SVB shows that there are few libertarians in a financial foxhole

Re:SVB shows that there are few libertarians in a financial ... by Waterluvian on Monday March 13, 2023 @04:15PM (#35141856)

I appreciate you're just playing Devil's Arbalest here, but this feels like the least libertarian take possible. It's the government's fault that my customers are handing me so much money to manage and I managed it poorly?

Admittedly, I still don't fully understand the link between investing too cautiously and seeing poor returns and there being a run on the bank.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:SVB shows that there are few libertarians in a financial ... by Swenrekcah on Monday March 13, 2023 @04:23PM (#35141960)

The link is that the investments went down in value and so the bank couldn’t sell enough of them when they suddenly needed a lot of money to pay out deposits.

I agree it’s peculiar to phrase it as the government is to blame. Except perhaps to the degree that the government in 2018 relaxed risk test requirements that would otherwise have included SVB, those requirements were originally set after and in response to the 2008 collapse.

But ultimately the blame lies with the bank executives.

[ Parent | on HN ]