SVB Bank Run: Fed Calling Emergency Meeting

[Anonymous]

Gotta love the left constantly griping about the rich and constantly bailing them out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure many around here would do well in the world that would exist in the absence of bailouts.

“Around here?” WT ever loving F are you talking abt? Babe, you won’t survive a banking crisis either. IDGAF if you are a farmer, a marksman, a mountain climber…whatever libertarian BS you believe. Every single person in this country would be F’ed if our entire banking system went down. Give me a break …. You’re not a big strong man

I lived through 08-09 front and center. There was no credit - the system froze. But we chose to bail out the banks not consumers or small business owners. And that has had disastrous results. Income equality, political divisiveness, a coup.

So having experienced that why should we continue to bail out the financial services industry ? I watched the US pay Goldman Sachs 100 cents on the dollar - par - for their credit default swaps with AIG. Why did Geithner tell us we had to foam the runway for 10 Million foreclosures ?

So tell me again why we have to bail them out ? And when we do and I sit in front of them they tell me they can’t help me because that would be moral hazard like they did in 08 and 09 ?

All the while my AIG neighbors were getting bonuses and putting in pools ?

Sure as hell felt like Armageddon for us regular folk…so really not interested in the nonsense that we can’t afford to not bail them out.

Let them eat cake.

The AIG bailout is little investigated, and remains shrouded in mystery but many think it had to do with saving the European banking system.

I did not know that.

I always though GS getting par for their AIG swaps was a back door bailout to GS that gave GS the ability to say they weren’t bailed out and didn’t have to take Government money.

AIG's French subsidiary sold enormous amounts of first loss guarantees on European loan exposures. If they failed, not only would the guarantees be gone but the European banks' regulatory capital ratios would have plunges as under the rules the guarantees allowed them to have lower capital requirements against the loans.

GS saved itself by becoming a bank holding company (as did MS) and both were among the large banks more or less forced to to take funds via issuance of TARP preferred stock to the government. Some of them needed the funds, others didn't, but making them all take it helped shield those who needed it from market stigma.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure many around here would do well in the world that would exist in the absence of bailouts.

“Around here?” WT ever loving F are you talking abt? Babe, you won’t survive a banking crisis either. IDGAF if you are a farmer, a marksman, a mountain climber…whatever libertarian BS you believe. Every single person in this country would be F’ed if our entire banking system went down. Give me a break …. You’re not a big strong man

I lived through 08-09 front and center. There was no credit - the system froze. But we chose to bail out the banks not consumers or small business owners. And that has had disastrous results. Income equality, political divisiveness, a coup.

So having experienced that why should we continue to bail out the financial services industry ? I watched the US pay Goldman Sachs 100 cents on the dollar - par - for their credit default swaps with AIG. Why did Geithner tell us we had to foam the runway for 10 Million foreclosures ?

So tell me again why we have to bail them out ? And when we do and I sit in front of them they tell me they can’t help me because that would be moral hazard like they did in 08 and 09 ?

All the while my AIG neighbors were getting bonuses and putting in pools ?

Sure as hell felt like Armageddon for us regular folk…so really not interested in the nonsense that we can’t afford to not bail them out.

Let them eat cake.

The AIG bailout is little investigated, and remains shrouded in mystery but many think it had to do with saving the European banking system.

I did not know that.

I always though GS getting par for their AIG swaps was a back door bailout to GS that gave GS the ability to say they weren’t bailed out and didn’t have to take Government money.

AIG's French subsidiary sold enormous amounts of first loss guarantees on European loan exposures. If they failed, not only would the guarantees be gone but the European banks' regulatory capital ratios would have plunges as under the rules the guarantees allowed them to have lower capital requirements against the loans.

GS saved itself by becoming a bank holding company (as did MS) and both were among the large banks more or less forced to to take funds via issuance of TARP preferred stock to the government. Some of them needed the funds, others didn't, but making them all take it helped shield those who needed it from market stigma.

+1 But I think Wells Fargo was the only one who didn’t really need it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure many around here would do well in the world that would exist in the absence of bailouts.

“Around here?” WT ever loving F are you talking abt? Babe, you won’t survive a banking crisis either. IDGAF if you are a farmer, a marksman, a mountain climber…whatever libertarian BS you believe. Every single person in this country would be F’ed if our entire banking system went down. Give me a break …. You’re not a big strong man

I lived through 08-09 front and center. There was no credit - the system froze. But we chose to bail out the banks not consumers or small business owners. And that has had disastrous results. Income equality, political divisiveness, a coup.

So having experienced that why should we continue to bail out the financial services industry ? I watched the US pay Goldman Sachs 100 cents on the dollar - par - for their credit default swaps with AIG. Why did Geithner tell us we had to foam the runway for 10 Million foreclosures ?

So tell me again why we have to bail them out ? And when we do and I sit in front of them they tell me they can’t help me because that would be moral hazard like they did in 08 and 09 ?

