3 ms·

Most bank runs tend to be driven by vibes, not numbers though. The good news is that these folks seem to be in possession of a vibe-rator.

JumpCrisscross 4mo ago
> bank runs Anthropic, SpaceX and OpenAI are not banks. (Also, we had the largest bank runs in American history three years ago. The ordinary American barely noticed.)
- za_creature 4mo ago
  They're not profitable either, so the money has to come from somewhere, no?
  - JumpCrisscross 4mo ago
    > the money has to come from somewhere, no? Yes. Equity investors. The ones who buy hundreds of billions to trillions of dollars of American stocks a quarter.
    - za_creature 4mo ago
      And these equity-investors, do they use their own money to buy the (presumably non-voting) stocks? Cause if that's the case, I see no reason for a government bailout should things go south. Nobody's pension would be affected by some private investor losing money on a bad investment. But if that's not the case, then someone somewhere along the chain is acting as a bank, subject to a vibe-driven run.
      - dboreham 4mo ago
        If much of the money comes from passive funds, presumably the other stocks in those funds will need to be sold?
      - JumpCrisscross 4mo ago
        > these equity-investors, do they use their own money to buy the (presumably non-voting) stocks? Yes [1]. > Nobody's pension would be affected by some private investor losing money on a bad investment ...pensions also invest in the stock market. > if that's not the case, then someone somewhere along the chain is acting as a bank, subject to a vibe-driven run You're confusing deeply unrelated concepts. Whether or not someone who loses money is politically sympathetic has nothing to do with whether they're at risk of a bank run. [1] https://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/20260319/html/f224.htm https://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/20260319/html/f22...
        za_creature 4mo ago
        I made no mention of anyone being politically sympathetic or otherwise. A private investor is _private_ and thus not subject to a government bailout. The argument for government bailouts used to be that "grandpa would lose his pension", I merely stated the terms that would make this non-applicable. If pensions invest in the stock market, then they are de-facto acting as a bank. And last I checked, in the land of the free, you get to withdraw your 401k should you vibe with the decision to do so [please don't do this based on this post alone].
        JumpCrisscross 4mo ago
        > A private investor is _private_ and thus not subject to a government bailout What does this mean? Who do you think benefits from a bailout? > If pensions invest in the stock market Pensions are private investors. And pensions invest in all kinds of things. Plenty are already shareholders in these companies. > last I checked, in the land of the free, you get to withdraw your 401k should you vibe with the decision to do so This is a non sequitur. Nobody disputed this. And 401(k)s are not pensions.
        za_creature 4mo ago
        [flagged]

JumpCrisscross 4mo ago

> bank runs Anthropic, SpaceX and OpenAI are not banks. (Also, we had the largest bank runs in American history three years ago. The ordinary American barely noticed.)

za_creature 4mo ago
They're not profitable either, so the money has to come from somewhere, no?
- JumpCrisscross 4mo ago
  > the money has to come from somewhere, no? Yes. Equity investors. The ones who buy hundreds of billions to trillions of dollars of American stocks a quarter.
  - za_creature 4mo ago
    And these equity-investors, do they use their own money to buy the (presumably non-voting) stocks? Cause if that's the case, I see no reason for a government bailout should things go south. Nobody's pension would be affected by some private investor losing money on a bad investment. But if that's not the case, then someone somewhere along the chain is acting as a bank, subject to a vibe-driven run.
    - dboreham 4mo ago
      If much of the money comes from passive funds, presumably the other stocks in those funds will need to be sold?
    - JumpCrisscross 4mo ago
      > these equity-investors, do they use their own money to buy the (presumably non-voting) stocks? Yes [1]. > Nobody's pension would be affected by some private investor losing money on a bad investment ...pensions also invest in the stock market. > if that's not the case, then someone somewhere along the chain is acting as a bank, subject to a vibe-driven run You're confusing deeply unrelated concepts. Whether or not someone who loses money is politically sympathetic has nothing to do with whether they're at risk of a bank run. [1] https://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/20260319/html/f224.htm https://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/20260319/html/f22...
      - za_creature 4mo ago
        I made no mention of anyone being politically sympathetic or otherwise. A private investor is _private_ and thus not subject to a government bailout. The argument for government bailouts used to be that "grandpa would lose his pension", I merely stated the terms that would make this non-applicable. If pensions invest in the stock market, then they are de-facto acting as a bank. And last I checked, in the land of the free, you get to withdraw your 401k should you vibe with the decision to do so [please don't do this based on this post alone].
        JumpCrisscross 4mo ago
        > A private investor is _private_ and thus not subject to a government bailout What does this mean? Who do you think benefits from a bailout? > If pensions invest in the stock market Pensions are private investors. And pensions invest in all kinds of things. Plenty are already shareholders in these companies. > last I checked, in the land of the free, you get to withdraw your 401k should you vibe with the decision to do so This is a non sequitur. Nobody disputed this. And 401(k)s are not pensions.
        za_creature 4mo ago
        [flagged]