Someone on Twitter said it best: “If taxpayer money bails out a bank, the bank should become publicly owned. You can’t privatize the profits, but socialize the losses.”
The point of some people depositing stuff in the bank is too invest and make a little extra money. If you give that deposit money to a person that doesn’t want to work to get a paycheck then you just loose that money
The US economy cannot survive without continuous credit and debt creation. The FED will print more money and the average American will go just that much further in debt. Meanwhile, foreigners lust for the greenback. Their economies are in worse condition than the US... if that's even possible. Someone is going to be left holding the bag...
This is precisely why I like having a portfolio coach guide my day-to-day market decisions: with their extensive knowledge of going long and short at the same time, using risk for its asymmetrical upside and laying it off as a hedge against the inevitable downward turns, their skillset makes it nearly impossible for them to underperform. I've been utilizing a portfolio coach for more than two years, and I've made over a million dollars.
It's often true that people underestimate the importance of financial advisors until they feel the negative effects of emotional decision-making. I remember a few summers ago, after a tough divorce, when I needed a boost for my struggling business. I researched and found a licensed advisor who diligently helped grow my reserves despite inflation. Consequently, my reserves increased from $275k to around $750k.
I like how these people who tell us "don't make bad decisions with your money, or you will suffer the consequences ." are the same people WE have to bail out when THEY make the bad decisions. Glad we all get to play the same game. SMH
in this case not really.. how is buying state bonds when there's a pandemic and war in europe going on a bad decision..? This is so easy for you to say with hindsight. 🤷♂️ people working at banks are doing their job like everyone else..
Hey Johnny, one key detail you left out: The FDIC sold all the assets of SVB to pay the account holders, not the shareholders (who were left out to dry). So this is a MASSIVE victory for everyone except the greedy SVB owners. This *is* how the system should work, and we should celebrate that we found a way to punish greed while ensuring people's money is safe.
Fuck a shareholder, that’s their investment they gotta live with the risks. That seems to be the crux of of why people are so torn on this situation though like everyone can agree in the short term this is the only move that prevents panic because we’re all dumb. I don’t think anyone has the answer yet to whether long term this sets a bad precedent. Frankly I think all of these TH-cam videos about the crisis are exacerbating things. Like at the end of the day these TH-camrs are risking more unrest more panic for the short term attention/profit, they might calm fears too who knows. It’s a slippery ass slope and we’re all a bit guilty here
Just so that people know the whole picture, this bank was considered well run and innovative. In October of 2021 their stock got up to $750. In December of 2022 the stock fell all the way down to $198. Clearly a massive move down and a company in major distress. It was possible knowing how banks work and the fact that the Fed was gonna have to raise rates, you could have bet against this bank using options and made a absolutely huge return. Trump helped to cause this disaster by doing away with regulations on regional banks like Silicon Valley. This bank was able to keep its investment portfolio in riskier than necessary bonds and the Federal government had no way of knowing about it.
Wait really? Can you point me to the article? Because that would be extremely significant! That would be almost unheard of in the past half century, I think...
@@monhi64 Good point. We need less incentive to create buzz, overall. On the wonkier side, In general I say fuck a shareholder too, but for the whole system to work at all, you need to give everybody some kind of insurance, but tier it much more in favor of people who were not intending to gamble but were just looking for a place to put their money. But yeah we sometimes forget that money is entirely imaginary, just a symbol of some sort of value we already brought or could bring into the world. The stock market is just a flying ball of imaginary money, everybody tossing some in and pulling some out. But is the stock market totally unnecessary? Well, if you weren't able to trade stocks in companies after investing in their IPO, then your gain or loss would be permanently tied to the success of that company, and people would have a lot less incentive to invest. So you have less investment and therefore, in theory, less innovation across the economy. I think the sweet spot is just treating people fairly according to their stake in things - if you work for a company or have a reasonable amount of money in a bank, then you should have a vote in who is on the board who are responsible for identifying various courses of action or investment, and then you should have a vote about which of those courses to take. There's no reason why large shareholders should be the unquestioned dictators of the private sector (which is guaranteed to penetrate the public sector - siphoning money off a tank filled with the collective wealth of huge numbers of poorer people is a fantastic way to stay rich, after all). If we're going to have a system based on private ownership, then it should be fair - what a brilliant concept! But that's the actual root of many of our problems today.
Its for them to make money back. So its that thing also. And there is a lot of fluff to this VDO. When too many people are talking about something, the action has already passed.
One thing to consider here in comparison to 2008: this time the financial products that led to the SVB failure were "safe" government bonds, then they were (overly) complicated derivatives that lost their complete value due to wrong risk categorizations. So this time, the bank failed because of panic in combination with liquidity problems due to rising interest rates. In 2008 it was rather a system-wide failure fueled by greed. It does not seem to be systemic this time. Thank you for explaining the fractional reserve in detail, that was quite interesting
It still shows a weakness in the system that a company can fail with safe investments. Allowing banks to only have to keep 10% is a massive vulnerability, especially in a bank where 90% of clients have more than the insured amount. The moment there’s a hint of panic people will pull money, doesn’t take much to hit that 10% reserve. One bank shouldn’t have the potential to trigger potentially hundreds of companies to fail (because their savings are gone overnight) without government help.
I agree, the products are safe but they give a very low return. The problem is the age of maturity, in these cases up to 10 years. So when SVB wanted to sell these they couldn't get all their money back because you could buy “new” bonds with higher returns for the same price. I have a video on my channel explaining this. No one wanted the bonds SVB was holding so they dropped in value and SVB had to sell them anyway when customers were withdrawing their money.
But like, this isn’t a greed issue though that’s why its different. It’s a good-old-fashion bank run. There is no stoping a bank run but collective trust. The real lesson here is *diversify your clients.*
There's the example of how Iceland's government dealt with their bank collapse in 2008. As far as I know, they chose to save the clients' money, but not the bank itself, and punished the managers and reckles investors and not the majority of the people. They also adjusted more policies and achieved unexpected economical growth after the whole country has basically bankrupted in the crisis
This is a joke right? Yall looking for solutions without addressing the actual problem of banks lying about how much money they have. Legalised greed then punishing the greedy is like being upset at people for getting too fat after you opened an all you can eat burger and donut buffet for free. If I lie about having a million dollars I go to jail, if the bank does it, it's a sign of a fictional economy. Yall can suck on my credit!
In my opinion even if someone saves the bank the bankers still needs to take responsibility.... I mean if there are no repercussions, what's to stop them from doing the same "mistakes" over and over again
SVB has failed. Under what law can you prosecute the bankers? They invested in Treasury bonds in 2020 and 2021, if you knew better then you would be rich enough to not be commenting on YT videos.
@@motog-rocks6544 you're missing out that our economie is based on division of labour. They're getting paid to know better. And they onmly should get bonusses if they know better than other experts in the field, which is the sense of a bonus. I wouldn't let an investment banker set up an respirator at an ICU, which is my job and what I'm getting paid for. And if I fail, I would have to face the consequences. So why managers don't have to?
