Haighus
Ye Olde King of OT
Posts: 902
|
Post by Haighus on Mar 16, 2023 5:54:02 GMT -5
Credit Suisse bailed out for $54 billion...
Lets see if that averts a chain reaction.
|
|
|
Post by easye on Mar 16, 2023 10:19:43 GMT -5
That would take the Banking Issues to the Global level, not just Silicon Valley or US Banks. Yikes!
|
|
|
Post by maddocgrotsnik on Mar 17, 2023 15:54:16 GMT -5
A chunk of it will depend on people not panic withdrawing money, as that’s what did for Northern Rock in the end. After some solid scaremongering from the gutter press of course.
|
|
|
Post by easye on Mar 20, 2023 10:18:22 GMT -5
Looks like USB is buying out Credit Suisse, and New York Community is picking up Signature on the cheap.
So, the "cure" appears to be more Bank mergers.
|
|
Haighus
Ye Olde King of OT
Posts: 902
|
Post by Haighus on Mar 20, 2023 10:42:06 GMT -5
Looks like USB is buying out Credit Suisse, and New York Community is picking up Signature on the cheap. So, the "cure" appears to be more Bank mergers. Lets see if this actually stabilises things, or just kicks the can down the road for a little longer until an even bigger potential crisis.
|
|
herzlos
Ye Olde King of OT
Posts: 700
|
Post by herzlos on Mar 20, 2023 16:49:33 GMT -5
One of the main issues was there are higher standards for stress testing banks with over $250bn in deposits, where SVB was sitting at about $200bn, so in theory merging some of the smaller banks would solve the problem.
Of course, the limit was $50bn before Trump, so undoing that would also fix the problem.
|
|
|
Post by maddocgrotsnik on Mar 23, 2023 7:35:22 GMT -5
Looks like USB is buying out Credit Suisse, and New York Community is picking up Signature on the cheap. So, the "cure" appears to be more Bank mergers. If they’re overseen well, it should be OK. And by well, I mean “has anyone actually checked if the purchasing bank has the readies to shore up its purchase, or are they just taking turns licking the same financial Poopsicle”
|
|
|
Post by easye on Nov 3, 2023 11:02:12 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Nov 3, 2023 11:37:09 GMT -5
Was crypto ever present? Sure the hype was huge, but beyond criminal activity, raising prices of high end PC parts and glorified pyramid schemes, what did crypto really achieve so far? Beyond a few joke attempts of 'buy a pizza' or 'buy a Tesla' with crypto, did it ever really become useful to the general public?
|
|
|
Post by easye on Nov 3, 2023 13:14:15 GMT -5
There are Crypto Machines in gas stations here in the states. That's pretty ubiquitous.
|
|
|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Nov 3, 2023 13:57:54 GMT -5
There are Crypto Machines in gas stations here in the states. That's pretty ubiquitous. This got me interested and I did a little googling. Now let me add that this seems to almost exclusively be a US thing (with a little in Canada), so ubiquitous would require a pretty big disclaimer based on location. Statistics vary, but a generous estimate is that 50.000 crypto ATMs exist in the US (depending on your source this might be half or one and a half times that number). This is against 150.000 gas stations and 450.000 regular ATMs. Not bad right? But ironically, their ubiquitousness in the US might turn back to money laundering: www.kansascityfed.org/research/payments-system-research-briefings/the-controversial-business-of-cash-to-crypto-bitcoin-atms/
|
|
Haighus
Ye Olde King of OT
Posts: 902
|
Post by Haighus on Nov 3, 2023 17:18:18 GMT -5
Bloody hell. The US is bizarre. You have crypto ATMs...
|
|
herzlos
Ye Olde King of OT
Posts: 700
|
Post by herzlos on Nov 3, 2023 17:41:10 GMT -5
CEX in the UK (a 2nd hand game/video store) had bitcoin machines, I think you could either buy bitcoin there or pay via bitcoin, I'm not sure if they'd let you sell bitcoin. As far as I can tell it was largely a gimmick.
It never took hold anywhere else but I don't know if that's because Europe has stronger regulations on that sort of thing, less money laundering or just less conspiracy theorists. I've never actually encountered anyone talking about BTC in person, beyond a brief discussion about how the bubble was over when it was mentioned on BBC news and my dad asked me if it was worth investing. Obviously I explained that the only sane time to invest would have been before it was suggested as an investment on national tv.
|
|
|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Nov 4, 2023 4:10:01 GMT -5
I never got why they called it investing in crypto. Normally investing lets you get something backed by something tangible, a business providing a service or a government bond. While of course incredibly difficult, you could at least try to estimate which way the market would go the coming years (war with Russia, good for oil and gas investments, economic downturn, bad for consumer goods but good for food related investments etc.). You could also get yearly dividends. Sure, investing remains a gamble, but at least something exists behind the 1s and 0s (of course if you go deep enough you can have a discussion on the true value of money).
Crypto is like going to the casino. Selling it as 'investments' almost feels like you're scamming people. Its completely circular/insular, you're not backed by anything tangible, just by more people buying into a hype. The value goes up or down entirely based on people's feelings for the day, instead of partially/mostly.
|
|
herzlos
Ye Olde King of OT
Posts: 700
|
Post by herzlos on Nov 4, 2023 17:14:06 GMT -5
I always assumed for investing you wanted something with rarity, the tangible part has kind of always been the default even with futures.
Crypo has rarity, in that the number crunching required to mine / process the transactions takes time to produce. Each one taking longer to make than the previous which means it's inflationary by nature. As with most bubbles, there's only a fairly short window where investment makes sense.
Of course, it has no actual value or use beyond existing for itself or as a proof of concept, so was always going to result in a bubble. The blockchain idea as a mechanism to digitally sign stuff has some value but only really when connected to something that has value. NFT's are an example of that; you used the crypto to generate and assign ownership of the token saying you owned whatever digital art it was. Where NFT's failed was that no-one really cares about owning some crap pixel art when anyone can use it anyway, and it was purely a bubble/investment scam.
It was definitely a scam, but it's completely unregulated unlike most financial investments. People were being convinced to buy some random thing on the promise it'd be worth more later, which I don't think is illegal even though it's completely dodgy.
|
|