To be clear I think we agree more than you might realize.
I believe we are both fully on board with Elon selling some more TSLA to buy another failing business.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Elon & Twitter
- Thread starter Buckminster
- Start date
- Status
To be clear I think we agree more than you might realize.
I believe we are both fully on board with Elon selling some more TSLA to buy another failing business.
italian bread
Member
How odd, because The Wall Street Journal says it was diversity that caused the bank to fail!
In an op-ed titled “Who Killed Silicon Valley Bank?” columnist Andy Kessler writes: “Was there regulatory failure? Perhaps. SVB was regulated like a bank but looked more like a money-market fund. Then there’s this: In its proxy statement, SVB notes that besides 91% of their board being independent and 45% women, they also have ‘1 Black,‘ “1 LGBTQ+,‘ and ‘2 Veterans.’ I’m not saying 12 white men would have avoided this mess, but the company may have been distracted by diversity demands.”
Sure, Kessler is not flatly, literally saying “12 white men would have avoided this mess,” because even David Duke knows you can’t just come out and say that in 2023. But…he’s basically saying exactly that, hence the claim that the bank might have failed because it was “distracted” by supposedly burdensome “diversity demands.” (Here’s where we’d like to point out that having “1 Black” person on a 12-person board means that that board is still 92% white. The same math goes for that “1 LGBTQ+” person.) Weirdly, Kessler did not note, alongside his thesis, that SVB’s executive team doesn’t appear to have been plagued by “diversity demands.” He also apparently did not feel the need to acknowledge that all of the major banks that failed during the Great Recession were largely run by white guys.
italian bread
Member
For those living on a round planet…
Silicon Valley Bank collapse puts new spotlight on Trump banking law
The fight over the 2018 law
Five years ago, Warren was the most outspoken opponent of the Republican-led Congress' push to undo regulations imposed under the 2010 Dodd-Frank law for small and midsize banks. The bill, led by Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, sought to reclassify the "too big to fail" standard, which came with enhanced regulatory scrutiny. By raising the threshold from $50 billion in assets to $250 billion, medium-size banks were exempted from those regulations.
“Had Congress and the Federal Reserve not rolled back the stricter oversight, S.V.B. and Signature would have been subject to stronger liquidity and capital requirements to withstand financial shocks,” Warren wrote Monday. “They would have been required to conduct regular stress tests to expose their vulnerabilities and shore up their businesses. But because those requirements were repealed, when an old-fashioned bank run hit S.V.B., the bank couldn’t withstand the pressure — and Signature’s collapse was close behind.”
Silicon Valley Bank collapse puts new spotlight on Trump banking law
The fight over the 2018 law
Five years ago, Warren was the most outspoken opponent of the Republican-led Congress' push to undo regulations imposed under the 2010 Dodd-Frank law for small and midsize banks. The bill, led by Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, sought to reclassify the "too big to fail" standard, which came with enhanced regulatory scrutiny. By raising the threshold from $50 billion in assets to $250 billion, medium-size banks were exempted from those regulations.
“Had Congress and the Federal Reserve not rolled back the stricter oversight, S.V.B. and Signature would have been subject to stronger liquidity and capital requirements to withstand financial shocks,” Warren wrote Monday. “They would have been required to conduct regular stress tests to expose their vulnerabilities and shore up their businesses. But because those requirements were repealed, when an old-fashioned bank run hit S.V.B., the bank couldn’t withstand the pressure — and Signature’s collapse was close behind.”
I think this is similar to rail laws loosening. You can replace rail/banking with any other industry probably done to increase profits, decrease oversight.
Yeah, too much oversight is a bad thing, but telling capitalistic corporations whose sole goal is profits to have less oversight or self regulate is usally a bad thing. Think IOUs (Investor owned utilities), ticketmaster/SOCIAL MEDIA (hah)/medical industry.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Some people are excited by the increased exposure they are getting on Twitter since Elon took over. Yes he's a white supremacist.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
It's gotten too dark for me. I'm quitting Twitter. Hope someone will move to oust Elon from Tesla. Not sure if to start divesting myself of Tesla shares. I'd rather Tesla divest itself of Elon. As someone mentioned above, it's almost as though he's been asking to be fired. Personally, I've already lost all the joy I use to have from being all in on Musk Enterprises. Wish I'd sold my car at last year's peak.