I am in my second year in college, from all professors we had, only one knows how to actually teach and simplifies things. Professors in general don't know how to teach.
feel bad for the lowest paid workers that may be affected, but not CEO's. A lot of them have created this abusive corporate pay structure where they are paid 300 to 400 percent the salary of entry level workers. Most add very little value. They posture and perform with speeches, meetings, and excessive travel to provide the appearance of working hard. It's a con.
Very big con and that is why i have always maintained that people should never have their money in the bank! Get a financial advisor and even make so much more while saving!
@@andreasleonard0 Very true , I diversified my $400K portfolio across multiple market with the aid of an investment advisor, I have been able to generate over $900k in net profit across high dividend yield stocks, ETF and bonds in few months.
My husband and I were following this same trajectory. Last two years, I pulled out my money and invested with her wealth manager. Not catching up with her profits over the years, but at least I earn more
@@kevsmills we’re only just an information away from amassing wealth, I know a lot of folks that made fortunes from the Dotcom crash as well as the 08’ crash and I’ve been looking into similar opportunities in this present market, could this coach that guides yo help?
@@vivianecardoso0 It's run by ISABEL LINDA DUERI, who I learned about and got in touch with thanks to a CNBC interview. Since then, it has served as the point of entry and departure for the games we have emphasized. A search on the internet can be done if tracking is necessary
Hey johny, I actually work in the finance department of a startup that had a bank account on SVB, great video! That being said, I do have a commment on the bailout part. It's important to note that in the SVB case, the bank itself was not bailed out, customers were, so while our startup got access to our cash, the bank was allowed to bankrupt and was taken over by the FDIC (which is a government agency). All of the owners of SVB lost 100% of their invested money, and institutions that had made loans to it lost their money as well, and the FDIC is selling the bank's assets to pay customers back, only if after selling assets there's money still lacking, then the FDIC will use it's money (which is the insurance fund thingy) to pay (only) customers back. I think the government was smart on this one, interfering with veeeery little (probably none) cost to tax payer, and the bank owners did lose all their money, so that ought to teach them a lesson, bank management did take their bonus but they lost their carreers and only customers were saved in this case
It should be illegal for bankers to give themselves bonuses when bank is failing. I felt exactley the same in 2008 when bankers were giving themselves multi million dollar bonuses directly from government bailouts. It's just stealing
Yeah, like its like rewarding them for their mistakes. Its like a parent let his kid punch another kid, and gave candy to his kid for doing so and not get any consequences. This is really irresponisble and corrupt that banekrs can simply not just get away of it, but actually gain some while tje rest suffer.
I think if bailouts have to happen, investigations should automatically be launched by the IRS regarding bonuses and mishandling...and ownership should be seized until the dust settles. Thus ensuring the customers still aren't penalized but the consequences be put on those that earned them.
Normally I'd agree with that customers shouldn't be penalized but SVB wasn't a "traditional" bank and a lot of the money put there was venture capital, who should have known better and had amounts that aren't normally insured with FDIC. If these types of customers get bailed out then it's a free for all for investors to put money into banks that provide unreasonably high intrest and get baile out sooner or later when it becomes unsustainable. TLDR: we shouldn't bail out customers who do risky things
You're thinking is a bit too rational. Would you mind giving us your address so that we can have some people come and uh.. "talk" to you? Just to set the record straight is all. You understand.
Banks do not depend on people and companies depositing money anymore, that was 50 years ago, maybe even 30 years ago. You don't see the ads about interest anymore, they borrow their money from the central bank (Federal Reserve), and are in practise agents for central banks, nothing more. I was looking to deposit some $ 100 000, and my bank said that they only pay interest on deposits up to $ 100 000, so I had to choose a small local bank instead. The bank was quite clear: -We are not looking for deposits, we can borrow the money in the central bank at a lower rate, with much less work and hassle, no bank lobbies and such,
I'm surprised how good the quality of this video is, especially when you consider how quickly you were able to put it out. You have the perfect blend of journalism and entertainment with real digestible information.
There's a relatively small group of folks that have been expecting something along the lines of SVB crashing for a couple years -- since around the time Archegos ate shit, so perhaps he's been keeping an eye on that DD. Joe coming out of the crypt to comment on it should scare y'all, not because he has anything to do with it, but because he usually keeps on the downlow
I love your consistent balanced approach to education. You give us the facts and offer multiple ways of responding to the facts without actually telling us what we should or shouldn’t do. This is what journalists are for and you are giving the rest journalists an excellent example! Thank you!
@@TheDesertBlizzard indeed, while Johnny cannot be described as 100% neutral...his politics are quite obvious in his videos.. I would say he's like rather than being 50/50 he's 60/40.. So while he's hardly neutral, he's not heavily biased either. That's why I watch him, cause I know that most of what I'm getting is factual and entertaining
YES, thank you! I thought is slant was just me. He gets so many tiny details wrong then builds on them. 10% reserve is a lie. And he clearly slants his videos to his political bios. To bad, as his videos like is politics only looks good on the surface.
@@TheStickman419 he’s polite which means his ideas are not outright dismissed. He appears to be able to have a conversation. I’d buy him a beer for his conversation.
This was pretty well done tbh. I think it would’ve been more complete if it was mentioned that a few years back banks lobbied to have weaker regulation for stress testing (testing to see if they could handle not easy economic situations, like high inflation) and it let them to be not as careful as they should’ve been
SVB and 1st republic actually had reserves that exceeded those potential regulations so that would not have factored in. The reason for lobbying for the weaker regulations was to give small and mid size banks a little more flexibility to compete with bigger banks. That would help them grow and provide competition with larger banks. Several politicians tried to float this as the cause for the disaster but were quickly corrected and that is why it did not gain any traction. A combination of the unintended consequences of the inflation reduction law, poor bank monitoring by the san francisco fed, a very poorly chosen board of directors and poor executive management is what led to it.
Johnny Harris has a talent for that. He is not always 100% correct, and is sometimes more strict driven in his explanations but if there's one thing no one beats Johnny at, it's narration and breakdowns
I think Johnny did necessarily did enough research on the subject. The taxpayer didn’t bailout svb. Silicon Valley bank has more assets than deposits so the government will just sell those assets slowly until all depositors are paid back. The gov giving everyone their money back even the money that wasn’t insured is basically the gov loaning out money until they sell svb assets. For the executive it’s just a coincidence that the bonus were paid a day before it failed. The bank exec have to let the sec know 3months prior to giving out bonus so it’s just not overnight
@@koikoi5520 Also poorly researched, since he thinks the reserve rate is 10%. It *not* being 10% is a huge part of the problem. And I agree, it's not technically a bailout under SVB's circumstances. SVB will cease to exist as an entity, and that ain't no bailout.
Well, a lot of people lost their jobs, stock and bondholders lost their money. Since they didn't break any laws (regulations on mid sized banks were "rolled back" a few years ago), what accountability do you think is missing? This does show a need (I think) for increased regulation of financial institutions that will cause systemic impacts. We seemed to only have partially learned that lesson after 2008...
there isnt much to hold accountable as all banks do this. The fed needs to raise the reserve amount so loan will be more expensive especially to poor people.
The banks that failed are banks that fell outside of regulatory capital requirements imposed by the Fed on the big banks. Another way of saying it is that the Fed runs simulations on all of the big banks every year to see what would happen if a certain number of scenarios occurred. If you fail one of these stress tests, then the Fed requires the bank to liquidate some of their investments to raise capital. All of the banks should be subject to the same requirements. The FDIC and the big banks are the ones propping up places like First Republic and SVB, not taxpayers. Just research the FDIC, it’s pretty straight forward. Banks pay premiums into an insurance pool, and the pool is used to cover depositors. All the big banks have passed their stress tests in each year since the financial crisis, which is why you see they are doing just fine right now, and if SVB had been subjected to the same tests, their capital risks would likely have been identified. Frankly, if the government had just taken a passing glance at SVB’s balance sheet, they would instantly have seen something was wrong. The corruption surprisingly has not been from the big banks, but from the Community Banking lobby which fought hard and spent a lot of money to be exempted from the big bank requirements.
@@Neptunestef why shouldn't it have a crisis if it's natural? The people in charge at the bank and the politicians both make way more money The broken part is US politics and regulations The problem in the US is the missing backlash and penalties for effectively corruption
@@Neptunestef Bailing out a failing company isn't capitalism at all. The US is FAR from a pure capitalist society. Any form of "Government" that relies on any form of a monetary system is never ever ever going to be looking out for the citizens.
I believe your 10,000 just becomes part of the banks 10% reserves... they then create 90,000 out of thin air to loan into the economy in the form of debt. They never actually "loan" depositors money.
As a second year economics student I've studied this bank run and money multiplier effect extensively; but I've never been able to explain it as well as you have here. Thank you!
You're probably not gonna believe a random TH-cam commenter about this, but both this video and what you've been taught about the 'money multiplier' at undergrad are wrong. The Bank of England explain here: www.bankofengland.co.uk/-/media/boe/files/quarterly-bulletin/2014/money-creation-in-the-modern-economy.pdf?la=en&hash=9A8788FD44A62D8BB927123544205CE476E01654
I think you hit the nail on the head - saving the bank is only good in the short run. In the long run it erodes all senses of accountability and a greater loss overall.
Yeah people keep saying letting the banks fail will tank the economy, what they don't realize is constantly bailing them out can also tank the economy. This bailout model is unsustainable. The government doesn't have unlimited money. More bailouts encourages more incompetence and riskiness, which in turn leads to more bank runs, which in turn leads to more drain in government budget.
There's been updates already. Janet Yellen at her testimony suggested that there wasn't unlimited deposit insurance. Rather it will be determined on a case by case basis depending on if the bank is classified as systemically important. Funds are already moving from small regional banks to the big banks. This story is deeper as well. You should talk about the easy money policies since 2008 that have exacerbated if not flat out caused each of these financial crises.
Idk why people say you need to invest your money or else it just gets loss to inflation. Even banks with teams of financial experts lose it to investing at times
I’m gonna be that guy, I watched the 2hour documentary by PBS about this “easy money policies” and I didn’t understand anything. TH-cam then recommended this video the next day lol
@@Bee-tj8gc If you simply put your money in an etf and hold it for a long time your very unlikely to lose money. If you just leave your money in the bank account inflation will slowly gobble it up.
One of the policies that were snuck in under the radar during COVID was that the US Federal Reserve adopted the "zero reserve ratio" model that Canada has been using since 1992. I haven't read the bill yet, but if it's like Canada, banks cannot go under unless the powers that be decide they want it to happen. There is no federally mandated reserve ratio requirement. Canadian big banks can loan out as much money as they want with no deposits. Smaller banks and credit unions must still hold 10% of loans in reserve.
@@darkionx It's probably a major natural disaster is coming and that's why they don't care, because it won't matter. The rich are hoarding money to build massive underground paradises for them to go after it all goes down
I think you are not explaining it very well because this sounds really stupit, zero reserve? what would happen if everyone pulls out the money at ones there? It sounds like an even bigger problem
@@manyakus8919 ok you have that, but would you not also have that when their would be a 10% mandated? How does saying you do not need to have a reserve be the reason for having the highest reserve? I do not see the connection
Johnny This was awesome, sent to both my kids who are studying business in college! You make a complex subject very simple to understand. And your editing skills are amazing. I love the last clip that was a brilliant ending!
This video was a HUGE improvement from the Inflation one. The one correction I have is that SVB and the other banks that failed were not actually bailed out. They were left to fail, but the depositors were bailed out in the sense that they got all their uninsured money back.
I love the video & how you were able to put it all together comprehensively. One note I have though, is to look into the controversy over the Dodd-Frank regulations. Signed post-2009, it introduced stress tests to be mandated for all banks: basically going through hypotheticals, such as what happens if theres a run on the bank when most of our assets are in federal bonds worth less than before. Then, in 2018 there was a bipartisan push & eventually was signed by Trump the repealing of a provision that required stress tests for banks between $50bn to $250bn: guess where SVB lies? $200B. smells fishy to me, but I understand coincidences happen too. Just thought you'd be interested! Great video :)
And because SVB was using long-term assets to pay short-term investments, any risk assessment would catch this very easily. This only works if you never will be forced to sell the long-term bonds, and they had *A LOT* of these bonds.
Your story telling and ability to keep up on current events is so amazing I can't tell you how much I have learned from just watching your videos keep up the good work
Unfortunately corruption breeds corruption. There is a reason banks and investment companies are one of the top donators to politicians. It's for moments like this after all
There's another side to this argument where deregulation allows new competitors into the market, and the increase in competition ensures that no single bank gets too big and the risk is spread out. If a small-medium bank collapses, the system won't go down with it.
@@James-gm9cs I respect your point of view, it is a valid one. But the priority has to be stability of the system. At the end of the day, an executive's recklessness should not destroy someone's financial wellbeing.
You work for 40yrs to have $1m in your retirement, Meanwhile some people are putting just $10k in a meme coin for just few months and now they are multi millionaires. I pray that anyone who reads this will be successful in life
This is actually an amazing video, I don't usually comment, but the quality of this and level of clarity it has is unmatched. Keep up the great work Johnny!
LMAO. Money doesn't "multiply". He can't withdraw money until the baker repays the loan. So. Say the bank closes its doors. A new bank takes over the oven loan (a bond). The new bank has the oven loan and this guys account balance. In a equilibrium. Stop spreading ignorance. #TH-cam
Regardless of what happens, those execs that paid themselves bonuses NEED to be held accountable, at the very least for their attempt to profit and run.
Johnny was flat out wrong about that. The bonuses were for all employees, and it was for work done from 2022. Nothing about it was out of the ordinary.
@@AndorranStairway It may be part of the regular bonus schedule, but if the work being done in 2022 (and before) contributed to the collapse in 2023, I think a lot of people would still take issue with that. By holding those bonuses hostage when a bank collapses, it ensures a level of accountability by both the employer and the employee. Maybe an employee who knew something was fishy could have called out the company about poor money management practices, but if they have a bonus hanging over their head as a carrot, there's no way they're going to speak up and give themselves the stick by potentially puting themselves out of that money.
These videos take a TON of time to make. The fact that you cranked this one out so quickly is amazing. I think I can speak for everyone when I say THANK YOU!
