- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Wapo reporting fed is strongly leaning towards covering all uninsured deposits at SVB
Posted on 3/12/23 at 2:31 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
Posted on 3/12/23 at 2:31 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
EVERYBODY a part of the club gets that funny money. Ukraine and green new deal corrupt politicans heres billions . East Palestine sorry folks you get ignored , cancer and inhabitable land for your children. Geez, Im glad the adults are in charge now .
0
Posted on 3/12/23 at 2:31 pm to 50_Tiger
quote:
Actual bailouts to the top 1%.
Okay they can pay off Student Loan Debt.
Good comparison. There's no way to defend this action.
Posted on 3/12/23 at 2:31 pm to keakar
In 2023, this is too crazy not to happen
Posted on 3/12/23 at 2:32 pm to RTRinTampa
quote:
Further proof our whole financial system is a ponzy scheme tilted towards the elite.
/thread
Posted on 3/12/23 at 2:33 pm to bamarep
quote:
Bamarep told y'all yesterday they would get a bailout.
This isn’t a bailout of the bank.
Posted on 3/12/23 at 2:36 pm to GnashRebel
quote:
Then what is the point of insured deposits
You'll find out if you hold $1m in a failed bank.
Posted on 3/12/23 at 2:37 pm to 50_Tiger
quote:
Okay they can pay off Student Loan Debt.
They do everything else except pay for student loans all while telling you they can’t pay for student loans. Shite is infuriating
Posted on 3/12/23 at 2:40 pm to cwill
Sure it isn't.............. 
Posted on 3/12/23 at 2:42 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
Fukking Bill Ackman....among others
Posted on 3/12/23 at 2:43 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
Here's an argument I've seen in support of this bail out:
On the surface money has been lost through decreases in value, so the money isn't there to serve as collateral or liquidate etc, so it can't circulate. This is deflationary.
Bailing out these depositors puts the money back in the system, and just returns the system to its old equilibrium, and thus is not inflationary.
If the accounts are not bailed out it will be catastrophic and "the government has to do something".
Therefore the right thing to do is bail out the accounts to avoid the catastrophe without causing inflation.
On the surface money has been lost through decreases in value, so the money isn't there to serve as collateral or liquidate etc, so it can't circulate. This is deflationary.
Bailing out these depositors puts the money back in the system, and just returns the system to its old equilibrium, and thus is not inflationary.
If the accounts are not bailed out it will be catastrophic and "the government has to do something".
Therefore the right thing to do is bail out the accounts to avoid the catastrophe without causing inflation.
Posted on 3/12/23 at 2:47 pm to bamarep
quote:
Sure it isn't..............
But it isn’t.
Posted on 3/12/23 at 2:47 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
No bailouts
Its beyond infuriating.
I’ll let you figure out what this ^^^^ represents…..lol
Posted on 3/12/23 at 2:48 pm to Timeoday
quote:
Well, he did hve a 50% chance of being right
That's not exactly how probability works...
Posted on 3/12/23 at 2:56 pm to keakar
quote:
well yellen came out and said "just to be clear" we arent going to bail them out
She said they weren't going to bail out the banks, I'm pretty sure. As was pointed out in the thread pretty quickly, she didn't say that about the depositors
Posted on 3/12/23 at 2:59 pm to POTUS2024
quote:
On the surface money has been lost through decreases in value, so the money isn't there to serve as collateral or liquidate etc, so it can't circulate. This is deflationary.
Bailing out these depositors puts the money back in the system, and just returns the system to its old equilibrium, and thus is not inflationary.
If the accounts are not bailed out it will be catastrophic and "the government has to do something".
Therefore the right thing to do is bail out the accounts to avoid the catastrophe without causing inflation.
Sounds exactly like why so many people think stock markets only go up. Feds picky winners/losers the whole problem in our system. frick around with your money, you should find out.
Posted on 3/12/23 at 2:59 pm to Mo Jeaux
quote:
But it isn’t.
They will purposefully not understand.
Also I'm sure there can be some accounting where the Fed "buys" some of these assets from FDIC to make the illiquid asset liquid, which isn't really "bailing out" b/c the net spend would be $0.
This isn't an asset issue as much as a liquidity issue.
Posted on 3/12/23 at 3:00 pm to POTUS2024
quote:
Bailing out these depositors puts the money back in the system, and just returns the system to its old equilibrium, and thus is not inflationary.
60% of the deposits are ‘foreign’ based out of Singapore and Israel. That ain’t the US Economy
Posted on 3/12/23 at 3:00 pm to SlowFlowPro
It’s clear this board doesn’t understand the distinction. Cwill has 7 downvotes for saying that covering depositors doesn’t mean a bank bailout.
One can argue either way why it’s a good idea to cover the depositors above the FDIC limit, but that’s not bailing out the bank.
One can argue either way why it’s a good idea to cover the depositors above the FDIC limit, but that’s not bailing out the bank.
Posted on 3/12/23 at 3:03 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
What a crock of shite. Would Congress have to pass a bill or does Fed have complete control?
Posted on 3/12/23 at 3:05 pm to Mo Jeaux
quote:
It’s clear this board doesn’t understand the distinction. Cwill has 7 downvotes for saying that covering depositors doesn’t mean a bank bailout.
One can argue either way why it’s a good idea to cover the depositors above the FDIC limit, but that’s not bailing out the bank.
You're going to keep hearing people bring up bonuses and "1%" and "rich tech people" so it doesn't matter.
I've also seen them claim 33-60% of the accounts are foreign-owned, with no real citation.
There are ways to fix this issue in the short term that don't actually cost any money but would look like a "bailout" to people who want to melt down about it.
Page 2 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News