No silver bullet. If there was One True Way we would have applied it by now. Instead, we just argue about policies, meaning that we don't actually know the answ

No silver bullet. If there was One True Way we would have applied it by now. Instead, we just argue about policies, meaning that we don't actually know the answer. Post 2008, interest rates were held at historically low figures, and for a long time. Everyone should have been suspicious. The illusion of stability can hide risks that build up within the system. Anyone who follows Taleb would have long suspected that they'll be bad consequences. > The post mortem of a bank failure always reveals idiosyncratic mistakes the bank made. That contradicts the argument that the "collapse of SVB shows why monetary policy is the wrong tool to fight inflation", because it implies that SVB's failure is due to SVB's bad decisions. > If the Federal Reserve were to raise interest rates, the market value of these bonds would collapse, And had it not occurred to anyone, especially bankers, that interest rates could rise? > Rather than change interest rates to control inflation it should pivot to a policy of stable interest rates with the goal of maintaining financial stability. So, maintain the current interest rate forever? Job done, everyone can go home? And if you don't mean that, then you're going to have to supply a carefully worded definition of what "stable" means. Then again, there's that word "stable"; see above. > The first mistake was to sell the bonds before raising equity. Raising equity is harder than selling bonds. Raising equity might have triggered a panic in any event. If everything's going swimmingly, then what rationale are you going to offer the market for raising money? > The second mistake was doing business with Goldman Sachs. Lol. Well, they're not called the "Vampire Squid" for nothing. "Ripping your face off" is kinda their thing. I'm perhaps being unkind to Associate Professor Nersisyan, but my point is that he has no more answers than anybody else. He's just another talking head. Suppressed interest rates has led to a speculative bubble, particularly in tech investment. That's how you get internet-controlled juice squeezers. No-one was really looking that hard at what they were investing in. The good news is that the speculative bubble seems to be mainly isolated in the tech sector. Are we all doomed? Well, that's consensus opinion, and one that seems eminently sensible. However, I've also heard opinions to the contrary from experienced investors, so we're not dead yet.