After a horrendous 2022, shell-stunned financial backers have misfortunes to recover and a lot to consider, as an expansion report and a pile of different information did close to nothing to change assumptions that the Central bank would probably keep climbing interest rates regardless of whether the economy dials back, And that implies more red ink for portfolios for the principal quarter of year 2023. How might I benefit from the ongoing unstable market, I'm currently at a junction choosing if to exchange my $250k security/stock portfolio.
Centre around two key targets. In the first place, remain safeguarded by realising when to offer stocks to cut misfortunes and catch benefits. Second, get ready to benefit when the market turns around. I suggest you look for the direction a representative or monetary consultant.
With the assistance of an investment advisor, I was able to diversify my $401k portfolio across multiple markets, earning over $980k in net profit from high dividend yielding stocks, ETFs, and bonds in just a few short months.
@Mark George She is Julie Anne Hoover my consultant. Since then, she has devoted section and leave attention to safeguards that I have been keeping an eye out for. You can locate information about the chief online, on the off chance that you're interested. I made no regrets about substantially adhering to their exchange strategy.
Odd that Johnny didn’t include how FDIC works. The “I” is for insurance. SVB deposits weren’t paid in full because of some “fund” the banks have for funsies. The insurance is covered by premiums they pay to FDIC to cover their risk. It’s one of the greatest programs put together by FDR and has no burden on normal people. Banks pay insurance to cover their risk. It’s beautiful.
*_"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered."_*_ - Thomas Jefferson_ *_"I sincerely believe that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies, and that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale."_*_ - Thomas Jefferson_
Thomas Jefferson held a deep-seated distrust of banking institutions, particularly central banks, and this distrust was grounded in his views on individual liberty and the sovereignty of the United States government. Jefferson believed that banking establishments posed a serious threat to individual liberties, as they had the power to control the issuance of currency and, in doing so, could manipulate the economy in ways that favored the wealthy and powerful. He argued that banks had the power to create inflation and deflation, which could lead to the impoverishment of the masses and the enrichment of the few. Jefferson believed that the people's property was at risk if banks were allowed to control the issuance of currency, as they could use their power to take advantage of the people and enrich themselves. Moreover, Jefferson was concerned about the potential for central banks to undermine the sovereignty of the United States government. He believed that private central banks issuing public currency would give too much power to a few wealthy individuals, who could then use that power to influence government policy and undermine the principles of democracy. Jefferson argued that the power to issue currency should belong to the people, not private banks, and that allowing private banks to control the issuance of currency was a threat to the sovereignty of the United States government. In summary, Jefferson's views on banking institutions were grounded in his belief in individual liberty and the sovereignty of the United States government. He believed that private banks, particularly central banks, posed a threat to these values, as they had the power to manipulate the economy and potentially influence government policy in ways that favored the wealthy and powerful. Jefferson argued that the power to issue currency should belong to the people, not private banks, in order to safeguard the liberties and sovereignty of the United States.
Shame on you for posting these "quotes" without googling for a couple minutes. They're not real; "deflation" wasn't even a word until the 20th century. Don't just believe the authenticity of "quotes" you find online.
I have watched many videos about SVB collapse since it happened, but only johnny harris can make it look so simple that my grandma can understand it (perfect as usual)!
It is a bit too long for everyone, but it should do. Try searching for Fractional Reserve, there is no need to point specifically to SVB, all banks are at risk, it is a systemic problem and there is no solution within the current hegemonic economy thinking. You need the Austrian school of Economy, anything else will just perpetuate the cycles of bubbles and crashes. The State intervention aggravated the problem, prolonging the distortion that "banks are safe", no they are not, stop giving money to them unless you are willing to say goodbye to it.
I really like that you reference the old macroeconomy since I have been watching you for several years now and it feels like I can understand everything a little bit easier great work Johnny and the crew!
An interesting fact is that the CEO of Silicon Valley Bank sits on the board of Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco. The solution seems obvious, require higher reserve limits for banks. If currently 10%, why not 30 or 40% or even 100%. But moves like this get blocked by the federal reserve because it would essentially reduce their level of control over the economy
Thank you Johnny. I only wish you would also add a “SO WHAT DO WE DO ABOUT IT?” and talk about solutions like non-extractive finance, public banks and postal banking. Would love to see a video that takes us there for your audience to fight for these solutions!!!! Said with love.
They’re doing what we thought they do, what all banks are doing. Just need the right conditions and they failed. The 10% holding is the issue. We’re sacrificing stability for economic growth.
I do not believe it caused the entire country to panic but I will tell you what is. My bank ..Key Bank . Had no money on Friday. No fifties, no hundreds, only small bills that had been deposited . Ok. BUT, there was a huge moving truck. Parked at the side door of the bank, and all the banks files, etc.were being removed....the Bank is closing. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure it out. Yet there was no announcement to depositors....
This guy made a video for a 4 year old. There is no information included that you shouldn’t already know😂 this is why we have a shit system. They rely on people like you to blindly trust…
Buying a stock is easy, but buying the right stock without a time-tested strategy is incredibly hard. Hence what are the best stocks to buy now or put on a watchlist? I’ve been trying to grow my portfolio of $560K for sometime now, my major challenge is not knowing the best entry and exit strategie;s ... I would greatly appreciate any suggestions.
Investing without proper guidance can lead to mistakes and losses. I've learned this from my own experience.If you're new to investing or don't have much time, it's best to get advice from an expert.
A lot of folks downplay the role of advlsors until being burnt by their own emotions. I remember couple summers back, after my lengthy divorce, I needed a good boost to help my business stay afloat, hence I researched for licensed advisors and came across someone of utmost qualifications. She's helped grow my reserve notwithstanding inflation, from $275k to $850k.
How can one find a verifiable financial planner? I would not mind looking up the professional that helped you. I will be retiring in two years and I might need some management on my much larger portfolio. Don't want to take any chances.
Svetlana Sarkisian Chowdhury is the licensed fiduciary I use. Just research the name. You’d find necessary details to work with a correspondence to set up an appointment..
Thank you for this tip. it was easy to find your coach. Did my due diligence on her before scheduling a phone call with her. She seems proficient considering her résumé.
Diversify.... This is the key to success. If the banks main source of money was businesses which rely on a good economy, it's almost inevitable that when the economy is doing bad, so will the banks. They need to make sure that they attract clients from all areas of society to keep a well balanced portfolio.
Yeah, that wouldn't really work. I mean I love the basic ideology of communism, and stuff, but people WILL want to be more equal. That's just how we are wired, and that's why all communist, and socialist countries fell apart, and the ones that are still up and running, calling themselves communist, are just autocracies where the government owns all the wealth, and people are equally starving to death. That's not communism, that's bullshit.
@Johnny Hariss, I recently started watching your videos and God I am so glad I did. Your contents and information you gather to make a 30 mins video with exceptional editing is phenomenal. The information we get are way better than anybody else. keep posting more.. God bless you.
Thank you very much for spelling it out Johnny. You covered points that I’ve been curious about and that nobody is covering. Most news outlets simply regurgitate the information. Thanks to you I now have a complete understanding of the A-to-Z as to how we’ve got here. And I love the graphics. And I love how the style changes from one video to the next. Very dynamic. Two things I don’t understand… How in the world can these executives be allowed to give themselves a bonus right before the government takes them over? Unconscionable. And how can something so foundational to the worlds most powerful nation be controlled, in large part, by something as fluid as human emotion? You’d think there’d be a mechanism to guard against that.
