Another Bank collapse! No Wonder why! Meet the Head of investment!

[toguy5252]

That is why in one of my posts I stated that we have to wait until the end of May to get the whole picture!!

Agreed.

 

[Gooseifur]

Again legally at the moment it did not look like SV Banks broke any laws. No one is accusing them of it. If they did like money laundering or some illegal tactics, then yes the Regulators did have every right to intervene. Of course it did not look like it when all they did was to raise the red flags with the manner in which SVB had too many eggs in one basket!!
Anyway, I am glad that we agree that there should be more stringent Regulations that Biden is now trying to implement!!

Did SVB or signature Bank break any laws? No. That's not all regulators look for. They are supposed to monitor and see things coming. They don't just step in when laws are broken. They were asleep at the wheel.

 

[jcpro]

What about breaking laws such as financial negligence, and not having a risk management director, for 8 months??

You can be sure that the lawyers of the assets holders at those banks are right now in the process of drafting the lawsuit aimed at the board and the executives. But, as long as Yellen keeps her word about bailing them out, they'll keep them on ice. All the while the rest of America will pay one more time for the sins of the most fortunate and the affluent. So much for the liberals and their love and commitment to the "litte people ". Maybe AOC can stage a cry in. Jesus wept.

 

[explorerzip]

The facts are the recent failed US banks were all run by radical left rainbow haired marxist lunatics. Democrats.

This proves absolutely nothing. There are plenty of other businesses that failed and were run by money grubbers that sought profits above all. Republicans.

 

[jcpro]

What about the stock market investors who invested in SVB, and are now left with nothing. Biden said, "that's the risk of investing in the stock market." I'm sure these investors will sue SVB, through a class action lawsuit. Or maybe sue the bank regulators etc

Maybe, but I doubt it. The banks are invulnerable while in the "care" of the fed.

 

[jalimon]

This proves absolutely nothing. There are plenty of other businesses that failed and were run by money grubbers that sought profits above all. Republicans.

Actually greed and egoism has no political party.

 

[bver_hunter]

I wouldn't hold my breathe. We'll never get the whole picture.

Why won't we get the whole picture??

 

[jcpro]

Silicon Valley Bank parent, CEO, CFO are sued by shareholders for fraud

SVB Financial Group and two top executives were sued on Monday by shareholders who accused them of concealing how rising interest rates would leave its Silicon Valley Bank unit, which failed last week, "particularly susceptible" to a bank run.

www.reuters.com

And the defense will counter: you should have known that raising interest rates would have negative impact. Unless they can prove incompetence or malice, they have no case. Of course they might hire a brilliant attorney who will bore the jury to death and they'll convict just to punish the "fat cats".

 

[Darts]

"Bear Stearns, Lehmann Brothers and many others were headquartered in NYC and failed under a Republican President."
NYC is hardcore Democratic in a hardcore Democratic NY state.

Does anyone remember President Bill Clinton?
Clinton's Legacy: The Financial and Housing Meltdown (reason.com)

 

[jcpro]

Yes, maybe. The article says there will be many more lawsuits against SVB. I guess we'll see what happens??

Remember the subprime fiasco? In the end, nobody paid...except the American people.

 

[explorerzip]

Actually greed and egoism has no political party.

Absolutely. So how does leftism and woke idealology factor into this discussion? Hint: it doesn't. It's another boogeyman that has no substance.

 

[explorerzip]

Yes, but Clinton was a democrat, and so was Obama. Obama was the president during the 2008 financial crisis.

Wrong. The financial crisis happened around 2007-2008 during the end of the Bush administration. What caused that crisis goes beyond one administration though. Deregulation was going on for decades at that point.

 

[jcpro]

Wrong. The financial crisis happened around 2007-2008 during the end of the Bush administration. What caused that crisis goes beyond one administration though. Deregulation was going on for decades at that point.

Not entirely fair description.

Are the Clintons the real housing crash villains?

Before Hillary rewrites history, let's look at how the Clintons contributed to the Great Recession, write Larry Kudlow and Stephen Moore.

www.cnbc.com

 

[jalimon]

Yes, but Clinton was a democrat, and so was Obama. Obama was the president during the 2008 financial crisis.

No he fix it.

 

[jalimon]

Absolutely. So how does leftism and woke idealology factor into this discussion? Hint: it doesn't. It's another boogeyman that has no substance.

It does not have factor. But trumpers are not the most unfrozen pogo of the box so they see every single problem as a leftie or woke responsibility… They only see black or white. No grey.

 

[explorerzip]

Not entirely fair description.

Are the Clintons the real housing crash villains?

Before Hillary rewrites history, let's look at how the Clintons contributed to the Great Recession, write Larry Kudlow and Stephen Moore.

www.cnbc.com

What's not entirely fair? Bush was president during the 07-08 financial crisis. Granted, it happened during the transition between Bush and Obama. Regardless, this is why I said: "What caused that crisis goes beyond one administration though. Deregulation was going on for decades at that point." The financial crisis and bank failures were caused by a series of bad decisions taken over years or decades by many people.

Yet the over-arching theme of this thread is that only wokeism or leftism causes the banks to fail, which is absurd. Or that we used to have "meritocracy" in corporations. As if putting incompent people in leadership positions is a new phenomenon?

 

[explorerzip]

It does not have factor. But trumpers are not the most unfrozen pogo of the box so they see every single problem as a leftie or woke responsibility… They only see black or white. No grey.

LOL. That's a new one.

 

[jcpro]

What's not entirely fair? Bush was president during the 07-08 financial crisis. Granted, it happened during the transition between Bush and Obama. Regardless, this is why I said: "What caused that crisis goes beyond one administration though. Deregulation was going on for decades at that point." The financial crisis and bank failures were caused by a series of bad decisions taken over years or decades by many people.

Yet the over-arching theme of this thread is that only wokeism or leftism causes the banks to fail, which is absurd. Or that we used to have "meritocracy" in corporations. As if putting incompent people in leadership positions is a new phenomenon?

They packaged shit mortgages with sound ones at behest of the wokeness long before Bush came to power.

 

[Frankfooter]

They packaged shit mortgages with sound ones at behest of the wokeness long before Bush came to power.

Its woke's fault every time.

 

[explorerzip]

They packaged shit mortgages with sound ones at behest of the wokeness long before Bush came to power.

So the Clinton's forced banks to package shit mortgages with sounds ones and at the behest of wokeness before woke was a thing? Yes, that makes sense