4 ms·
To everyone talking about bailout and money printing: > No losses associated with the resolution of Silicon Valley Bank will be borne by the taxpayer. (from t
by senko 4y ago
To everyone talking about bailout and money printing:
> No losses associated with the resolution of Silicon Valley Bank will be borne by the taxpayer.
(from the other article, currently top of HN, about Signature Bank)
- argella 4y agoWhoever said that doesn’t view inflation as something borne by taxpayers.
- dcre 4y agoPlease, do us the favor of drawing the through-line between this action and inflation.
- mmoustafa 4y agoFurthermore, the banks will pay for it: > Any losses to the [FDIC’s] Deposit Insurance Fund to support uninsured depositors will be recovered by a special assessment on banks, as required by law.
- kqr2 4y agoBut banks will just pass this onto account holders either through lower interest rates or higher banking fees. So taxpayers with bank accounts are going to pay for this indirectly.
- baal80spam 4y agoOf course!
- xenadu02 4y agoYeah but look at the FDIC historical data on "dividends" (FDIC's term for uninsured depositor paybacks). Lots of cases have >90% payback rates... they just take years to do so. This whole operation is just a short term backstop to prevent a bank panic. By promising 100% with no delay everyone can calm down. And the cost of 100% immediately vs 96% within 5 years isn't that high.
- cm2187 4y agoThat's called a tax.
- abigail95 4y agoThat's like saying TARP returned a profit. It's a bailout because the govt is stepping in to ensure the liabilities of a business that's insolvent.
- recursivedoubts 4y agoYep, just like the tax payers made money on the 2008 bailout. We should have bank collapses more often. Seems like a great deal for the tax payer, with enough maybe we could even pay off the national debt.