Bank collapse?

[BeachGal]

SVB put a lot into long term bonds yielding low rates back when rates were not high and had not been high for quite a few years. SVB might have thought they would remain low. Then when interest rates began to rise, SVB did not take the steps necessary to protect themselves. They waited and then found themselves with a liquidity problem.

My husband managed a huge fund and says there are a number of failings here starting with decisions made by the CEO and other executives as well as bank examiners. Deregulating was not smart either. Dh is retired now but would go way beyond the minimum stress test requirements to ensure assets were protected in the fund he managed.

SVB was involved with a number of big start ups and was pretty savvy about the risks then. There may be something they were counting on with something else. I don’t know. We’ll learn more as time goes on, I guess.

Credit Suisse is not doing well either and has had problems in the past. They are one to watch now as well.

Edited March 15, 2023 by BeachGal

[Tree Frog]

17 hours ago, Sneezyone said:

We have always operated from two banks just b/c the federal credit unions we use will advance us funds based on prior direct deposits if Congress decides to stop paying military salaries (which has happened several times in DHs career). My pay goes into one, his goes into another, and our retirement accounts are separate. It does make me wonder if we need to diversify our retirement portfolio tho.

We have also done this throughout dh's career, though currently we are using 3 credit unions. 2 are federal credit unions and one just stopped being a federal cu and is now a state charter.

Are credit unions safer than banks in cases like this? And is the state charter less secure than a federal charter? 

[Sneezyone]

3 hours ago, Tree Frog said:

We have also done this throughout dh's career, though currently we are using 3 credit unions. 2 are federal credit unions and one just stopped being a federal cu and is now a state charter.

Are credit unions safer than banks in cases like this? And is the state charter less secure than a federal charter? 

I don't, honestly, know--as in the dark as most Americans.

[prairiewindmomma]

Credit unions are insured through NCUA: https://ncua.gov/newsroom/press-release/2020/deposits-are-safe-federally-insured-credit-unions

[Bootsie]

3 hours ago, Tree Frog said:

We have also done this throughout dh's career, though currently we are using 3 credit unions. 2 are federal credit unions and one just stopped being a federal cu and is now a state charter.

Are credit unions safer than banks in cases like this? And is the state charter less secure than a federal charter? 

From an average household depositor situation, the credit union is just a safe in that insurance protects the money deposited by smaller depositors.  Both state and federally chartered banks are insured by the FDIC since 1991.  

[Lecka]

I am checking out a new Frontline called “The Age of Easy Money” about this topic.

It’s available on the free PBS app.  

[Melissa in Australia]

and now a big swiss bank is in trouble

 

[Arcadia]

9 minutes ago, Melissa in Australia said:

and now a big swiss bank is in trouble

 

https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/credit-suisse-borrow-up-54-bln-it-seeks-calm-investor-fears-2023-03-16/
‘In its statement early Thursday, Credit Suisse said it would exercise an option to borrow from the central bank up to 50 billion Swiss francs ($54 billion). That followed assurances from Swiss authorities on Wednesday that Credit Suisse met "the capital and liquidity requirements imposed on systemically important banks" and that it could access central bank liquidity if needed.

… Credit Suisse is the first major global bank to be given an emergency lifeline since the 2008 financial crisis and its problems have raised serious doubts over whether central banks will be able to sustain their fight against inflation with aggressive interest rate hikes.

Asian stocks followed Wall Street's tumble on Thursday and investors bought gold, bonds and the dollar. While the bank's announcement helped trim some of those losses, trade was volatile and sentiment fragile.

"It does help. It removes an immediate risk. But it confronts us with another choice. The more we do this, the more we blunt monetary policy, the more we have to live with higher inflation -- and what is it going to be?" said Damien Boey, chief equity strategist at Barrenjoey in Sydney.

