Silicon Valley Bank has FAILED, becoming the largest US bank failure since 2008

[Sanlmar]

Honest question.

Did you think, in some way/shape/form, banks aren't nationalized already?

I still harbored some notion of banks as private businesses subject to risk like all businesses. I’m probably your average Joe in this regard.

This event will serve to promote a useful national conversation that will inevitably pose the question, “shouldn’t the Fed offer a utility for municipalities, big business and everyone else to deposit directly with the Fed in the same way as banks themselves do now” with all the explicit guarantees that would provide.

I think “they” find SVB a not unpleasant circumstance which dovetails nicely with the CBDC rollout. You will be begging for direct Federal banking.

“They” will be happy to oblige and are preparing as we speak.

[brutal_thinker]

And the hits just keep on coming.

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/03/13/sign...s-history.html

[VaughnP]

What's the quickest way to protect your money if you hypothetically have large amounts above the FDIC limit in some accounts? Never had to really worry about this shit before, but unfortunately two of the banks I primarily use are the type I think would be at risk of social media driven panic.

[Sanlmar]

And the hits just keep on coming.

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/03/13/sign...s-history.html

That’s huge. The guy whose name is on Dodd Frank was on the board of Signature and he’s head scratching the Fed move. He isn’t actually cause he knows the game but jeez.

I’m driven by privacy though that ship sailed long ago but I can’t believe the rate of change while everyone cheers on Ukraine, electric cars and gas ovens

You get the country you deserve.

[Small_Banana]

What's the quickest way to protect your money if you hypothetically have large amounts above the FDIC limit in some accounts? Never had to really worry about this shit before, but unfortunately two of the banks I primarily use are the type I think would be at risk of social media driven panic.

If you are married or have kids you can add them to the account. You get 250k coverage per owner.

[limitles]

The future is now

[Daly]

it's as if they had never heard of laddering their bonds. smh. nothing makes sense any longer. time to take my ball and go home.

Daly, would you please respond to my post. i'm an outsider. you aren't. but it seems so simple and yet they failed. wouldn't this have prevented the run? and isn't laddering the standard of care here?

Laddering would have helped that said the bond values were deteriorating across all maturities that it only would have helped so much. Its extremely fair to say it could have been managed better.

Let us also consider the amount of time involved here. Its not like these imbeciles woke up one morning and the bond portfolio took a 40% haircut and was the main asset against all deposits. These assholes should have self reported this to the Fed and the regulator should have made them do a capital raise.

Its a disgusting level of incompetence.

[Daly]

Honest question.

Did you think, in some way/shape/form, banks aren't nationalized already?

If the federal reserve didn't step in here the X amount of billion it would take would have made TARP seem small.

As far as i can tell This isn't “a bailout”. If you owned shares of this bank you going to lose it. If thats not the case then Id have a much different feeling about all this. The fact remains If you have earned cash and you wish to enter it into the system of banking in the USA there needs to be an implicit guarantee that you will get said funds back. Thats a major part of fractional reserve banking with a “strong central authority”.

why have we continued with the $250k limit farse? sincere query.

I cant answer them all….. Im sure on some level nobody benefits from leaving money in a savings account. Not you, not the bank, not society……

The american way is if you gamble and lose then thats the way the cookie crumbles. Its the pursuit of happiness sort of thing. But if you want to sit it out with near zero risk at sub inflation rate return then these deposits need to be guaranteed by the US Banking system. Thats across the board if you a billionaire or a bum.

[mickeycrimm]

n

[Daly]

Honest question.

Did you think, in some way/shape/form, banks aren't nationalized already?

I still harbored some notion of banks as private businesses subject to risk like all businesses. I’m probably your average Joe in this regard.

This event will serve to promote a useful national conversation that will inevitably pose the question, “shouldn’t the Fed offer a utility for municipalities, big business and everyone else to deposit directly with the Fed in the same way as banks themselves do now” with all the explicit guarantees that would provide.

