LOL WUTGet woke, start a run on the banking system - SVB hired woke board obsessed with diversity who held month long Pride celebration but failed to hire Chief Risk Management Officer for 8 months.

submitted by ClassroomPast6178 from dailymail.co.uk

all 22 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]LtGreenCo 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Any companies that sink millions into ESG and wokeness initiatives are essentially flushing money down the toilet. That shit should be a red flag to any investor.

[–]ClassroomPast6178[S] 13 insightful - 3 fun13 insightful - 2 fun14 insightful - 3 fun -  (3 children)

You’d almost think that ESG was designed by the Standing Committee of the Political Bureau of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China as a way to sow discord and wage economic war on The West.

[–]Newzok 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It comes from inside. Some wide ranging post-occupy psyop I reckon.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The Dems are all on board with it too.

[–]Musky༼⁠ ⁠つ⁠ ⁠◕⁠‿⁠◕⁠ ⁠༽⁠つ 🐈 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I think you're right. It has happened before and it will happen again.

[–]filbs111 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Flushing money down the toilet, but where does the money go then?

Perhaps it's possible to make a lot of money while bankrupting a company, as long as you do it accidentally. Hire useful idiots to make bad investments. It was an honest mistake!

[–]OuroborosTheory 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

tbh it's SOP for all banks--blockbusting and redlining for 11 months, then raised fists for 28 days (or 29 every fourth year)

LA's "AIDS Healthcare Foundation" does the same crap: they hand out free condoms and astroturf some protests, so with the rest of their money they run literal slum apartments with no sprinklers, blow millions on failing proposition campaigns, buy off NIMBY/BANANA councilmembers so the poor have nowhere to go but their slum apartments, and demands an injunction when a neighboring skyscraper threatens to block their CEO's view of the Hollywood Sign from the 20th-story suite where he gets half a million a year

[–]ClassroomPast6178[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Executives at Silicon Valley Bank focused on woke initiatives to increase diversity amongst its ranks and invest in startups promoting a 'healthier planet,' but failed to spot its glaring problems with investments as interest rates rose.

The now-failed bank had an A rating for its Environmental, Social and Governance policies according to the MSCI index after creating its own initiatives to 'advance inclusion and opportunity in the innovation economy' and investing in clean energy solutions over the past few years.

It even announced that it would invest a whopping $5billion by 2027 to support sustainability efforts, while its European offices held a monthlong Pride celebration and promoted 'safe spaces.'

But for eight months last year, the bank did not have a chief risk operator, as it invested clients' money in low-interest government bonds and securities.

Then when the Federal Reserve increased interest rates, the value of SVB's assets fell while customers tried to withdraw their money.

Now, many are slamming the financial institution for focusing too much on woke policies and not enough on its investments.

It also notes that the bank implemented 'a diverse candidate slate for US leadership roles' and introduced its first six Employee Resource Groups for Asian, black, Hispanic, LGBTQ, veteran, military and female employees.

Additionally, it 'introduced measurable diversity goals for its senior leadership positions to strengthen the hiring and talent development initiatives meant to create paths to professional advancement, especially for women, black/African American and Hispanic/Latinx individuals.'

The report then goes on to note that the bank even created its own program 'designed to advance inclusion and opportunity in the innovation economy, particularly for women, black/African American and Hispanic/Latinx individuals.'

'In 2021, SVB continued to expand the program, harnessing its resources, experience and connections to address key barriers that prevent underrepresented groups from succeeding in the innovation sector

[–]hfxB0oyADon't piss on my head & tell me it's raining. 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

The diversity hires come home to roost.

[–][deleted]  (2 children)

[deleted]

    [–]ClassroomPast6178[S] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

    Hey, it’s totally not suspicious that the top execs at SVB dumped their stock last week…totally not suspicious.

    [–]William_World 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

    like how the crypto guy with big hair used investors money to donate to dems

    [–]ClassroomPast6178[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

    Sam Bankman-Fried? He was donating equally to Republicans too, he was just doing it dark.

    He was wanting to be involved in writing the crypto-regulations, and the only way to guarantee that was to give to both sides.

    [–]William_World 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

    I had heard that too but turns out it was fake news, he just gave to dems

    [–]ClassroomPast6178[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

    From the article I linked:

    Public data shows that some parts of Bankman-Fried’s empire gave equally to both parties. Data from OpenSecrets, a non-profit that tracks data on campaign finance and lobbying, shows FTX US, the company’s US operation, gave equally to both parties.

    But Bankman-Fried’s public donations went largely to Democrats. The FTX founder gave more than $990,000 to candidates in the last election cycle, according to OpenSecrets, and another $38.8m to outside groups. Only about $235,000 of his public political giving went toward Republican candidates.

    The money helped Bankman-Fried position himself as an influential voice in crypto regulation

    So yes, his personal donations might have been to largely Dems, but his company donated to both.

    And what’s more he admitted to doing it on video.

    [–]Alienhunter糞大名 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    I heard he donated to Dems openly so he could claim the woke points but used a front or some kind of accounting trick to donate to republicans "anonymously" since they wouldn't like it if they found out he was playing both sides of the fence for his own purposes.

    Shouldn't be surprising, but crazy ideologues definitely hold the cause as sancrisant above all else.

    [–]UncleWillard56 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

    I'm not a fan of it (and how does that even jibe with Risk Management??), but that's not why they went broke. They went broke because they invested their depositors money in Treasury Bonds, that are usually pretty stable and guarantee a low, but "bankable" return. The the Fed released high-yield T-bonds that tanked their investment income and made them insoluble. That's when the FDIC took over, but they only guarantee $250K on your account. Anything over that, you get fucked. UNLESS, the government bails you out because you're a "systemically critical bank." Ironically, SVB's CEO tried to lobby Congress to allow them to avoid that label and the regulations and money it would cost them to maintain it. Lucky it didn't work as their depositors would be SOL. The price is the tax dollars it'll take to cover their deposits. I guess that's better than a run on banks?

    [–]William_World 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    they should be just guaranteed for $250k, that's the rule. We're bailing them all the way out just to be nice. You shouldn't put more than $250 k in a bank, especially a woke one. They should lose all that money past $250k, that would be good because it would make people afraid to put their money in woke banks going forward.

    [–]ClassroomPast6178[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

    Coffeezilla?

    [–]UncleWillard56 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

    Ding ding ding!! And some other sources, but yeah he did a great summary that I've hijacked to look smart.

    [–]ClassroomPast6178[S] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

    Hehe no shame. His breakdown on SVB and Signature was excellent. It was you mentioning the CEO lobbying against being systemically critical that tipped me off.

    [–]UncleWillard56 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    Yeah, he is good. I forget if it was him or someone else that pointed out that Barney Frank of Dodd-Frank fame, is a consultant/lobbyist for Signature. The circle of fraud.

    [–]JasonCarswellSisyphus / Ouroboros 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    Worth it?