Silicon Valley Bank unmasks the hypocrisy of libertarian tech bros

Re:Silicon Valley Bank unmasks the hypocrisy of libertarian ... by AdamN on Wednesday March 15, 2023 @08:39AM (#35167361)

I would say 'yes'. Banks should start offering fully insured accounts (maybe they already do) and those accounts should cost more and possibly have different liquidity profiles.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Silicon Valley Bank unmasks the hypocrisy of libertarian ... by Tinyyy on Wednesday March 15, 2023 @09:22AM (#35167947)

Fully insured by whom?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Silicon Valley Bank unmasks the hypocrisy of libertarian ... by AdamN on Thursday March 16, 2023 @12:14PM (#35183960)

A re-insurance company probably, or the FDIC which would charge a premium for the excess insurance.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Silicon Valley Bank unmasks the hypocrisy of libertarian ... by pjc50 on Wednesday March 15, 2023 @09:24AM (#35167974)

Why banks specifically? Should there be insurance for AWS and Github accounts?

> maybe they already do

"Insured cash sweep" (which is basically "RAID for banking")

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Silicon Valley Bank unmasks the hypocrisy of libertarian ... by AdamN on Thursday March 16, 2023 @12:13PM (#35183942)

There already is DR and business continuity insurance so non-financial assets have an entire industry around insuring against events there.

Cash sweep is insured but only to a limit, there's nothing magical there and the underlying securities have default risk (or breaking the buck).

[ Parent | on HN ]