I think “they” find SVB a not unpleasant circumstance which dovetails nicely with the CBDC rollout. You will be begging for direct Federal banking.

“They” will be happy to oblige and are preparing as we speak.

Think it some ways you answering your own question here. The notion you hold is being applied in real time. SVB was a private business. It fucked up bad. I cant say for sure yet but Im willing to wager a small sum they violated a lot of rules re: capital ratios for a chartered bank with access to the Fed Window. The depositors have their money. The executives and shareholders of SVB got zero.


A non bank with access to the window. Well these are allegedly highly regulated entities here that went titis up. Can you imagine a Enron situation with this sort of access? Dont think we get there but its fair to start asking whats the difference between bank/nonbank.

[Sanlmar]

A non bank with access to the window.

Well these are allegedly highly regulated entities here that went titis up. Can you imagine a Enron situation with this sort of access? Don't think we get there but its fair to start asking whats the difference between bank/nonbank.

Oh no no no. The Fed Window is not at all what I’m talking about.

I’m talking about Central banks providing retail bank accounts to the general public - perhaps you can imagine eliminating the private banking entirely to more clearly picture what I’m alluding to

I think that clarifies my thoughts. We are discussing the endgame here.

Allegedly, fiat and CBDC will exist concurrently (at least for a while) filthy fiat is unwieldy and requires private banking necessarily. But you feel me.

This series of failures and the unusual response is a first step toward National conversation and a CBDC catalyst

[Sanlmar]

It’s all the same ball of wax

This is unverified but entirely likely. This is opportunity in street clothes if you’re .gov

[Sanlmar]

I still harbored some notion of banks as private businesses subject to risk like all businesses. I’m probably your average Joe in this regard.

This event will serve to promote a useful national conversation that will inevitably pose the question, “shouldn’t the Fed offer a utility for municipalities, big business and everyone else to deposit directly with the Fed in the same way as banks themselves do now” with all the explicit guarantees that would provide.

I think “they” find SVB a not unpleasant circumstance which dovetails nicely with the CBDC rollout. You will be begging for direct Federal banking.

“They” will be happy to oblige and are preparing as we speak.

Think it some ways you answering your own question here. The notion you hold is being applied in real time. SVB was a private business. It fucked up bad. I cant say for sure yet but Im willing to wager a small sum they violated a lot of rules re: capital ratios for a chartered bank with access to the Fed Window. The depositors have their money. The executives and shareholders of SVB got zero.


A non bank with access to the window. Well these are allegedly highly regulated entities here that went titis up. Can you imagine a Enron situation with this sort of access? Dont think we get there but its fair to start asking whats the difference between bank/nonbank.

If I’m being fair in our dialogue I should respond to your characterization of everything having been resolved in a tidy and righteous fashion.

I believe SVB could have been liquidated as is the usual practice and prolly 90% of the depositors money would have been returned. That didn’t happen for reasons obvious to both of us.

A decision was made which will alter everything going forward. There are always consequences.

[Sanlmar]

Tim Dillon cracks me up. Just found out he’s gay. Former mortgage broker… I shoulda figured right away.

Embedded Tweet

https://twitter.com/twt/status/1635440378584203266

This is just divided America nonsense. The presses run for everyone buddy.

[Dan Druff]

What's the quickest way to protect your money if you hypothetically have large amounts above the FDIC limit in some accounts? Never had to really worry about this shit before, but unfortunately two of the banks I primarily use are the type I think would be at risk of social media driven panic.

Add beneficiaries.

Call up the bank (or go online if it has this feature) and add 2+ beneficiaries, payable upon your death. These people will NOT have any access to the money, or visibility into your account unless you croak. They do not have to be related to you.

You get up to $250k protection per beneficiary, and you can have up to 5. One beneficiary gives you the same $250k you'd get otherwise, but two would give you $500k, three would give you $750k, etc.

