John Drake

Fair trade.

There goes the dollar. And here comes inflation again.

Do you have a source that verifies Ivanka Trump was on SVB's board? I don't think you do, although I wish you did. She was on the board of Signature Bank. And she deserves to be raked over the coals as well. Is she woke, btw? Don't know about that. But she sure fits the description of a limousine liberal.

In other words, censorship and Big Tech/Big Government approved generated results.

It was all about a bailout for the well connected and politically influential. Like Gavin Newsom.

Not really. The article says she lives in New York.

What's so special about SVIB? Get a load of this. 93 percent of the accounts at SVIB were above the $250,000 limit. And apparently it's because most of them were businesses stuffed with venture capitalists' funds. Don't these companies have CEOs and CFOs whose job it is to mitigate risks, including those created by deposit accounts over the FDIC limit? Why didn't they do their job? How did they miss this fundamental aspect of deposit protection?

Lazy or incompetent depositors put themselves into this situation. There were ways to protect deposits above $250,000. But they couldn't be bothered. https://www.forbes.com/advisor/banking/ways-to-insure-excess-deposits/

555 Read the document. It explains how foreign companies set up US shell entities, often just a single person, to get a US bank account. It's not too far removed from the manipulation of Thai nominees fronting for Chinese Triads in the Thai grey business scandal.

I have no problem assigning blame to the dumb brute, Trump. Just as I have no problem pointing out the hypocrisy of Barney Frank in becoming a champion of Trump's repeal of Dodd-Frank, to which you allude above, as it affected his crypto focused bank. https://www.wsj.com/articles/barney-frank-pushed-to-ease-financial-regulations-after-joining-signature-bank-board-e5c8819c

Here are the directions from the US government for how foreign companies can get a US bank account: https://www.trade.gov/sites/default/files/2021-05/Chapter 9 - Banking Checklist.pdf The first step is to create a U.S. entity at the state level. This procedure is generally straightforward and completed documents can be processed within 24 to 48 hours. • Once the entity is formed, you must file for a Federal Employer Identification Number (FEIN) (Form SS-4). This is the number you will use on your federal tax return. If the company officer who signs Form SS-4 is a U.S. citizen, you can apply for and obtain an FEIN immediately. If not, it could take two to three weeks. • Once your FEIN is received, you can apply for a U.S. bank account. • A bank account normally takes around three weeks to open, and in some cases requires an in-person meeting with the bank. A U.S. officer of the business, as designated in company documents, typically attends these meetings and has the authority to make decisions regarding a bank account.

Sound like they are living in the US? From the same Reuters article

Looks like they were. According to Reuters, SVIB had Chinese depositors some of whom are taking their US subsidized bailout and now putting the money in Chinese banks. Meanwhile, China seems to be preventing Americans from getting their money out of China. https://www.reuters.com/markets/billionaire-investor-mark-mobius-says-he-cannot-take-money-out-china-fox-2023-03-05/

Killer Seaweed. The Lost Continent (1968).

You had to have the car insurance before you had an accident. You don't have and accident and then go back and get insurance. Silly.

Tell you what. Go ahead and give these guys their bailout. But when the sector gets back to making profits and their stock prices soar, how about most of that goes to the Treasury. Privatizing profits and socializing losses stops now.

That's the hysteria we heard all weekend of tech gamblers who spent the past 48 hours fearmongering about problems at one bank. There was a system in place to deal with this "crisis." Why wasn't it given a chance to work?

Again, banks and their customers, to whom they will pass on the fee increase, also pay taxes. So "taxpayers" will pay. And we will all pay in terms of renewed inflation, if this causes Powell to turn back on the money spigot and pause or reduce rates.

So we have a string of idiots and con men. Of course, Trump has a huge responsibility, providing the barn door through which the banks could put themselves in a mess. But that doesn't let out the responsibility every individual has to realize that FDIC was supposed to be limited to $250,000. Now, Mark Cuban will see somewhere between $3 to $10 million returned to him he was uninsured for.

Utterly laughable. Of course, it's a bailout. It's coming from a "fund," created by charging fees to banks who then pass it on to their customers. Aren't banks and their customers taxpayers, too? I mention the celebrities, btw, because they were the ones out front demanding a bailout for depositors who breached the $250,000 FDIC insurance limit. Mark Cubans was especially loud about it. So was David Sacks and other big mouth libertarians who suddenly wanted government money to save their cash and not coincidentally stop QT, so they can go back to ZIRP and free money.

Nothing makes "Barbara" different. She is getting a bailout along with the others who shouldn't be, because FDIC plainly told every depositor when they opened their account that FDIC insurance only covered up to $250,000. Why change the rules after the fact? Because a lot of rich, connected people started complaining over the weekend and tried to start a panic.

Bailing out the rich and connected. And now every bank in the US is guaranteed to bailout depositors to infinity.

Their deposits are different because they are over the FDIC $250,000 insurance.

I don't have nearly enough knowledge about this event to know whether "backstop" equals "bailout." But I do have a question? Is it true that the people getting their deposits back that are over the $250,000 insurance threshold include Oprah, Mark Cuban, Harry and Meghan in addition to all those venture capitalists and tech firms? If so, why? Why are the rules being changed retroactively? FWIW it sure looks like Mark Cuban did: https://www.thestreet.com/technology/mark-cuban-had-millions-at-failed-silicon-valley-bank

A Thai would have a government hospital at least. And they wouldn't need to be flown back home.