5 ms·

I am not sure why you are so bitter but it’s important do understand that all you do is create more hate with comments like this. The only thing anyone is askin

I am not sure why you are so bitter but it’s important do understand that all you do is create more hate with comments like this. The only thing anyone is asking for is to protect the deposits of the people who bank(ed) with SVB. That is it.

kreeben 4y ago
Will that not cost anyone anything? If so then sure, let's do it! If it costs more than a dime, though, let's not.
- matwood 4y ago
  Making depositors whole is important and should happen. Confidence in the banking system is important. A company that needs banking should not be subject to the same risk as a shareholder.
  - Ekaros 4y ago
    If depositors gained single penny of interest on their deposits. They should have been certain there is some risk. Including losing money above 250k. And they have less than zero right to cry when risk realises.
- Eisenstein 4y ago
  Define 'cost'. If losing faith in the banking system gets people to disinvest and hoard under their mattress do you count that as 'no cost'?
- jmye 4y ago
  Define costs, specifically. What are the 'costs' of ensuring that depositors have their money, while taking over long-term SVB investments that the government can wait out? What are the 'costs' of tens of thousands of job losses? What are the specific 'costs' of significant centralization of banking, as any new VC would immediately require a start-up to move it's money to JPM or GS?
  - citizenkeen 4y ago
    The cost is that we keep publicizing risk and privatizing gains. SVB took advantage of Trump-era deregulation to make more profit and now that they've screwed up they want help. The people who deposited money at SVB profited from those choices and now they also want a bailout.
  - bradleyjg 4y ago
    What are the 'costs' of ensuring that depositors have their money, while taking over long-term SVB investments that the government can wait out? Net present value is a well defined concept. No need for scare quotes.
chewz 4y ago
Op is not bitter but realistic... Deposits are insured up to 250 thousand. Above they do incur risk..
- _8j50 4y ago
  Both you, op and others are being ignorant on this. Insurance payment or bailout is external money, this is making depositors whole using the bank's assets, not FDIC or government money. Tax payers are not making anyone whole as I understand yellen's proposal.
  - morelisp 4y ago
    But this is literally what was going to happen as soon as the FDIC moved in. If that's all they want, why all the extra noise?
    - mtremsal 4y ago
      Because there are tons of people, including in this very thread, who are confused and calling this a bailout.
      - morelisp 4y ago
        Nope. YC and other investors are explicitly asking for something beyond the normal process - no possible haircuts, no delays, $10M guaranteed, whatever. That can't be covered just by SVB assets. (It can be mostly covered. But that's not what they're begging for.) And that's without getting into the question of whether they should be allowed to still reap the rewards of being a customer of a risk-taking bank for years before the event.
        macintux 4y ago
        What investors are clamoring for and what the government has announced are two different things.
morelisp 4y ago
Founders drained the whole Bay Area of anything culturally interesting, tech companies all just did massive layoffs, years of shouting "learn to code" at every other profession, the world's art output fed into an AI meat grinder with "whoops sorry but also it's legally okay" to enrich a few VCs, but you can't imagine why someone might be bitter about demands to compensate their business mistakes from the public purse?
- UncleEntity 4y ago
  > Founders drained the whole Bay Area of anything culturally interesting… I grew up in the Bay Area in the 70s and 80s and it wasn’t all that culturally interesting back then either.
- booleandilemma 4y ago
  I love the AI meat grinder analogy, wow.
mynameishere 4y ago
When a person doesn't want himself and every other ordinary person to be robbed by millionaires and billionaires, that is not "hate". That is not what "hate" is.

kreeben 4y ago

Will that not cost anyone anything? If so then sure, let's do it! If it costs more than a dime, though, let's not.

matwood 4y ago
Making depositors whole is important and should happen. Confidence in the banking system is important. A company that needs banking should not be subject to the same risk as a shareholder.
- Ekaros 4y ago
  If depositors gained single penny of interest on their deposits. They should have been certain there is some risk. Including losing money above 250k. And they have less than zero right to cry when risk realises.
Eisenstein 4y ago
Define 'cost'. If losing faith in the banking system gets people to disinvest and hoard under their mattress do you count that as 'no cost'?
jmye 4y ago
Define costs, specifically. What are the 'costs' of ensuring that depositors have their money, while taking over long-term SVB investments that the government can wait out? What are the 'costs' of tens of thousands of job losses? What are the specific 'costs' of significant centralization of banking, as any new VC would immediately require a start-up to move it's money to JPM or GS?
- citizenkeen 4y ago
  The cost is that we keep publicizing risk and privatizing gains. SVB took advantage of Trump-era deregulation to make more profit and now that they've screwed up they want help. The people who deposited money at SVB profited from those choices and now they also want a bailout.
- bradleyjg 4y ago
  What are the 'costs' of ensuring that depositors have their money, while taking over long-term SVB investments that the government can wait out? Net present value is a well defined concept. No need for scare quotes.

chewz 4y ago

Op is not bitter but realistic... Deposits are insured up to 250 thousand. Above they do incur risk..

_8j50 4y ago
Both you, op and others are being ignorant on this. Insurance payment or bailout is external money, this is making depositors whole using the bank's assets, not FDIC or government money. Tax payers are not making anyone whole as I understand yellen's proposal.
- morelisp 4y ago
  But this is literally what was going to happen as soon as the FDIC moved in. If that's all they want, why all the extra noise?
  - mtremsal 4y ago
    Because there are tons of people, including in this very thread, who are confused and calling this a bailout.
    - morelisp 4y ago
      Nope. YC and other investors are explicitly asking for something beyond the normal process - no possible haircuts, no delays, $10M guaranteed, whatever. That can't be covered just by SVB assets. (It can be mostly covered. But that's not what they're begging for.) And that's without getting into the question of whether they should be allowed to still reap the rewards of being a customer of a risk-taking bank for years before the event.
      - macintux 4y ago
        What investors are clamoring for and what the government has announced are two different things.

morelisp 4y ago

Founders drained the whole Bay Area of anything culturally interesting, tech companies all just did massive layoffs, years of shouting "learn to code" at every other profession, the world's art output fed into an AI meat grinder with "whoops sorry but also it's legally okay" to enrich a few VCs, but you can't imagine why someone might be bitter about demands to compensate their business mistakes from the public purse?

UncleEntity 4y ago
> Founders drained the whole Bay Area of anything culturally interesting… I grew up in the Bay Area in the 70s and 80s and it wasn’t all that culturally interesting back then either.
booleandilemma 4y ago
I love the AI meat grinder analogy, wow.

mynameishere 4y ago

When a person doesn't want himself and every other ordinary person to be robbed by millionaires and billionaires, that is not "hate". That is not what "hate" is.