Johnny was wrong about the bonus being given to “executives”. It was part of standard payroll. Don’t you think the regular employees deserve to get paid? Or should they just lose their jobs with no money because the bank’s risk management team screwed up?
Also, the entire stock market is influenced by human emotion. A large chunk of the goods in the world have their value derived from human emotion. It’s been that way for millennia
Two things, One: Money has no morals, it spends the same if it was acquired by stealing from children or from honest socially positive work. Two: The financial system is a game and in any game cheating is allowed. The only thing that stops cheating is codified punishments. Those punishments would have to get written into law by people whos pockets are stuffed with the banks money... Because again, if there's no punishment then all cheating is valid and just part of the game. Capitalism is the stupidest idea ever. Market Socialism keeps money around, but places people over profit. Most americans seem to be confused on which of those two we live under. Hint: It's the one that doesn't give a shit if you live or die.
Ahhhh I love waking up in the morning a couple times a week and seeing that you guys released another amazingly well done video. Always very interesting too. Keep it up!😊
This situation really reminds me of the covid supply chain disruptions. The system works incredibly well when all things are fine, but is not robust, and as soon as a step fails, it REALLY fails!
It’s a couple old sayings: When you put “all your eggs in one basket” your entire ability to survive becomes a “house of cards” propped up on a perception of stability. In 2008 too much money was in mortgages. In 2001 too much money was in the internet. In 1990 too much money was in the Gulf War. In 1980 too much money way in Iran’s oil. It’s always the same story. The bank HAS to play with your money in order to make money…and they always take it too far and exceed the risk you are willing to accept. And they mess up.
"It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning." - Henry Ford
Well our monetary system has made the US far and away the richest most powerful empire in human history. So much so that the world uses our dollar as the international standard. While it's far from perfect it's done a damn good job so far
You basically walked through the reason why we need to have public banks without every realizing that we need to have public banks. Our banking system is pretty far from: "leads us to all work together for the prosperity and growth of society".
Lemme tell you, I live in a country which does have public banks. As well as public healthcare. Some places it may work, where the economy is less unequal perhaps, but here in Brazil it only serves to broaden the abyss between the rich and poor.
Public banks would create worse inflation than private banks. The problem does NOT originate from private banks, it stems from centralized banking (ie central banks). Also, not having 100% reserve requirements.
No. He made absolutely no mathematical sense. @2:55 that money belongs to her. Now she is a predatory lender. The baker will get money from paying customers to repay said loan. He became a predatory lender to the baker. And she became a predatory lender too. He became a predatory lender to a small business. Now his baguettes are more expensive from said interest rates on said loan. This caused inflation on the baguettes. He will become a paying customer to the baker to repay his own loan. In an equilibrium. Now the more expensive baguettes equals the money he made on collecting interest rates on loaning said money. In an equilibrium. Some how. A business owner is in debt. Being charged interest rates. Not only he has to work his but off feeding us baguettes. But support a predatory lender. Is anyone going to protect this business owner from predatory lenders. In a simple understanding. All of us can't save for a one star retirement and all of us receives a two star retirement this is impossible math. Inflation will happen.
Most lucid explanation of what's happening (the core of the problem: the general banking system). No video from any other channel comes close to this... ❤
How about setting up an international lottery; one in which every bank CEO & CFO are the tokens. If their name appears on the 'winning' ticket, they and their families are incinerated. The important question here is: should this lottery be played only once a year or every month? Lottery name: WE DON'T EXIST TO BE SCREWED OVER
"The reality is that we don't have to worry." Spoken like a true economist. Someone who is looking at the system as a whole, but forgetting about the extreme inequality and poverty that this system is, relentlessly, creating.
i'm sure what this middle class white man means is that the middle and upper classes must not worry because the system is not about to collapse. He doesn't look like the type of person who thinks very often about poverty.
@@luckas221a The US government spends hundreds of billions on welfare for poor people. Stop acting like there isn’t any help. The problem is cultural and political, not economic.
I work at a Bank & most of the things Johnny explained are pretty common knowledge among bankers like me. But these things are actually 'under-the-hood' kind of things that everyone should know to make sound financial decisions. Good Video Though! Love you Johnny Harris!
@@JusticeAlways bad. If everyone decides to go cashless Banks will start raising charges on everything citing how everyone is utilizing their services so much and you won't be able to change your ways due to everyone collectively being reliant on them. Use it in moderation . Unless you have way too much money cause then it won't be physically possible to make cash transactions all the time.
Sometimes, I’m so scared of the banking system that I realised that in ‘Mary Poppins’, Michael Banks had a point when he refused to give his tuppence to the bank and wanted to give it to feeding the birds.
@@JusticeAlways Argh, I hope you are not one of the people who are the reason that pigeons shit all over the place. We have perfectly fine parks nearby, but those birds just stay in the little room for the trash, because they are fed seeds by someone twice a day. The little food they forage for is fast food from the bins. What a life. No wonder they are fat af.
The executives at these banks should never be bailed out and be prosecuted to the fullest!!! I also believe it's highway robbery that places of employment force you to have a bank account for direct deposit. If you want to do checks and invest your cash and keep your money to yourself. You should never have to be told what to do with your hard earned money. As long as it remains by legal standards and practices.
Near the end you presented a choice between 'let them fail' or 'bail them out' but the reality it isn't a dichotomy, there is a third option: force them to behave more safely in the first place (such as the dodd frank act), and have punishments for bad behavior's/failures rather than letting those responsible get away with no real consequences even when they fail.
What bad behavior did this bank do that directly caused this bank run? From where I'm sitting this all could have been prevented if fund managers didn't literally tell their entire startup portfolios to withdraw their money at once. Investing a large sum in bonds isn't even known to be a risky investment, it just hit them at the unluckiest time possible.
@@mattsmitt00 everyone and their mom knew the fed would raise rates eventually and this bank did nothing to hedge their bets. Its mismanagement. They also lobbied against their bank facing the same rules as larger banks, claiming they were just a small regional bank.
@@mattsmitt00 They didn't keep sufficient reserves and did so legally because they had previously lobbied the government to allow them to be exempt. They probably engaged in some other bad practices given the recent behavior's of the staff (selling off shares and paying themselves bonuses right before the crash suggests they may have known it was coming.)
@@pahwraith Yes, everyone knew that the Fed would raise their rates. But fewer people bet on a bank run. SVB was not (and is not) the most exposed to the risk of T Bills. In fact, it is not in the top 10. BUT, it does (unfortunately for them) have a high concentration in customers who acted in unison. That is a risk that was far harder (though not impossible) to plan for. (I agree with you about the lobbing for reduced regulations. Obviously, they and all mid sized banks should have been regulated as they were originally after the 2008 crisis).
@osamabinladenssecondgirlfr4241 You are incorrect about the cost of behaving more safely. They don't actually keep cash or gold as deposits. My understanding (although I could be wrong) is that they keep it with the reserve bank or some other bank which can in turn lend it out. The difference being that if they ask for it back they don't potentially loose money because of the urgency.
Based on the video "Why Banks Fail," it is important to understand that the reasons behind bank failures can vary, but some common factors include: Risky lending practices: Banks that lend money to individuals or businesses that are unlikely to repay their loans are at a higher risk of failure. Poor management: Banks that are poorly managed or lack effective oversight can also be at risk of failure. Economic downturns: During times of economic recession or depression, many banks may experience financial difficulties. Fraud or corruption: Banks that engage in fraudulent or corrupt practices, such as money laundering or insider trading, can also face financial and reputational damage. To avoid these risks, banks should prioritize sound risk management practices, maintain adequate capital reserves, and maintain strong regulatory compliance. Additionally, banks should focus on building trust and strong relationships with their customers and stakeholders to ensure long-term success. Overall, it is important for banks to balance risk-taking with prudent management and regulatory compliance to ensure their long-term success and avoid the risks that can lead to failure.
@OsamaBinLadensSecondGirlfriend *the risk they take with not-their-money. I'm personally cool with banks but we need to start chopping heads when one goes under to incompetence. Interest rates were near zero for a while. Any dumbass should have known not to put all one's reserves into low interest rate bonds, particularly when they need liquidity because of the fact that they're a FUCKING BANK.
Nicely done Johnny - with the now famous line from Adam McKay's "The Big Short" about the '08 financial crisis..."people will blame immigrants and poor people." 😏😅
You sir are the only living thing in this universe till now who was successful to make me watch a 21 mins long video related to a bank and not just that but make me understand the whole thing.... I still can't believe that this actually happened.... Boy am i glad to have found you!!!
@@RMSVA Banks don't loan out customers deposits. When they issue loans they are creating new money. The money multiplier model he put further is sophomoric nonsense(although it is still taught in some Econ textbooks). They are banks that don't even accept customer deposits that issue loans.
"When you let banks fail, they will feel the consequences of their actions and behave responsibly in the future." Not unless the *executives* feel the consequences. If the policymakers at the top get to jump out with golden parachutes while everyone else crashes and burns, nothing will change.
WRONG. The fractional reserve rate at the time of this video was 0%. It is still 0% and has been since after the first 2020 lockdown. Which means you can make an infinite amount of money from 1 person's deposit... No-one will probably see my comment but I'll make my own video on it.
First off, huge thumbs up for the awesome work explaining the nuance behing this whole fiasco. I could understand what was going on just fine for myself, but not well enough to explain to a layman like my father. So cheers for that. Now, I wish I could've given a second thumbs up for including the clip from The Big Short at the end. Such an awesome movie that I think everyone (or at least everyone affected by the 2008 crisis) should watch. Also, Steve Carell was absolutely brilliant in it. He wasn't his classic movie self, cheerful and silly and comedic. No, his view was bleak and harrowing and pessimistic and he brought it to the big screen in such an amazing way.
@@AndorranStairway Nobody said today has anything to do with 2008. But it's naive to think that some of the fundamental issues aren't the same. Similar lax money policies, similar reckless gambling from banks, asset bubbles etc. It's not a repeat of history, but it shows that we haven't learned all the lessons we should've. Still, the movie scene shown is as relevant to today as it was to back then.
@@959tolis626 what we’re seeing with the banks have nothing to do with gambling or asset bubbles either. I get that you watched the big short; I did too, but it doesn’t just mean you can hurl out phrases without understanding them.
That part at the end of that movie is so bone-chilling that I watch it not really understanding what happened or anything about banking, but it was amazing
Great content! First video that I’ve watched of yours. I’m not an expert in financials, but my initial thoughts are that we need banks to be bailed out, but we need to see people punished and we need to see the $$ retrieved, lets get those bonuses back.
One other aspect that should be considered is public and institutional confidence that the FDIC will be able to meet the demands of the next bank failure. Like with the 10% deposit requirement, the FDIC collects insurance payments from member banks that is only a small fraction of the total assets covered by the insurance. It also depends on only an extremely small number of bank failures at any one time.
I’m convinced the only way I learn things is when Johnny and his team create this visual storybook for me to follow along. It really helps me understand it more. Visual Learners wya?
You're not a visual learner. There is not such thing. What you are doing is being told the underlying concept with images that match along with the story. You are then able to understand a concept, which, has a kind of narrative to it with how it works. That's why you could explain many different types of reserve banking systems to young people, even children, because of this method of learning through stories and analogies. The "visual" part of visual learner is actually more to do with being able to form a mental image of the concept. You understand the story and so you can recall it through the analogies.
there is no such thing as visual learner. you learn better when more of your senses get involved. that's all. you might have preference for one over the other but the best way to learn is to get as much as yourself involved through ear, eyes, nose, touch etc.
@@karmanderdimdung223 That's actually incorrect. You confusing learning with things that help you to memorize a particular event, e.g. smells and sounds. They aren't inherently the same thing.
Outstanding as always. Johnny makes videos that even my 11yrs old son also gets it - that's how clearly and entertainingly he explains every topic. Can't wait for the one on Antarctica, next in the line I guess.
Saambou bank, in South Africa also went bankrupt because it pushed itself to close to the limit. When rumours started going around that they were close to failure, everybody withdrew their deposits, destroying the bank's cash flow and it went under.
Johnny another banger. Keep up all the good work. You are far and away my favorite journalist. Until I can afford to pay for your subscription I will be liking and sharing everything. Thank you so much for everything you and your team do
The part of "please dont withdraw all your money at once" is what happened at Argentina in 2001. There was a huge crysis and all the people went to the banks, and what happened? Everyone of them was closed and then started something that no one expected: losing all their life savings from night to day. We are still struggling from that period.
![[#2024MAMA] G-DRAGON - 무제(Untitled, 2014)+POWER+HOME SWEET HOME+뱅뱅뱅+FANTASTIC BABY | Mnet 241123 방송](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Ox29z5Nf1Uk/mqdefault.jpg)
Someone on Twitter said it best:
“If taxpayer money bails out a bank, the bank should become publicly owned.
You can’t privatize the profits, but socialize the losses.”
Yes!
Amen to that!
then if you are poor, and the government pays you for that, you can´t get money for work anymore?
The point of some people depositing stuff in the bank is too invest and make a little extra money. If you give that deposit money to a person that doesn’t want to work to get a paycheck then you just loose that money
@@nikolaievans2432 You want people to starve to death?
That "The Big Short" outro though in the end 👌- great stuff, Johnny.
YESS I laughed out at the Irony🤣
It was perfect
They won't blame themselves, that's for sure
oh no its this guy....
love your channel btw
Appreciate the quality of your content
Good
Good
That's indeed very true...the bank is liable to pay back..
Nice
I love him more
The US economy cannot survive without continuous credit and debt creation. The FED will print more money and the average American will go just that much further in debt. Meanwhile, foreigners lust for the greenback. Their economies are in worse condition than the US... if that's even possible. Someone is going to be left holding the bag...
This is precisely why I like having a portfolio coach guide my day-to-day market decisions: with their extensive knowledge of going long and short at the same time, using risk for its asymmetrical upside and laying it off as a hedge against the inevitable downward turns, their skillset makes it nearly impossible for them to underperform. I've been utilizing a portfolio coach for more than two years, and I've made over a million dollars.