All the while my AIG neighbors were getting bonuses and putting in pools ?

Sure as hell felt like Armageddon for us regular folk…so really not interested in the nonsense that we can’t afford to not bail them out.

Let them eat cake.

The AIG bailout is little investigated, and remains shrouded in mystery but many think it had to do with saving the European banking system.

I did not know that.

I always though GS getting par for their AIG swaps was a back door bailout to GS that gave GS the ability to say they weren’t bailed out and didn’t have to take Government money.

AIG's French subsidiary sold enormous amounts of first loss guarantees on European loan exposures. If they failed, not only would the guarantees be gone but the European banks' regulatory capital ratios would have plunges as under the rules the guarantees allowed them to have lower capital requirements against the loans.

GS saved itself by becoming a bank holding company (as did MS) and both were among the large banks more or less forced to to take funds via issuance of TARP preferred stock to the government. Some of them needed the funds, others didn't, but making them all take it helped shield those who needed it from market stigma.

+1 But I think Wells Fargo was the only one who didn’t really need it.

They were the only one who fought it, but not the only one who didn't really need it. GS actually may have been one of those as they had received a large capital infusion from Buffet.

Rumors now swirling that Buffet, who is sitting on a pile of cash, may buy capital in some of the regional banks that have been hammered in the last week.

[Anonymous]

We should have done with Iceland did in '08. Let the banks fail, bail out the consumers, and prosecute the bankers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We should have done with Iceland did in '08. Let the banks fail, bail out the consumers, and prosecute the bankers.

This is a lot easier in a country with less than 400,000 people.

[Anonymous]

Re-enact Glass-Steagall

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Re-enact Glass-Steagall

How would that have helped here? Neither SVB nor Signature did investment banking. Nor do the regional banks under stress.

This was ordinary commercial banking that was mismanaged.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We should have done with Iceland did in '08. Let the banks fail, bail out the consumers, and prosecute the bankers.

This is a lot easier in a country with less than 400,000 people.

The size argument should have been a cause for caution and it wasn’t. There’s really no getting around the fact that in the 2008 fin crisis the establishment screwed the public and saved itself from its own malfeasance. And then they were craven enough to think political convulsions were surprising!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure many around here would do well in the world that would exist in the absence of bailouts.

“Around here?” WT ever loving F are you talking abt? Babe, you won’t survive a banking crisis either. IDGAF if you are a farmer, a marksman, a mountain climber…whatever libertarian BS you believe. Every single person in this country would be F’ed if our entire banking system went down. Give me a break …. You’re not a big strong man

I lived through 08-09 front and center. There was no credit - the system froze. But we chose to bail out the banks not consumers or small business owners. And that has had disastrous results. Income equality, political divisiveness, a coup.

So having experienced that why should we continue to bail out the financial services industry ? I watched the US pay Goldman Sachs 100 cents on the dollar - par - for their credit default swaps with AIG. Why did Geithner tell us we had to foam the runway for 10 Million foreclosures ?

So tell me again why we have to bail them out ? And when we do and I sit in front of them they tell me they can’t help me because that would be moral hazard like they did in 08 and 09 ?

All the while my AIG neighbors were getting bonuses and putting in pools ?

Sure as hell felt like Armageddon for us regular folk…so really not interested in the nonsense that we can’t afford to not bail them out.

Let them eat cake.

The AIG bailout is little investigated, and remains shrouded in mystery but many think it had to do with saving the European banking system.

I did not know that.

I always though GS getting par for their AIG swaps was a back door bailout to GS that gave GS the ability to say they weren’t bailed out and didn’t have to take Government money.

AIG's French subsidiary sold enormous amounts of first loss guarantees on European loan exposures. If they failed, not only would the guarantees be gone but the European banks' regulatory capital ratios would have plunges as under the rules the guarantees allowed them to have lower capital requirements against the loans.

GS saved itself by becoming a bank holding company (as did MS) and both were among the large banks more or less forced to to take funds via issuance of TARP preferred stock to the government. Some of them needed the funds, others didn't, but making them all take it helped shield those who needed it from market stigma.

+1 But I think Wells Fargo was the only one who didn’t really need it.

Long been rumored Wells was the biggest garbage barge of all. Lots of financially sophisticated people looked at it closely and it didn’t make sense. But it had some very powerful friends!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure many around here would do well in the world that would exist in the absence of bailouts.

“Around here?” WT ever loving F are you talking abt? Babe, you won’t survive a banking crisis either. IDGAF if you are a farmer, a marksman, a mountain climber…whatever libertarian BS you believe. Every single person in this country would be F’ed if our entire banking system went down. Give me a break …. You’re not a big strong man

I lived through 08-09 front and center. There was no credit - the system froze. But we chose to bail out the banks not consumers or small business owners. And that has had disastrous results. Income equality, political divisiveness, a coup.