…bAustralian Treasurer Jim Chalmers said on Thursday the country's banks were well capitalised and that he had convened a meeting of major regulators and the central bank this week to discuss the collapse of SVB. He did not specifically mention Credit Suisse.

SVB's demise last week, followed by that of Signature Bank two days later, sent global bank stocks on a roller-coaster ride this week as investors feared another Lehman Brothers moment, the Wall Street giant whose failure had triggered the global financial crisis more than a decade ago.

Nervous markets had also discounted assurances from U.S. President Joe Biden and emergency steps giving banks access to more funding.

… Unease sparked by SVB's demise has also prompted depositors to seek out new homes for their cash.

Ralph Hammers, CEO of Credit Suisse rival UBS said market turmoil has steered more money its way and Deutsche Bank (DBKGn.DE) CEO Christian Sewing said that the German lender has also seen incoming deposits.”

[Corraleno]

Jesse Watters, Tucker Carlson, and Ainsley Earhardt of Fox News are now claiming that SVB failed because they "donated more than $73 million to Black Lives Matter." That is a complete fabrication, but of course it's being repeated and retweeted all over social media.

[pinball]

6 minutes ago, Corraleno said:

Jesse Watters, Tucker Carlson, and Ainsley Earhardt of Fox News are now claiming that SVB failed because they "donated more than $73 million to Black Lives Matter." That is a complete fabrication, but of course it's being repeated and retweeted all over social media.

Links?

[Arcadia]

https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/svb-financial-seeks-bankruptcy-protection-2023-03-17/
“March 17 (Reuters) - SVB Financial Group (SIVB.O) said on Friday it filed for a court-supervised reorganization under Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection to seek buyers for its assets, days after its former unit Silicon Valley Bank was taken over by U.S. regulators.

…

SVB Securities and SVB Capital's funds and general partner entities are not included in the Chapter 11 filing, the company said on Friday, adding it planned to proceed with the process to evaluate alternatives for the businesses, as well its other assets and investments.”

[pinball]

50 minutes ago, Corraleno said:

Jesse Watters, Tucker Carlson, and Ainsley Earhardt of Fox News are now claiming that SVB failed because they "donated more than $73 million to Black Lives Matter." That is a complete fabrication, but of course it's being repeated and retweeted all over social media.

Also, considering that this board consistently categorizes Fox News as skewed in a distinct political direction…

How is your post not considered political/politics?

🤔🤷‍♀️🫤🤷🤔🤷‍♂️😕

[Idalou]

2 hours ago, pinball said:

Links?

Since you asked, lol

https://www.thenation.com/article/society/silicon-valley-bank-black-lives-matter/

...I deleted the first article due to the obviously controversial title. This one's from the Nation and contains the original link and additional donation explanations

Edited March 17, 2023 by Idalou
Got rid of first link

[KSera]

3 hours ago, Corraleno said:

Jesse Watters, Tucker Carlson, and Ainsley Earhardt of Fox News are now claiming that SVB failed because they "donated more than $73 million to Black Lives Matter." That is a complete fabrication, but of course it's being repeated and retweeted all over social media.

Considering Tucker and friends have been outed for their habits of believing one thing themselves, but peddling things they know to be total lies to their viewers to increase viewership, that’s completely unsurprising. It appears from reading, that any money that goes towards investing in Black people or communities has been branded by them as “investing in BLM” 🙄. 

[Frances]

3 hours ago, pinball said:

Also, considering that this board consistently categorizes Fox News as skewed in a distinct political direction…

How is your post not considered political/politics?

🤔🤷‍♀️🫤🤷🤔🤷‍♂️😕

I don’t think this board speaks as one voice about anything, let alone its view of Fox News. I’m sure there are people on this board who are avid consumers of Fox News.

It seems as though you are saying that discussing media bias, misinformation, and propaganda should only be done on the politics board. And also that the only reason people have issues with Fox News is because it leans one direction? I would hope that on the WTM board readers in general would be concerned about media bias, misinformation, and propaganda regardless of whether it is coming from left, right, or center and that it would be of general and educational interest, and not just considered political.

