HN2new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> The depositors “took risks” by literally keeping their cash in a bank? This is ridiculous

Its not ridiculous. Its how the free market works. Its a choice. There were other banks that were compliant with the regulation that !protects! the bank and its depositors. This bank wasn't one of them. People put their money in this bank anyway. It makes little difference if many startups were forced by their VCs to put their money in that bank - they chose to go with those VCs.

> What was the safe, responsible thing to do? Put it in one of the “too big to fail” banks instead, given that those are guaranteed to be bailed out should they encounter difficulties?

The first thing to do was to put their money in banks that have not lobbied for exemption from the regulations that protect the bank and its depositors' money from exactly what is happening right now.

The second thing would be to put it in multiple banks that are not exempt from that regulation to spread around the risk.

The third thing would be to spread the risk around many investment tools and banks.

It turns out that there ARE startups that did precisely that, and they were not affected by the SVB thing in the slightest manner.

> Let’s not pretend that literally keeping cash in a savings account is irresponsible risk taking.

It is unless it is a state run bank, period. This is the free market, and if the organization that you are putting your money into is a private organization, you are simply taking a risk. If that does not sound good, then it means that all the rhetoric about free market vs government should be revised.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: