You can buy SVB

Move along Waco

The old "disprove" move is used up.

Prove you are not a communist. Originally Posted by VitaMan

prove i'm not Brad Pitt.


bahahahaa


why don't you cash out your vast investment portfolio and buy SVB before MuskRat does?

Sometimes you're just too much Waco.

And like Trump, are unable to realize it.

I would rather have bought Remington after they declared bankruptcy a few years ago. Their ammunition facility went for $7 million. I'd never run out of ammo. Marlin went to Ruger for an unspecified amount. Now, that would have been a sale to attend.

still waiting for you to refute anything i posted. if you can. Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

Gruenberg and Liang will do it for me.

The FDIC guaranteed all deposits at the failed banks, and the Treasury created a new lending facility to provide cash for banks suffering rushes of withdrawals, according to Liang. She said the moves helped "stabilize deposits throughout the country and provided depositors with confidence that their funds are safe."

Without these actions, the contagion would have been worse and bank runs would have been much more serious, Gruenberg and Liang concurred during questioning.

Fed Vice Chairman for Supervision Michael Barr, FDIC Chairman Martin Gruenberg and Nellie Liang, Treasury undersecretary for domestic finance, all testified

No. how many times do i need to repeat that? they are a very small part of the overall banking system with a very narrow clientele that does not pose any threat to the commercial banking system. Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

Above we have Gruenberg and Liang testifying. Here we have TWK giving his opinion.

Gruenberg and Liang vs. TWK

Gruenberg and Liang will do it for me.

The FDIC guaranteed all deposits at the failed banks, and the Treasury created a new lending facility to provide cash for banks suffering rushes of withdrawals, according to Liang. She said the moves helped "stabilize deposits throughout the country and provided depositors with confidence that their funds are safe."

Without these actions, the contagion would have been worse and bank runs would have been much more serious, Gruenberg and Liang concurred during questioning.

Fed Vice Chairman for Supervision Michael Barr, FDIC Chairman Martin Gruenberg and Nellie Liang, Treasury undersecretary for domestic finance, all testified Originally Posted by VitaMan

do these three clowns who advocate bailouts for two private investment banks run into the ground by mismanagement really think there is "contagion" in the banking system?


well they are right there is contagion ... in government bailouts for two poorly run banks who's customers were investment firms and high net worth private clients.



do they know SVB and Signature are not commercial banks? that they don't effect commercial banks?


https://www.banking.senate.gov/heari...atory-response


these banks should have been allowed to fail

You have been refuted per your request.

If you want to put up your credentials:

Gruenberg, Liang, and Barr vs. TWK



hahababahaba

You have been refuted per your request.

If you want to put up your credentials:

Gruenberg, Liang, and Barr vs. TWK



hahababahaba Originally Posted by VitaMan

better get some more gov fools. i'll wait.

Sorry Waco, won't work here. You can call them fools and clowns. You are the one with no credentials. You claim to be an expert on almost everything.

There's that word "claim" again.

You have at least 100 of your other posts you need to get busy and refute. And that is just in the last few days.

You have been refuted. Don't make it harder on yourself.

Run along now

Sorry Waco, won't work here. You can call them fools and clowns. You are the one with no credentials. You claim to be an expert on almost everything.

There's that word "claim" again.

You have at least 100 of your other posts you need to get busy and refute. And that is just in the last few days.

Run along now Originally Posted by VitaMan

if you say so

There it is

Why keep kidding yourself ?

its my understanding that those banks that failed were not "true" banks in the sense of the word.

they were investment banks designed to finance some business deals; some are high risk. they don't have the regular deposits from street people.

those banks should not be bailed out and the investors wold be stuck with the 250,000 deposit recovery limit.

its my understanding that those banks that failed were not "true" banks in the sense of the word.

they were investment banks designed to finance some business deals; some are high risk. they don't have the regular deposits from street people.

those banks should not be bailed out and the investors wold be stuck with the 250,000 deposit recovery limit. Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

you are correct. they were not commercial banks. SVB specialized in venture capitol investments where most of these tech startups fail. for every home run you get many strike outs. these investment banks can make lots of money by betting on the next google or facebook. without these few big successes and some startups that get bought by big players like Microsoft and others these investment banks would fail without continued capitol investment by high net worth investors and traditional investment firms.



SVB should not have been bailed out above the fdic limit. the reason this bailout happened is the silicon valley tech companies which invest in these startup funding firms lean heavily democratic and give buckets full of money to democratic candidates.



the democrats aren't going to bite the hand that feeds them.

Clearly no understanding at all by the above 2 posters.

Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) was a state-chartered commercial bank headquartered in Santa Clara, California.

The rest is the opinion of the 2 posters.

oooooooooooohhhh.... fighting words. lol.

so they were chartered big whoop. means nothing.