[pinball]

7 minutes ago, Frances said:

I don’t think this board speaks as one voice about anything, let alone its view of Fox News. I’m sure there are people on this board who are avid consumers of Fox News.

It seems as though you are saying that discussing media bias, misinformation, and propaganda should only be done on the politics board. And also that the only reason people have issues with Fox News is because it leans one direction? I would hope that on the WTM board readers in general would be concerned about media bias, misinformation, and propaganda regardless of whether it is coming from left, right, or center and that it would be of general and educational interest, and not just considered political.

This proves my point. 
 

thank you!

[Frances]

3 minutes ago, pinball said:

This proves my point. 
 

thank you!

You’re very welcome, although I disagree.

[Idalou]

38 minutes ago, pinball said:

 

@pinball So did you read the links I sent that you asked for? If you take away the slanted commentary in the article and just look strictly at the dollars given and where,  do you believe they were all to BLM? Should those media people have differentiated between the multiple groups and BLM, or do you think it's fine to use the term BLM for any black charity, foundation, or group?  Do you think those people used the term BLM on their programs because it has a different connotation to some?

Edited March 17, 2023 by Idalou

[pinball]

5 minutes ago, Idalou said:

@pinball So did you read the links I sent that you asked for? If you take away the slanted commentary in the article and just look strictly at the dollars given and where,  do you believe they were all to BLM? Should those media people have differentiated between the multiple groups and BLM, or do you think it's fine to use the term BLM for any black charity, foundation, or group?  Do you think those people used the term BLM on their programs because it has a different connotation to some?

I tried but it said I had used my quota of free articles.

 

[Pawz4me]

23 minutes ago, pinball said:

I tried but it said I had used my quota of free articles.

 

This appears to be a left-leaning website, but the article seems solid. Perhaps you'll be able to read it and respond to @Idalou's questions.

(The link is to mediamatters.org in case anyone prefers to know before clicking.)

[Idalou]

2 hours ago, pinball said:

I tried but it said I had used my quota of free articles.

 

Try here

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/no-silicon-valley-bank-did-not-donate-more-than-73-million-to-black-lives-matter-95e08b3

Yiu can google "Did SVB give BLM 73 million" and find multiple articles refuting the claim. I'd be very interested in hearing if you believe the claim.

 The article is neither long nor hard to understand, so really, give them a look and let us know if you agree with the claims made

Edited March 18, 2023 by Idalou

[Melissa in Australia]

I am often very culturally confused by some of people's posts,  But I would have thought that havi g banks collapse and other banks in serious trouble would be a worthy thing to discuss without posting crazy. It really takes away from the discussion. 

 

 

[Idalou]

11 minutes ago, Melissa in Australia said:

I am often very culturally confused by some of people's posts,  But I would have thought that having banks collapse and other banks in serious trouble would be a worthy thing to discuss without posting crazy. It really takes away from the discussion. 

 

 

Posting crazy? If a big chunk of your country believes that the bank failed due to giving 70+ million to BLM, then yes, we do have a crazy problem. Americans are being lied and manipulated by media personalities and then political leaders and they keep on swallowing it. I'm sure if another one fails we'll be told another lie. And from a few comments here, there are long time posters who believe the lies. I don't think you understand the real danger the US is in, on nearly every serious subject, from outlandish and crazy conspiracy promoting media-leaders. It's deadly.

Edited March 18, 2023 by Idalou

[Melissa in Australia]

Why repeat the garbage here? Why not have a discussion about what is really going on instead of continually copying and spreading nonsense? If the media is so bad over there then wouldn't people welcome having a serious discussion, perhaps looking for alternate sources of information, maybe some international news if local news only has nonsensical sensational stories?