That just means he did a great job at preparing to set cash on fire.
I feel you. For me, Elon's luster has been losing it's shine since the whole cave rescue incident, continuing on a steady glide path to insanity.
I used to be super excited to watch/listen to his presentations. Now his big insights have become mote and mundane as he seems to think he's espousing these hugely insightful ideas, but he's been saying the same thing for a decade now. So now I sit and wait for the next thing to cringe at.
I used to follow every tweet. I didn't (and still don't) get most of his humor, but even then, it was clear that he was simply re-posting someone else's meme and not generating new funny content.
Then I unfollowed him and now I've got him on mute, because the only thing that bubbles up to my feed lately is the latest crazy thing he's posted his $2B on, claiming it's "Worrisome" or "Indeed" or "Very concerning" or "Yeah" without having done any research on the actual topic to find out if it's even worth replying to. And if he had spent 2 seconds researching it, he'd realize it's just noise to ignore.
Which is what most of Twitter is if you don't curate who you follow, mute and block carefully.
Has Elon improved Twitter in any meaningful way? I can't say that he has. But he has further tarnished his reputation and by association, the companies he leads.
That said, Tesla and SpaceX are both doing great things. But at this point I think it's in spite of Elon, and not because of Elon. I loved seeing more of company speak at the last investor day event. And I hope that continues to happen, and Elon fades into the background.
Tesla still sits at the top of the my automobile shopping list. The ironic thing is that Tesla opening up it's Supercharger network to other CCS vehicles will be the thing that finally gets me to seriously consider another brand of EV.
smogne41
Active Member
I would go so far to say that Tesla is noticeably doing better since Elon has been mostly distracted by Twitter. Holiday Update that was actually the first in 2 years that mostly improved things instead of taking things away, a round wheel option for S/X, etc. He really needs to go.
Sometimes fame/power/wealth does this to people. Remember Ye said Adidas couldn't do a thing to him? Adidas fired him, but is sitting on over a billion in sales/merchandise loss they aren't sure what to do with.
Adidas says dropping Kanye West could cost it more than $1 billion in sales
Adidas' breakup with Ye, formerly known as Kanye West, is a pricey one.
www.cnn.com
Adidas stuck with Yeezy gear after dropping Kanye
Adidas said Wednesday it was still weighing what to do with its huge inventory of Kanye West's Yeezy products after it ended its partnership with the controversial rapper.As a result, the group ended production of the highly successful Yeezy line designed together with West.
Here is something most of us already knew
www.vox.com
Would you buy an EV from this man?
Tesla has competition for the first time. Bad time to have Bad Tweets.
www.vox.com
Doggydogworld
Active Member
Bank Policy Institute analyzed SVB's books and says they would have passed the pre-2018 stress test. SVB's main problem was a simple duration mismatch that one bank exec I heard said "an 11 year old who plays a lot of Monopoly could have caught". Regulations don't really help when regulators fail to exercise basic common sense.
Norbert
TSLA will win
CNN fact checking Chuck Callesto who got amplified by Elon. ("A comedian, not Antifa.").
The 2018 banking law is still highly relevant to SVB because SVB was one of the banks that was pushing for it the hardest. But yeah, the fact that regulators ignored interest rate risk makes me wonder exactly what the regulators were doing. Were the regulations inadequate as written, were the regulators just incompetent in how they interpreted them, or both?
EfficientWatts
Member
This (I'm aware of copying what Elon is doing unironically).
Saw a number of posters do the same this here as well which made me mad because it offered no meaningful contribution.
But for Elon it's not the same. That simple Yeah can dangerously amplify falsehoods, triggering people and potentially causing people to think certain things that could lead to deadly consequences down the road. Yea I think you ultimately can't control people's actions, but with great reach comes great responsibility. And I think that's only something certain news stations have started to realize as well.
- Status
