SVB Spinners Cover Up Cover Up?

No matter how Joe & Fed spin the SVB bailout, it’s a result of a decade’s long policy after 2008 debacle that kept interest rates at insanely low rates to cover up a decade’s long stagnation. More pain in (our hind) end to come?

The lib MSM, as usual, pathetically tried to pin another policy fiasco on Donald Trump. But, the WSJ put it best when its editorial board put the SVB failure this way: “The bill for bad policy comes due, but there’s risk in a second rescue of the banking system in 15 years … The Treasury & Fed stepped in late Sunday to contain the financial damage from Friday’s closure of Silicon Valley Bank, guaranteeing even uninsured deposits & offering loans to other banks so they don’t have to take losses on their fixed-income assets … [but make no mistake about it] … This is a de facto bailout of the banking system, even as regulators & Biden officials have been telling us that the economy is great & there was nothing to worry about. The unpleasant truth – which Washington will never admit – is that SVB’s failure is the bill coming due for years of monetary & regulatory mistakes …”

Another West Coast woke bank, Silvergate Capital, had also went belly up, so that explains the WSJ’s further observance that “Wall Street & Silicon Valley were in full panic over the weekend demanding that the Treasury & Fed intervene to save the day.” Joe “Always Asleep at the Wheel” Biden’s announcing he’d “talk” to the nation about the crisis that he’ll say isn’t a crisis is a further indication of serious angst in DC, too. Worried the WSJ as last week’s selloff of regional bank stock showed: Will Sunday’s SVB intervention lead to a “universal uninsured deposit guarantee”? If events demand it to “save” the system, would it be legal? Do you feel “safe” with Joe & Janet Yellen at the helm? (As Joe spoke, “trading in … several regional bank stocks, incl First Republic, was halted due to [renewed] volatility …”

Davd Soul