[Sneezyone]

2 minutes ago, Melissa in Australia said:

Why repeat the garbage here? Why not have a discussion about what is really going on instead of continually copying and spreading nonsense? If the media is so bad over there then wouldn't people welcome having a serious discussion, perhaps looking for alternate sources of information, maybe some international news if local news only has nonsensical sensational stories?

When all else fails, yell louder and bring a gun. It’s the American way. Some people would like to learn/discuss, yes. Not all. We’ve reached full saturation with BS right now, so much so that it doesn’t even merit discussing most of the time. Everyone with 2 remaining brain cells knows/sees it for what it is.

Edited March 18, 2023 by Sneezyone

[pinball]

1 hour ago, Melissa in Australia said:

I am often very culturally confused by some of people's posts,  But I would have thought that havi g banks collapse and other banks in serious trouble would be a worthy thing to discuss without posting crazy. It really takes away from the discussion. 

 

 

 

56 minutes ago, Melissa in Australia said:

Why repeat the garbage here? Why not have a discussion about what is really going on instead of continually copying and spreading nonsense? If the media is so bad over there then wouldn't people welcome having a serious discussion, perhaps looking for alternate sources of information, maybe some international news if local news only has nonsensical sensational stories?

Yes, considering that depositors had something like $175 BILLION dollars in SVB, it’s baffling why there are posts complaining about the term woke and Tucker Carlson.

🤷‍♀️

A young person I know said, “a *bleeping* freshman finance student could tell you backing your assets with 10 year treasury bonds is horrible risk management” and “you can’t *bleeping* back your assets on such illiquid assets like bonds”

People know the score. People know magicians want you to look in one directions while they’re doing their hocus-Pocus somewhere else.

[Frances]

1 hour ago, Sneezyone said:

When all else fails, yell louder and bring a gun. It’s the American way. Some people would like to learn/discuss, yes. Not all. We’ve reached full saturation with BS right now, so much so that it doesn’t even merit discussing most of the time. Everyone with 2 remaining brain cells knows/sees it for what it is.

I only wish your last sentence was true, but I disagree strongly that it is. Otherwise, a significant chunk of our country has less than two remaining brain cells, and I don’t believe that to be true. Misinformation and propaganda continued to be used because they work very, very well. Nothing is more effective than stirring up negative emotions and creating an us vs them mentality and having scapegoats. History has shown this over and over again. While I think the politicians and media personalities using them know full well what they are doing and why, I think that vast swaths of our adult population believes most of what they see and hear from their chosen news sources. And the consequences are dangerous for all of us. That’s why people are speaking up.

[Melissa in Australia]

Are people speaking up? Or just spreading nonsense by reposting.  

 

Or maybe it is some sort of cultural game that I am not clued into. Would the correct response  be to write and post some random nonsense?

If it is a game I can try to join in, though I think it a bit silly

 

Tika says a bank run is good thing for everyone. Tika is an authority on runs of all kinds, being the neighbours dog. And she is named after a sniper rifle, so I managed to bring guns into it losely

Jonathan reccomend people taking money out of the banks and putting it into yellow metal, then encasing into a shell and burying in the ground by scratching. Jonathan is a chook(hen) that has a male name, but isn't woke but rather named by a child with an interlectual disability that doesn't know there are male and female names. So I managed to bring the word woke in as well, though it is one if those vague words that I don't really have an understanding of. 

[KSera]

7 minutes ago, Melissa in Australia said:

Are people speaking up? Or just spreading nonsense by reposting.  

 

Or maybe it is some sort of cultural game that I am not clued into. Would the correct response  be to write and post some random nonsense?

If it is a game I can try to join in, though I think it a bit silly

 

Tika says a bank run is good thing for everyone. Tika is an authority on runs of all kinds, being the neighbours dog. And she is named after a sniper rifle, so I managed to bring guns into it losely

Jonathan reccomend people taking money out of the banks and putting it into yellow metal, then encasing into a shell and burying in the ground by scratching. Jonathan is a chook(hen) that has a male name, but isn't woke but rather named by a child with an interlectual disability that doesn't know there are male and female names. So I managed to bring the word woke in as well, though it is one if those vague words that I don't really have an understanding of. 