[Zap_the_Fractions_Giraffe]

https://voca.ro/1dfhNWHua77O

[Zap_the_Fractions_Giraffe]

[Daly]

A non bank with access to the window.

Well these are allegedly highly regulated entities here that went titis up. Can you imagine a Enron situation with this sort of access? Don't think we get there but its fair to start asking whats the difference between bank/nonbank.

Oh no no no. The Fed Window is not at all what I’m talking about.

I’m talking about Central banks providing retail bank accounts to the general public - perhaps you can imagine eliminating the private banking entirely to more clearly picture what I’m alluding to

I think that clarifies my thoughts. We are discussing the endgame here.

Allegedly, fiat and CBDC will exist concurrently (at least for a while) filthy fiat is unwieldy and requires private banking necessarily. But you feel me.

This series of failures and the unusual response is a first step toward National conversation and a CBDC catalyst

In a word, No. we are nowhere near being able to get rid of the current “banking layer”.

That being said you are raising some questions I haven't thought all the way through…… and few others have as well. Could we get rid of banks and deal direct with the Fed in 10-20-30 years? First blush thinks no but forever is a long time.

[Daly]

Think it some ways you answering your own question here. The notion you hold is being applied in real time. SVB was a private business. It fucked up bad. I cant say for sure yet but Im willing to wager a small sum they violated a lot of rules re: capital ratios for a chartered bank with access to the Fed Window. The depositors have their money. The executives and shareholders of SVB got zero.


A non bank with access to the window. Well these are allegedly highly regulated entities here that went titis up. Can you imagine a Enron situation with this sort of access? Dont think we get there but its fair to start asking whats the difference between bank/nonbank.

If I’m being fair in our dialogue I should respond to your characterization of everything having been resolved in a tidy and righteous fashion.

I believe SVB could have been liquidated as is the usual practice and prolly 90% of the depositors money would have been returned. That didn’t happen for reasons obvious to both of us.

A decision was made which will alter everything going forward. There are always consequences.

My “end the thread” quip was directed at the current temperature of the room over the weekend when there were people calling for shuttering up SVB and sending all the depositors $250K. That was the possible systemic disaster that was adverted. Im not sure people really understand what the end result of said decision would have been. Ill talk about Banking all day long.

Fact of the matter is if Paulson would have been told Lehman was going to be bankrupt Monday AM, knowing what we all know now, Im not sure he/“we” would have let that go down the same way. Its almost always going to be cheaper by a factor of 100 to patch up the issue and move on then to let it all unfold.

Is that the right thing to do? Maybe not. Crossroads of Ethics and whats practical. Personally I think so long as the executives and stockholders get wiped out its going to be a step in the right direction. And Im not normally a fan of lookbacks but the CEO/CFO/Other massive sale of stock 2-3 months ago is bullshit and should be returned to the creditors. All of them knew what was coming, even if it was “only” the shares being slashed by 90%. They sold as much as they could without looking like they were jumping ship.

[Sheesfaced]

What's the quickest way to protect your money if you hypothetically have large amounts above the FDIC limit in some accounts? Never had to really worry about this shit before, but unfortunately two of the banks I primarily use are the type I think would be at risk of social media driven panic.

Add beneficiaries.

Call up the bank (or go online if it has this feature) and add 2+ beneficiaries, payable upon your death. These people will NOT have any access to the money, or visibility into your account unless you croak. They do not have to be related to you.

You get up to $250k protection per beneficiary, and you can have up to 5. One beneficiary gives you the same $250k you'd get otherwise, but two would give you $500k, three would give you $750k, etc.

This, but really why would you have so much in cash anyways when you can ladder 3 month t-bills at nearly 5% that are fully backed by US government? Also most brokerages will sweep cash across multiple banks so you can get 1.25M of FDIC coverage on cash. Or you can buy a money market mutual fund that’s liquid and protected by SIPC insurance.