Yellen and the Fed chair are going to pull a Greenspan and say they were "shocked" when things get worse....
The U.S. government took extraordinary steps Sunday to stop a potential banking crisis after the historic failure of Silicon Valley Bank, assuring depositors at the failed financial institution that they would be able to access all of their money quickly.
www.seattletimes.com
I feel like financial media and those with stakes in it are deliberately trying to panic and cause it to become 'worse' just because they want their government hand-outs.
So I have really mixed feelings. I do think it's possible it could get worse, but I also feel like there's extortion being carried on by those people to deliberately MAKE IT WORSE just because they want government bail-outs.
Fact is those who deposited money into SVB were doing it out of greed and taking a risk. When Bank of America was offering like 0.90% interest on deposits, SVB was offering like 2.30%. It was more than double the going rate that banks were offering for deposits. If something seems too good to be true.
It was all because SVB was funneling those deposits into buying long-term treasury bonds that SVB was predicting they could make money off of because before the fed raised interest rates you could only get new treasury bonds being issued at super low returns. But with the fed raising interest rates that meant new treasury bonds/notes/bills were being issued at much higher return rates which meant the old existing treasury bonds they purchased were now going to return less than a new one which lowered their tradeable value.
In terms of assets. SVB still has a lot of money tied up into treasury bonds. I saw one market person estimating as much as maybe 90%(which is on the high end) of depositor money may be returned. 90% of the money you deposited at a bank giving you a RIDICULOUSLY high rate on deposit compared to other banks which should have given you pause and a hard look doesn't seem that unfair to me.
Those in the financial media are trying to frighten with a 'lost confidence in money deposited in banks', but that's not what happened here. You had greed on both sides. From those picking SVB and from SVB itself, and it was ALLOWED to happen because of lack of regulations some of which were rolled back 5 years ago.
If this was 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017... What happened at SVB probably wouldn't have happened. From July of 2010 to May of 2018 the Dodd-Frank Act would have required any bank with $50b or more of value/assets to have a compliance officer routinely running and submitting 'financial stress tests' to the Government to show the financial stability/solvency of the bank. These stress tests would take the current financial situation of the bank and then throw various scenarios at it over a theoretical 2 year period.
Things like interest rate hikes, market crashes, etc... and see how the money the bank hand on hand and lent out or invested would fare. This would be to keep banks from getting too heavily into something that would come back to burn them. But SVB among other smaller banks lobbied Congress to change these regulations and in 2018 it succeeded and got the threshold raised from $50B to $250b. SVB was around $200B when they collapsed so they were under that new threshold put into law in May of 2018.