The context you might be missing is that these aren't just random nut bags that are spouting this stuff, but include the most watched cable news show in the US. Consequently, a huge portion of the US population believes a bunch of utter nonsense to be true, which is clearly to our detriment. If these were just randos or fringe people spreading this kind of stuff, I agree it would be better to just ignore.

[LaughingCat]

On 3/13/2023 at 8:51 AM, Idalou said:

OH NO! The woke agenda! Woke woke woke! 

Just once I'd like to see someone tell us exactly what woke means, in detail. I'm guessing it's similar to the gay agenda and the drag queen agenda.

Because we're not supposed yo talk politics, correct? Guess your stupid code words don't count.

As far as I can tell, the word "woke" is just a replacement for "PC" or "politically correct" of the 80's

[Frances]

29 minutes ago, Melissa in Australia said:

Are people speaking up? Or just spreading nonsense by reposting.  

 

Or maybe it is some sort of cultural game that I am not clued into. Would the correct response  be to write and post some random nonsense?

If it is a game I can try to join in, though I think it a bit silly

 

Tika says a bank run is good thing for everyone. Tika is an authority on runs of all kinds, being the neighbours dog. And she is named after a sniper rifle, so I managed to bring guns into it losely

Jonathan reccomend people taking money out of the banks and putting it into yellow metal, then encasing into a shell and burying in the ground by scratching. Jonathan is a chook(hen) that has a male name, but isn't woke but rather named by a child with an interlectual disability that doesn't know there are male and female names. So I managed to bring the word woke in as well, though it is one if those vague words that I don't really have an understanding of. 

It’s not a game, it’s deadly serious. I can certainly understand if you are not  familiar with the major media personalities in the US and their outsized influence on a huge swath of our population. Not only do they have large viewership, but their propaganda and misinformation is spread further through sharing on social media, the major source of news for a not insignificant portion of our population.
 

I certainly couldn’t name a single Australian media personality. I hope things are very different there, but I truly have no idea.

[Frances]

2 hours ago, pinball said:

 

Yes, considering that depositors had something like $175 BILLION dollars in SVB, it’s baffling why there are posts complaining about the term woke and Tucker Carlson.

The depositors will get all $175 billion back.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/federal-reserve-rolls-out-emergency-measures-to-prevent-banking-crisis-ba4d7f98

Part of the reason back runs happen are psychological. Major media personalities and news sources spreading misinformation and propaganda about the situation can only make the situation worse, not help it. Today lots of people are believing false information about why SVB collapsed, tomorrow they could trust the very same sources to incite a run on numerous banks. Plus, those who want less regulation on our financial institutions are well served by the misinformation. 

[Melissa in Australia]

43 minutes ago, KSera said:

The context you might be missing is that these aren't just random nut bags that are spouting this stuff, but include the most watched cable news show in the US. Consequently, a huge portion of the US population believes a bunch of utter nonsense to be true, which is clearly to our detriment. If these were just randos or fringe people spreading this kind of stuff, I agree it would be better to just ignore.

Well that makes a difference. I was completely unaware of that 

Thank you 

[Melissa in Australia]

27 minutes ago, Frances said:

It’s not a game, it’s deadly serious. I can certainly understand if you are not  familiar with the major media personalities in the US and their outsized influence on a huge swath of our population. Not only do they have large viewership, but their propaganda and misinformation is spread further through sharing on social media, the major source of news for a not insignificant portion of our population.
 

I certainly couldn’t name a single Australian media personality. I hope things are very different there, but I truly have no idea.

I don't know any American media personalities  and don't think I could  name an Australian media personality either.   

Now I am getting some sort of understanding. From my angle it seemed people were just posting the most amazing  random hogwash in what I thought was a serious thread. 