So having experienced that why should we continue to bail out the financial services industry ? I watched the US pay Goldman Sachs 100 cents on the dollar - par - for their credit default swaps with AIG. Why did Geithner tell us we had to foam the runway for 10 Million foreclosures ?

So tell me again why we have to bail them out ? And when we do and I sit in front of them they tell me they can’t help me because that would be moral hazard like they did in 08 and 09 ?

All the while my AIG neighbors were getting bonuses and putting in pools ?

Sure as hell felt like Armageddon for us regular folk…so really not interested in the nonsense that we can’t afford to not bail them out.

Let them eat cake.

The AIG bailout is little investigated, and remains shrouded in mystery but many think it had to do with saving the European banking system.

I did not know that.

I always though GS getting par for their AIG swaps was a back door bailout to GS that gave GS the ability to say they weren’t bailed out and didn’t have to take Government money.

AIG's French subsidiary sold enormous amounts of first loss guarantees on European loan exposures. If they failed, not only would the guarantees be gone but the European banks' regulatory capital ratios would have plunges as under the rules the guarantees allowed them to have lower capital requirements against the loans.

GS saved itself by becoming a bank holding company (as did MS) and both were among the large banks more or less forced to to take funds via issuance of TARP preferred stock to the government. Some of them needed the funds, others didn't, but making them all take it helped shield those who needed it from market stigma.

+1 But I think Wells Fargo was the only one who didn’t really need it.

Long been rumored Wells was the biggest garbage barge of all. Lots of financially sophisticated people looked at it closely and it didn’t make sense. But it had some very powerful friends!

A certain bank with large presence in the DMV area who had minimal to no mortgage exposure also didn't need TARP. Didn't fight it because it saw the futility of it all. The sad thing was, taking TARP came with a bunch of constraints on activity that all banks were bound by, so it was not as harmless as just shielding the weaker banks (cough, Citi, cough) from stigma.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure many around here would do well in the world that would exist in the absence of bailouts.

“Around here?” WT ever loving F are you talking abt? Babe, you won’t survive a banking crisis either. IDGAF if you are a farmer, a marksman, a mountain climber…whatever libertarian BS you believe. Every single person in this country would be F’ed if our entire banking system went down. Give me a break …. You’re not a big strong man

I lived through 08-09 front and center. There was no credit - the system froze. But we chose to bail out the banks not consumers or small business owners. And that has had disastrous results. Income equality, political divisiveness, a coup.

So having experienced that why should we continue to bail out the financial services industry ? I watched the US pay Goldman Sachs 100 cents on the dollar - par - for their credit default swaps with AIG. Why did Geithner tell us we had to foam the runway for 10 Million foreclosures ?

So tell me again why we have to bail them out ? And when we do and I sit in front of them they tell me they can’t help me because that would be moral hazard like they did in 08 and 09 ?

All the while my AIG neighbors were getting bonuses and putting in pools ?

Sure as hell felt like Armageddon for us regular folk…so really not interested in the nonsense that we can’t afford to not bail them out.

Let them eat cake.

The AIG bailout is little investigated, and remains shrouded in mystery but many think it had to do with saving the European banking system.

I did not know that.

I always though GS getting par for their AIG swaps was a back door bailout to GS that gave GS the ability to say they weren’t bailed out and didn’t have to take Government money.

AIG's French subsidiary sold enormous amounts of first loss guarantees on European loan exposures. If they failed, not only would the guarantees be gone but the European banks' regulatory capital ratios would have plunges as under the rules the guarantees allowed them to have lower capital requirements against the loans.

GS saved itself by becoming a bank holding company (as did MS) and both were among the large banks more or less forced to to take funds via issuance of TARP preferred stock to the government. Some of them needed the funds, others didn't, but making them all take it helped shield those who needed it from market stigma.

Thank you for sharing your knowledge and insights.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We should have done with Iceland did in '08. Let the banks fail, bail out the consumers, and prosecute the bankers.

This is a lot easier in a country with less than 400,000 people.

+1 Also, most of the country is uninhabited, and it has restrictive immigration policies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Re-enact Glass-Steagall

How would that have helped here? Neither SVB nor Signature did investment banking. Nor do the regional banks under stress.

This was ordinary commercial banking that was mismanaged.

Indeed. Signature didn’t have a holding company structure. Glass-Steagall would not have applied. So many yuck yucks making stupid comments. In fact, Glass IS still in place right now for ownership or control purposes. You think all the trillions of dollars outside of the banking system might be of help right now? NONE of it is available to sure up any bank on the equity side right now. So Warren Buffet and all those like him can only watch as the government has to consider govt action or action from inside the banking sector. Those are the only two options bc of the genius of Glass-Steagall.

[Anonymous]

The Fed knew about the problems at SVB for over a year, had secretly banned the bank from acquiring other entities and placed it under the highest levels of supervisory oversight. SVB management refused to address the Fed’s findings.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/19/business/economy/fed-silicon-valley-bank.html