REVEALED: Only ONE member of failed SVB's board had a career in investment banking - and the rest were Obama, Clinton mega-donors

[frigidweirdo]

The system isn't corrupt. That's the dumb and/or lazy person's cop-out. There are too many corrupt players and most have a "(D)" after their name.
The voters have the power, but too many don't care enough to do what they should to deal with it.

Yes, the system is corrupt. The system, FPTP, allows for the rich to control it more easily because it encourages people to vote for the two largest parties, which makes it easier for the rich to control.
That you think only Democrats are corrupt is just infantile.
The votes have the power, but most people are easily manipulated. With PR there would be more political parties and more choice making it harder to manipulate.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Seriously? You have no concern with a bank whose board has little to no banking experience?

Not really. If a person is smart and they listen to the right people, then anything is possible.
Just because a board is made up of bankers, you think that's a guarantee of success? Not a chance, bankers take more risks than anyone else.

 

[WTH_Progs?]

I should have figured as much. After all, the left was blaming Trump for it, and you know what that means, confession by projection.

 

[LeftofLeft]

Not really. If a person is smart and they listen to the right people, then anything is possible.
Just because a board is made up of bankers, you think that's a guarantee of success? Not a chance, bankers take more risks than anyone else.

You are only saying that because this Board is replete with Democrat political cronies. Boards of any company should have a dominant presence of industry-related people; including, risk management professionals. You think a winemaker and an entertainer take fewer risks than a banker?

 

[toobfreak]

A huge path of corruption seems to follow leftist everywhere they go.

37,000 far leftist accounts worth an average of 4.2 million dollars, in a bank which flagrantly mismanaged money to advance woke agendas while the Bidens are going to bail all of them out 100%, almost 4 million each over the FDIC limit?! Can we say, impeach case number 42?



\

 

[frigidweirdo]

You are only saying that because this Board is replete with Democrat political cronies. Boards of any company should have a dominant presence of industry-related people; including, risk management professionals. You think a winemaker and an entertainer take fewer risks than a banker?

I'm not a Democrat.
I've worked for many businesses, and the people in charge are the people in charge. They're there and they make the decisions, whether good or bad and they have that responsibility and if it all goes wrong, it's their fault.
Boards of any business should be whoever they are. The people with the most shares, people who are chosen by those people with the most shares. It's how it goes. It's CAPITALISM.

 

[LeftofLeft]

I'm not a Democrat.
I've worked for many businesses, and the people in charge are the people in charge. They're there and they make the decisions, whether good or bad and they have that responsibility and if it all goes wrong, it's their fault.
Boards of any business should be whoever they are. The people with the most shares, people who are chosen by those people with the most shares. It's how it goes. It's CAPITALISM.

Boards are free to be comprised of whatever and whomever and that is reality. Shareholders carry weight. Im not arguing that is not the case. Im arguing to back my opinion of what a Bank’s board SHOULD be comprised of.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Boards are free to be comprised of whatever and whomever and that is reality. Shareholders carry weight. Im not arguing that is not the case. Im arguing to back my opinion of what a Bank’s board SHOULD be comprised of.

The world is full of shoulds and shouldn't. But the world is what it is, lots of people trying to con their way through life, and other with the right skills missing out because they don't have the gift for the gab.

They're private companies, I really don't think it's an issue for us to even be discussing.
Their company, their ways, the company fails, well, it fails.

Did it fail because the board members know nothing about banking? Probably not.
It failed because cryptocurreny is a ponzi scheme that has an inevitable demise. (at least in the form it takes right now)

 

[LeftofLeft]

The world is full of shoulds and shouldn't. But the world is what it is, lots of people trying to con their way through life, and other with the right skills missing out because they don't have the gift for the gab.

They're private companies, I really don't think it's an issue for us to even be discussing.
Their company, their ways, the company fails, well, it fails.

Did it fail because the board members know nothing about banking? Probably not.
It failed because cryptocurreny is a ponzi scheme that has an inevitable demise. (at least in the form it takes right now)

Banks like any business venture is not without risk. Having a board weighted with relative industry experience to advise and guide helps to mitigate risk.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Banks like any business venture is not without risk. Having a board weighted with relative industry experience to advise and guide helps to mitigate risk.

Sure, there's always going to be risk.

Question here is, do you trust bankers?

 

[mudwhistle]

Pretty much nail on head there. But more like about 60 years since that game plan started in earnest. Thanks to Saul Alinsky and a couple other "designers".