 

Edited March 18, 2023 by Melissa in Australia

[Spy Car]

8 minutes ago, Melissa in Australia said:

Id I don't know any American media personalities  and don't think I could  name an Australian media personality either.   

Now I am getting some sort of understanding. From my angle it seemed people were just posting the most amazing  random hogwash in what I thought was a serious thread. 

 

We unfortunately have a full-time disinformation network that is, frankly, dangerous to our democracy.

Come to think of it, it is owned by an Australian media tycoon. Does Rupert Murdoch still own Sky News Australia? And do they try to rile up the bogans with bogus conspiracy theories and wall-to-wall hogwash?

We don't have a good situation here.

Bill

 

 

Edited March 18, 2023 by Spy Car

[Melissa in Australia]

This is the type of news coverage we are getting here about the banking crisis https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-03-18/unclear-central-banks-can-contain-banking-crisis-analysts-warn/102115262

[Melissa in Australia]

7 minutes ago, Spy Car said:

We unfortunately have a full-time disinformation network that is, frankly, dangerous to our democracy.

Come to think of it, it is owned by an Australian media tycoon. Does Rupert Murdoch still own Sky News Australia? And do they try to rile up the bogans with bogus conspiracy theories and wall-to-wall hogwash?

We don't have a good situation here.

Bill

 

 

No idea! didn't Murdoch shift to USA years ago? 

I don't watch sky news

[Spy Car]

12 minutes ago, Melissa in Australia said:

No idea! didn't Murdoch shift to USA years ago? 

I don't watch sky news

He did shift over here. I'd gladly give him back. 

Just this week Murdoch and FOX have been on trial and he's forced to admit that his network anchors knowing lied about claims of election fraud. They just make up and spread the disinformation without shame.

Hard to have an informed citizenry when some people  get a daily dose of conspiracy theories and anti-factual disinformation posing as "news." 

Same thing with the bank failure. They just make up whatever the care to with no regard to the truth.

Bill

Edited March 18, 2023 by Spy Car

[Ausmumof3]

3 hours ago, Spy Car said:

We unfortunately have a full-time disinformation network that is, frankly, dangerous to our democracy.

Come to think of it, it is owned by an Australian media tycoon. Does Rupert Murdoch still own Sky News Australia? And do they try to rile up the bogans with bogus conspiracy theories and wall-to-wall hogwash?

We don't have a good situation here.

Bill

 

 

A fair percentage of media is still Murdoch owned/backed. Sky doesn’t have the following that Fox does. Thankfully we have the ABC who do have some poor journalism but overall it’s better quality than commercial media.

[Pawz4me]

5 hours ago, Spy Car said:

 

Just this week Murdoch and FOX have been on trial and he's forced to admit that his network anchors knowing lied about claims of election fraud. They just make up and spread the disinformation without shame.

 

On trial this week? I don't think so. I think the trial date is set for mid April. I think you meant a lot of their deposition testimony has been made public in the last week or two? But the people who most need to read it almost certainly haven't. Those people will likely get little/no coverage of the trial, either.

 

2 hours ago, Ausmumof3 said:

A fair percentage of media is still Murdoch owned/backed. Sky doesn’t have the following that Fox does. Thankfully we have the ABC who do have some poor journalism but overall it’s better quality than commercial media.

We have some pretty good media here, too. Unfortunately too many incurious and/or weak minded people just want to read or listen to propaganda outlets that feed them what they want to hear. No matter if it's all lies, as long as it (a) fits their view or (2) makes them mad or scared. Propaganda outlets know if they can control those two emotions they can control people and keep viewers and make big money. In a way it's like drug dealers--they don't care if they wreck lives as long as they can peddle their poison. Ignoring the lies and propaganda won't make them go away as long as there's an available audience of fools to make money off of. The deposition testimony of Murdoch and his talking heads recently released has proved that last point. Unfortunately the people who most need to read that testimony very likely haven't. Fox certainly hasn't been covering it.

