most people would rather live in, the one that charges you an extra 10 percent a year but promises to replace all your belongings if it ever burns down, or one that tells you it will never burn down?
This is because by 2028 all of the payments we make on the loans for all that printed money will only be going to the interest, not the principal, and the spiral will be inescapable. (unless they change all the rules/trow them away which is where things like war and The Great Reset come in.
What does this have to do with the banks failing? There will be no more stimulus or bailouts, that's what. FDIC will be lucky if they can cover insured funds. Social Security it has already been reported will be bankrupt by 2033. The money supply has already contracted 2% and historically I think only once when that happened we didn't go into a deep recession or depression. Depression because of what I stated above is on the menu.
Cling to your jobs, folks, save all the money you can, cut all unnecessary spending. The next decade if we're lucky will not turned out like last century, but I'm not holding my breath. All that free money given to cronies by politicians leads to this. This is why you have a god standard and don't use fiat currency. So you can' spend money you don't have politicians buying votes with bailouts and handouts.
We deserve to see more useful top comments on this matter. The top ones in this and the main announcement thread [1] are just ad hominem complaining against some ostensibly "salty" or "cognitively dissonant" majority. Let's talk about skin in the game and bailouts. Explain to a peasant why he should have to share the risk you took with your money. Explain to him this game being played where he gains nothing when you…
"Hey, the FDIC coould raise the limit to, say, 10 million, and just let the FED reserve print out the moneys to everyone. Not much different than what the US government is already doing. Reached the debt limit? Just raise it again, lol."
We deserve to see more useful top comments on this matter. The top ones in this and the main announcement thread [1] are just ad hominem complaining against some ostensibly "salty" or "cognitively dissonant" majority. Let's talk about skin in the game and bailouts. Explain to a peasant why he should have to share the risk you took with your money. Explain to him this game being played where he gains nothing when you…
You are better off because the government is helping, and so are all of the people in the country who need to work for a living and need companies to work for. You can't let the banking system collapse and expect it will only hurt the people you don't like. > If these statements are true, can someone explain how it's possible that despositors are fully protected, far beyond what FDIC insures, without the taxpayer bea…
From where do you think this money will, or has come from?
From Yellen's backside?
We deserve to see more useful top comments on this matter. The top ones in this and the main announcement thread [1] are just ad hominem complaining against some ostensibly "salty" or "cognitively dissonant" majority. Let's talk about skin in the game and bailouts. Explain to a peasant why he should have to share the risk you took with your money. Explain to him this game being played where he gains nothing when you…
You are better off because the government is helping, and so are all of the people in the country who need to work for a living and need companies to work for. You can't let the banking system collapse and expect it will only hurt the people you don't like. > If these statements are true, can someone explain how it's possible that despositors are fully protected, far beyond what FDIC insures, without the taxpayer bea…
Depositors are the absolute last group to lose money in a bankrupt bank. When a bank collapses its assets don't just disappear, and depositors (and paychecks) get first scoop from the pot.
It would be nice if everyone didn't have such hostility towards personal responsibility. You never put all your eggs in one basket. You diversify where you keep your money.
The government can best help by doing what it does best. Let it invest in making bankruptcy courts super efficient. Set up automated systems to drip feed payouts to depositors as assets are sold.
The "heads you win tails we lose" deal we give to bankers, which we don't give to anyone else, is fundamentally evil, and we have to stop bowing to their terroristic threats that if you don't give us this deal you're all doomed.
We deserve to see more useful top comments on this matter. The top ones in this and the main announcement thread [1] are just ad hominem complaining against some ostensibly "salty" or "cognitively dissonant" majority. Let's talk about skin in the game and bailouts. Explain to a peasant why he should have to share the risk you took with your money. Explain to him this game being played where he gains nothing when you…
Just by saying “we will backstop depositors” the government will likely have calmed things down enough that that’s the end of the story. Nothing else needed.
The bank has or can likely get the money to pay everyone back just not in 48 hours which is unnecessary anyway given normal outflows for the bank.
We deserve to see more useful top comments on this matter. The top ones in this and the main announcement thread [1] are just ad hominem complaining against some ostensibly "salty" or "cognitively dissonant" majority. Let's talk about skin in the game and bailouts. Explain to a peasant why he should have to share the risk you took with your money. Explain to him this game being played where he gains nothing when you…
You are better off because the government is helping, and so are all of the people in the country who need to work for a living and need companies to work for. You can't let the banking system collapse and expect it will only hurt the people you don't like. > If these statements are true, can someone explain how it's possible that despositors are fully protected, far beyond what FDIC insures, without the taxpayer bea…
We deserve to see more useful top comments on this matter. The top ones in this and the main announcement thread [1] are just ad hominem complaining against some ostensibly "salty" or "cognitively dissonant" majority. Let's talk about skin in the game and bailouts. Explain to a peasant why he should have to share the risk you took with your money. Explain to him this game being played where he gains nothing when you…
But it strikes me that there's a second-order "too big to fail" effect at work here.
Not only bank runs. How many businesses who don't have any banking with SVB are operationally dependent on cloud services provided by SVB-banked companies?
What's curious is that this wasn't a risk in the 2000-2001 crash, and barely an emerging one in 2008.
Let's say 20% of cloud service providers can't make payroll and shut down. What does the disruption in the wider, real economy look like? Pretty messy, no?
Do big companies not do this with their liquid assets as a matter of course? Are there just not enough banks? Or would per-account fees unknown to me as a little guy eat into savings?
I get that big companies directly hold a bunch of bonds, too. But if they use a bank so they can actually write checks, why not many banks?