I've been trained on spotting this since the 70s.
It's so obvious.

 

[LeftofLeft]

Sure, there's always going to be risk.

Question here is, do you trust bankers?

Given the dependency of banking we have in our personal and business lives, I place trust in bankers like I do doctors, nurses, lawyers, engineers, IT infrastructure managers.

 

[mudwhistle]

Well, there's an issue. The problem is the US political system is so corrupt one side will attack the other, while handing out money to their own people at the same time.

And they get away with it because the voters simply don't have the power, or the knowledge, to deal with this.

 

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,

1. Bank Records.
2. All of them.
3. Which non banker democrat was using this bank as his/her personal piggy bank is what we should be asking?
4. To the tune of how much?
5. No bail out till we find out.
6. LAUCNH THE INVESTIGATION CONGRESS!
7. Don't be asleep. again mother fuckers!!!!........ lol!!!!

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

 

[struth]

nobody, other then dembots, should be surprised by this

 

[mudwhistle]

Given the dependency of banking we have in our personal and business lives, I place trust in bankers like I do doctors, nurses, lawyers, engineers, IT infrastructure managers.

So instead of being a leftist....you're an establishment stooge.

 

[WTH_Progs?]

nobody, other then dembots, should be surprised by this

I think you give leftists too much credit. You're assuming they have the capacity of honesty and the ability to learn. They'll sweep this under the rug as they do everything else their kind are guilty of.

 

[emilynghiem]

Well, there's an issue. The problem is the US political system is so corrupt one side will attack the other, while handing out money to their own people at the same time.

And they get away with it because the voters simply don't have the power, or the knowledge, to deal with this.

Well here is a prime opportunity for us as taxpayers to complain, and unite left and right. We join in the chorus of Rightwing objecting to the bailouts, and in unison demand that the candidates receiving the documented donations from these banks deduct that from what the taxpayers are LENDING. The banks donors and recipients are only receiving LOANS that must be paid back to taxpayers, who will hold real property as collateral on the debts.

Liberal protestors of conservative bailouts can add equivalent demands to reimburse Taxpayers for corporate loans instead of handouts or welfare, and also claim ownerships of property or programs as collateral on these loans extended at taxpayers expense.


Let's turn the tables on govt, where taxpayers claim collateral and interest in these loans we are being charged for like handouts. We cannot be held to a contract unless we sign it voluntarily. So let's layout the terms of these loans by which we agree to be financially responsible, which means giving us enough collateral, credit or interest to make it worth the investment and get our consent as taxpayers footing the costs

 

[Harpy Eagle]

A huge path of corruption seems to follow leftist everywhere they go.

Only ONE member of failed SVB's board had experience in banking

Tom King, 63, was the only member of Silicon Valley's board of directors with experience in the financial industry, while the others include a former Obama employee and a major Hillary Clinton donor.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Thank you for the 19th thread on this exact topic.

Now, tell us how many members of the Exxon board have oil and gas experience?

 

[emilynghiem]

You think because they were never bankers, they don't know how to count?
Do they need to be bankers?

That is missing the point and not directly the issue. The problem is if the system was run as a network for leftist interests to pool together collective capital for political agenda.

Had the board been professional bankers interested in long-term banking services and relations with the public on a profitable sustainable basis, not only would investment and loan decisions be made differently (and not the short term goals of funding political allies even at great risk and loss of the money), but investors and business partners would give this network "greater credibility" and bring more capital and business there due to long-term productivity.

As is, it looks hardly different from a pyramid scheme similar to Enron having its top officials and investors get all the money and profits they could get out of the deal, and let the rest crash at the expense of other people and taxpayers to bail out the huge profiteers at the top.

So that's where the complaints are coming from, that Democrat political interests basically laundered money they could afford to lend or give away, through these bank and financial institutions, so when the pyramid crashes, the taxpayers foot the bill and basically fund and cover all the loans and donations made to profiteers for their political careers and campaigns.

Reminds me of the failed SNL bailouts of junk bonds under Reagan where corporate raiders like MAXXAM got bailed out at $1.6 billion if you include est. Interest at taxpayer expense, for bonds abused to takeover companies like Pacific Lumber (and later Kaiser Aluminum), crash them after liquidating their assets and pension funds, then declaring bankruptcy so taxpayers are left holding the bag of debts while the boards and top shareholders ran off with the profits sucked out before the crash.