[pinball]

7 hours ago, Melissa in Australia said:

Well that makes a difference. I was completely unaware of that 

Thank you 

The difference you are missing is the politics.

depositors in US are insured for up $250K per account. Yet in this case, at SVB, all depositors will be made whole…IOW, no matter how much an individual depositor had, perhaps millions of dollars, he will get all of it back. 175 billion.

Now, if you read this thread, this is all Tucker Carlson’s fault. Because he lies on TV and scares people.

Ask yourself if that makes sense. 
 

LOOK! a squirrel! 

[Idalou]

3 hours ago, pinball said:

The difference you are missing is the politics.

depositors in US are insured for up $250K per account. Yet in this case, at SVB, all depositors will be made whole…IOW, no matter how much an individual depositor had, perhaps millions of dollars, he will get all of it back. 175 billion.

Now, if you read this thread, this is all Tucker Carlson’s fault. Because he lies on TV and scares people.

Ask yourself if that makes sense. 
 

LOOK! a squirrel! 

@pinball you still didnt answer my question. Did you read the free articles explaining how 73 mil didn't go to BLM? Do you think the many people-news outlets are outright falsehoods or just sorta untruths? It's much more widespread than Tucker, you must be aware of that much.

 I have noticed these past months your posting style is often aggressive.  You grab hold of one idea and continually pepper the person repeatedly. So I'd like to know why you will not answer my specific questions. I mean, you were the one who asked for links as if you would not believe it until you saw it.

I dont care about the squirrel stuff. You are actually engaging in squirrel stuff now by not answering the question. I'd just like you to say whether you think the money given to organizations that were listed in the free links were BLM and if they caused the bank to fail. 

In the bigger scheme of things, maybe some part of you will see what this type of posting style feels like!😄 But before that, maybe give me an answer to the question you were asking @Corraleno

 

Edited March 18, 2023 by Idalou

[KSera]

3 hours ago, pinball said:

Now, if you read this thread, this is all Tucker Carlson’s fault. Because he lies on TV and scares people.

Not a person has said the bank failure was Tucker’s fault. Not a one. That would be ridiculous. Melissa was wondering why these dumb theories about the failure are being given any notice and it was explained. 

[pinball]

44 minutes ago, Idalou said:

@pinball you still didnt answer my question. Did you read the free articles explaining how 73 mil didn't go to BLM? Do you think the many people-news outlets are outright falsehoods or just sorta untruths? It's much more widespread than Tucker, you must be aware of that much.

 I have noticed these past months your posting style is often aggressive.  You grab hold of one idea and continually pepper the person repeatedly. So I'd like to know why you will not answer my specific questions. I mean, you were the one who asked for links as if you would not believe it until you saw it.

I dont care about the squirrel stuff. You are actually engaging in squirrel stuff now by not answering the question. I'd just like you to say whether you think the money given to organizations that were listed in the free links were BLM and if they caused the bank to fail. 

In the bigger scheme of things, maybe some part of you will see what this type of posting style feels like!😄 But before that, maybe give me an answer to the question you were asking @Corraleno

 

I asked for links to this:

“Jesse Watters, Tucker Carlson, and Ainsley Earhardt of Fox News are now claiming that SVB failed because they "donated more than $73 million to Black Lives Matter." That is a complete fabrication, but of course it's being repeated and retweeted all over social media.”

No here has linked to them saying what is stated here. The only links are articles commenting on what they were supposed to have said. 
 

Ive moved on, tho. I’ve read enough links from people here to know what I’m going to get.

but you can keep on. 😚

 

 

 

 

[Spy Car]

5 hours ago, Pawz4me said:

On trial this week? I don't think so. I think the trial date is set for mid April. I think you meant a lot of their deposition testimony has been made public in the last week or two? But the people who most need to read it almost certainly haven't. Those people will likely get little/no coverage of the trial, either.