It's often true that people underestimate the importance of financial advisors until they feel the negative effects of emotional decision-making. I remember a few summers ago, after a tough divorce, when I needed a boost for my struggling business. I researched and found a licensed advisor who diligently helped grow my reserves despite inflation. Consequently, my reserves increased from $275k to around $750k.
impressive gains! how can I get your advisor please, if you don’t mind me asking? I could really use a help as of now
Her name is Annette Christine Conte can't divulge much. Most likely, the internet should have her basic info, you can research if you like
Thank you for this Pointer. It was easy to find your handler, She seems very proficient and flexible. I booked a call session with her.
I like how these people who tell us "don't make bad decisions with your money, or you will suffer the consequences ." are the same people WE have to bail out when THEY make the bad decisions. Glad we all get to play the same game. SMH
They also tell us to have a 6 month emergency fund while they empty all our bank accounts
Not just Bad decisions. Negligent decisions with Our money.
They also get a huge bonus when they make poor decisions.
in this case not really.. how is buying state bonds when there's a pandemic and war in europe going on a bad decision..? This is so easy for you to say with hindsight. 🤷♂️ people working at banks are doing their job like everyone else..
@@mike496 they are just doing their jobs giving themselves a bunch of bonuses before they take the golden parachute? It’s not about the bonds.
Hey Johnny, one key detail you left out: The FDIC sold all the assets of SVB to pay the account holders, not the shareholders (who were left out to dry). So this is a MASSIVE victory for everyone except the greedy SVB owners. This *is* how the system should work, and we should celebrate that we found a way to punish greed while ensuring people's money is safe.
not just shareholders were left out, the debt holders were also left for loss
Fuck a shareholder, that’s their investment they gotta live with the risks. That seems to be the crux of of why people are so torn on this situation though like everyone can agree in the short term this is the only move that prevents panic because we’re all dumb. I don’t think anyone has the answer yet to whether long term this sets a bad precedent. Frankly I think all of these TH-cam videos about the crisis are exacerbating things. Like at the end of the day these TH-camrs are risking more unrest more panic for the short term attention/profit, they might calm fears too who knows. It’s a slippery ass slope and we’re all a bit guilty here
Just so that people know the whole picture, this bank was considered well run and innovative. In October of 2021 their stock got up to $750. In December of 2022 the stock fell all the way down to $198. Clearly a massive move down and a company in major distress.
It was possible knowing how banks work and the fact that the Fed was gonna have to raise rates, you could have bet against this bank using options and made a absolutely huge return.
Trump helped to cause this disaster by doing away with regulations on regional banks like Silicon Valley. This bank was able to keep its investment portfolio in riskier than necessary bonds and the Federal government had no way of knowing about it.
Wait really? Can you point me to the article? Because that would be extremely significant! That would be almost unheard of in the past half century, I think...
@@monhi64 Good point. We need less incentive to create buzz, overall. On the wonkier side, In general I say fuck a shareholder too, but for the whole system to work at all, you need to give everybody some kind of insurance, but tier it much more in favor of people who were not intending to gamble but were just looking for a place to put their money. But yeah we sometimes forget that money is entirely imaginary, just a symbol of some sort of value we already brought or could bring into the world. The stock market is just a flying ball of imaginary money, everybody tossing some in and pulling some out. But is the stock market totally unnecessary? Well, if you weren't able to trade stocks in companies after investing in their IPO, then your gain or loss would be permanently tied to the success of that company, and people would have a lot less incentive to invest. So you have less investment and therefore, in theory, less innovation across the economy. I think the sweet spot is just treating people fairly according to their stake in things - if you work for a company or have a reasonable amount of money in a bank, then you should have a vote in who is on the board who are responsible for identifying various courses of action or investment, and then you should have a vote about which of those courses to take. There's no reason why large shareholders should be the unquestioned dictators of the private sector (which is guaranteed to penetrate the public sector - siphoning money off a tank filled with the collective wealth of huge numbers of poorer people is a fantastic way to stay rich, after all). If we're going to have a system based on private ownership, then it should be fair - what a brilliant concept! But that's the actual root of many of our problems today.
I am FLOORED by how fast you all made this video happen and how good it is. It's next level. Incredible work that shows an incredible team 💪
You're awesome too ya know :D
What is this, a crossover episode?
Your videos are just as good Cleo!
I hope he's not overworking his team
Its for them to make money back. So its that thing also. And there is a lot of fluff to this VDO. When too many people are talking about something, the action has already passed.
One thing to consider here in comparison to 2008: this time the financial products that led to the SVB failure were "safe" government bonds, then they were (overly) complicated derivatives that lost their complete value due to wrong risk categorizations. So this time, the bank failed because of panic in combination with liquidity problems due to rising interest rates. In 2008 it was rather a system-wide failure fueled by greed. It does not seem to be systemic this time. Thank you for explaining the fractional reserve in detail, that was quite interesting
It still shows a weakness in the system that a company can fail with safe investments. Allowing banks to only have to keep 10% is a massive vulnerability, especially in a bank where 90% of clients have more than the insured amount. The moment there’s a hint of panic people will pull money, doesn’t take much to hit that 10% reserve.
One bank shouldn’t have the potential to trigger potentially hundreds of companies to fail (because their savings are gone overnight) without government help.
I agree, the products are safe but they give a very low return. The problem is the age of maturity, in these cases up to 10 years. So when SVB wanted to sell these they couldn't get all their money back because you could buy “new” bonds with higher returns for the same price. I have a video on my channel explaining this.
No one wanted the bonds SVB was holding so they dropped in value and SVB had to sell them anyway when customers were withdrawing their money.
But like, this isn’t a greed issue though that’s why its different. It’s a good-old-fashion bank run. There is no stoping a bank run but collective trust.
The real lesson here is *diversify your clients.*
There's the example of how Iceland's government dealt with their bank collapse in 2008. As far as I know, they chose to save the clients' money, but not the bank itself, and punished the managers and reckles investors and not the majority of the people. They also adjusted more policies and achieved unexpected economical growth after the whole country has basically bankrupted in the crisis
This is a joke right? Yall looking for solutions without addressing the actual problem of banks lying about how much money they have.
Legalised greed then punishing the greedy is like being upset at people for getting too fat after you opened an all you can eat burger and donut buffet for free.
If I lie about having a million dollars I go to jail, if the bank does it, it's a sign of a fictional economy.
Yall can suck on my credit!
This was the opposite in America
They also gave jail time to those bankers that were guilty of misappropriation.
Meanwhile the ones in the states get a slap on the hand and senior management gets new jobs at new banks
Dont forget ragulation
Didn't Iceland let banks fail, and actually sought to prosecute the bankers? Would've been nice to hear about that approach
In my opinion even if someone saves the bank the bankers still needs to take responsibility.... I mean if there are no repercussions, what's to stop them from doing the same "mistakes" over and over again
same with politicians
SVB has failed. Under what law can you prosecute the bankers? They invested in Treasury bonds in 2020 and 2021, if you knew better then you would be rich enough to not be commenting on YT videos.