 

Yes, you are correct. Murdoch's deposition--given in advance of the upcoming trial--and where he admitted the lying was released  this week. I regret my error.

Thank you for the correction.

Bill

Edited March 18, 2023 by Spy Car

[Spy Car]

4 hours ago, pinball said:

The difference you are missing is the politics.

depositors in US are insured for up $250K per account. Yet in this case, at SVB, all depositors will be made whole…IOW, no matter how much an individual depositor had, perhaps millions of dollars, he will get all of it back. 175 billion.

Now, if you read this thread, this is all Tucker Carlson’s fault. Because he lies on TV and scares people.

Ask yourself if that makes sense. 
 

LOOK! a squirrel! 

Depositors were made whole by a combination of of FDIC money (which is an insurance program paid for by the banks) and arrangements that were very swiftly made with other banks to purchase SVB assets. This rapid response helped avert fears of wider bank failures, which could have disrupted the world economy.

I suppose Tucker Carlson and his buddy Vladamir Putin would have prefered a global meltdown. Oh well.

Bill

 

[pinball]

24 minutes ago, KSera said:

Not a person has said the bank failure was Tucker’s fault. Not a one. That would be ridiculous. Melissa was wondering why these dumb theories about the failure are being given any notice and it was explained. 

No, the implication is that what Tucker, etc. said needs to be commented on and responded to bc they are so influential they might cause panic and bank issues.

And I think it is ridiculous, considering what actually happened and the timeline of the depositors being made whole of the entire 175 BILLION…

there was no reason to bring up Tucker in this thread, bc his comments were made long after the bank failed. And yet…there it is…

 

[Spy Car]

4 minutes ago, pinball said:

No, the implication is that what Tucker, etc. said needs to be commented on and responded to bc they are so influential they might cause panic and bank issues.

And I think it is ridiculous, considering what actually happened and the timeline of the depositors being made whole of the entire 175 BILLION…

there was no reason to bring up Tucker in this thread, bc his comments were made long after the bank failed. And yet…there it is…

 

Carlson spread lies about the election--as admitted by his own boss--and we saw a mob storm the Capital on Jan 6 in response to those lies by Carlson (and others).

Did we really want to see a repeat, with a crash of our banking system due the the spread of similar falsehoods? Not me.

The spread of lies and disinformation is dangerous to our republic.

Bill

 

 

Edited March 18, 2023 by Spy Car

[historically accurate]

14 minutes ago, pinball said:

I asked for links to this:

“Jesse Watters, Tucker Carlson, and Ainsley Earhardt of Fox News are now claiming that SVB failed because they "donated more than $73 million to Black Lives Matter." That is a complete fabrication, but of course it's being repeated and retweeted all over social media.”

No here has linked to them saying what is stated here. The only links are articles commenting on what they were supposed to have said. 
 

Ive moved on, tho. I’ve read enough links from people here to know what I’m going to get.

but you can keep on. 😚

 

 

 

 

I shouldn't bite, but here is a youtube mash up I found in about 2 seconds of googling. Do with it what you want: 

 

[KSera]

1 minute ago, pinball said:

No, the implication is that what Tucker, etc. said needs to be commented on and responded to bc they are so influential they might cause panic and bank issues.

And I think it is ridiculous, considering what actually happened and the timeline of the depositors being made whole of the entire 175 BILLION…

there was no reason to bring up Tucker in this thread, bc his comments were made long after the bank failed. And yet…there it is…

 

While not relevant to the bank failure, I actually think it is worthy to discuss the racism and other discriminatory speech that is freely and plainly spoken in such popular media outlets currently. The Andy Kessler quote in the WSJ suggesting that to have a few people on the board of directors who are not white men is a distraction and Fox News considering any investments that might benefit people who are Black to be donations to BLM are egregious and worthy of discussion. They happen to have come up in the context of this bank failure.