But what would SVB need to be prosecuted for? If they met their reserve amount before the run, it was bad decision making but not illegal
@@motog-rocks6544 you're missing out that our economie is based on division of labour. They're getting paid to know better. And they onmly should get bonusses if they know better than other experts in the field, which is the sense of a bonus. I wouldn't let an investment banker set up an respirator at an ICU, which is my job and what I'm getting paid for. And if I fail, I would have to face the consequences. So why managers don't have to?
I've had economics classes in college and I swear you explain many concepts way better than my professors did
You are absolutely right👍
Most college professors don’t teach you how to learn, they just teach you a portion of *what* THEY learned.
Professors are generally hired due to their knowledge and pedigree, not how well they teach
I am in my second year in college, from all professors we had, only one knows how to actually teach and simplifies things. Professors in general don't know how to teach.
feel bad for the lowest paid workers that may be affected, but not CEO's. A lot of them have created this abusive corporate pay structure where they are paid 300 to 400 percent the salary of entry level workers. Most add very little value. They posture and perform with speeches, meetings, and excessive travel to provide the appearance of working hard. It's a con.
Very big con and that is why i have always maintained that people should never have their money in the bank! Get a financial advisor and even make so much more while saving!
@@andreasleonard0 Very true , I diversified my $400K portfolio across multiple market with the aid of an investment advisor, I have been able to generate over $900k in net profit across high dividend yield stocks, ETF and bonds in few months.
My husband and I were following this same trajectory. Last two years, I pulled out my money and invested with her wealth manager. Not catching up with her profits over the years, but at least I earn more
@@kevsmills we’re only just an information away from amassing wealth, I know a lot of folks that made fortunes from the Dotcom crash as well as the 08’ crash and I’ve been looking into similar opportunities in this present market, could this coach that guides yo help?
@@vivianecardoso0 It's run by ISABEL LINDA DUERI, who I learned about and got in touch with thanks to a CNBC interview. Since then, it has served as the point of entry and departure for the games we have emphasized. A search on the internet can be done if tracking is necessary
Hey johny, I actually work in the finance department of a startup that had a bank account on SVB, great video! That being said, I do have a commment on the bailout part. It's important to note that in the SVB case, the bank itself was not bailed out, customers were, so while our startup got access to our cash, the bank was allowed to bankrupt and was taken over by the FDIC (which is a government agency). All of the owners of SVB lost 100% of their invested money, and institutions that had made loans to it lost their money as well, and the FDIC is selling the bank's assets to pay customers back, only if after selling assets there's money still lacking, then the FDIC will use it's money (which is the insurance fund thingy) to pay (only) customers back.
I think the government was smart on this one, interfering with veeeery little (probably none) cost to tax payer, and the bank owners did lose all their money, so that ought to teach them a lesson, bank management did take their bonus but they lost their carreers and only customers were saved in this case
It should be illegal for bankers to give themselves bonuses when bank is failing. I felt exactley the same in 2008 when bankers were giving themselves multi million dollar bonuses directly from government bailouts. It's just stealing
Yeah, like its like rewarding them for their mistakes. Its like a parent let his kid punch another kid, and gave candy to his kid for doing so and not get any consequences. This is really irresponisble and corrupt that banekrs can simply not just get away of it, but actually gain some while tje rest suffer.
Be careful what you ask for. Every law has an unintended consequence.
@@rafaeltorre1643 Undoubtedly, but, if these people had any morals above making more money for themselves it wouldn't be an issue.
That still doesn’t solve the problem. And Doesn’t solve any problem. Is thats an impotent attempt at class warfare.
I think if bailouts have to happen, investigations should automatically be launched by the IRS regarding bonuses and mishandling...and ownership should be seized until the dust settles. Thus ensuring the customers still aren't penalized but the consequences be put on those that earned them.
Yeah not gonna happen
Another trump supporter caught 😌
My thoughts exactly
Normally I'd agree with that customers shouldn't be penalized but SVB wasn't a "traditional" bank and a lot of the money put there was venture capital, who should have known better and had amounts that aren't normally insured with FDIC. If these types of customers get bailed out then it's a free for all for investors to put money into banks that provide unreasonably high intrest and get baile out sooner or later when it becomes unsustainable.
TLDR: we shouldn't bail out customers who do risky things
You're thinking is a bit too rational. Would you mind giving us your address so that we can have some people come and uh.. "talk" to you? Just to set the record straight is all. You understand.
Banks do not depend on people and companies depositing money anymore, that was 50 years ago, maybe even 30 years ago. You don't see the ads about interest anymore, they borrow their money from the central bank (Federal Reserve), and are in practise agents for central banks, nothing more.
I was looking to deposit some $ 100 000, and my bank said that they only pay interest on deposits up to $ 100 000, so I had to choose a small local bank instead. The bank was quite clear: -We are not looking for deposits, we can borrow the money in the central bank at a lower rate, with much less work and hassle, no bank lobbies and such,
I'm surprised how good the quality of this video is, especially when you consider how quickly you were able to put it out. You have the perfect blend of journalism and entertainment with real digestible information.
Ain't lyin
Ever heard of "Captain Crunch"?
As an animator myself, he's someone that you just have to know to meet up with anything sort of deadline
There's a relatively small group of folks that have been expecting something along the lines of SVB crashing for a couple years -- since around the time Archegos ate shit, so perhaps he's been keeping an eye on that DD. Joe coming out of the crypt to comment on it should scare y'all, not because he has anything to do with it, but because he usually keeps on the downlow
I love your consistent balanced approach to education. You give us the facts and offer multiple ways of responding to the facts without actually telling us what we should or shouldn’t do. This is what journalists are for and you are giving the rest journalists an excellent example! Thank you!
His political slant is obvious when you can see the passive aggressive nature of his words. Hardly neutral.
@@TheDesertBlizzard indeed, while Johnny cannot be described as 100% neutral...his politics are quite obvious in his videos..
I would say he's like rather than being 50/50 he's 60/40..
So while he's hardly neutral, he's not heavily biased either.
That's why I watch him, cause I know that most of what I'm getting is factual and entertaining
YES, thank you! I thought is slant was just me. He gets so many tiny details wrong then builds on them. 10% reserve is a lie. And he clearly slants his videos to his political bios. To bad, as his videos like is politics only looks good on the surface.
@@TheStickman419 he’s polite which means his ideas are not outright dismissed. He appears to be able to have a conversation. I’d buy him a beer for his conversation.
His video would 190 degrees if a republican was in office. So many little details are "off"
Massive respect for getting such a polished video out so quickly.
This was pretty well done tbh. I think it would’ve been more complete if it was mentioned that a few years back banks lobbied to have weaker regulation for stress testing (testing to see if they could handle not easy economic situations, like high inflation) and it let them to be not as careful as they should’ve been
SVB and 1st republic actually had reserves that exceeded those potential regulations so that would not have factored in. The reason for lobbying for the weaker regulations was to give small and mid size banks a little more flexibility to compete with bigger banks. That would help them grow and provide competition with larger banks. Several politicians tried to float this as the cause for the disaster but were quickly corrected and that is why it did not gain any traction. A combination of the unintended consequences of the inflation reduction law, poor bank monitoring by the san francisco fed, a very poorly chosen board of directors and poor executive management is what led to it.
Thank you for explaining such a complicated topic and helping us make more sense of it!
Johnny Harris has a talent for that.
He is not always 100% correct, and is sometimes more strict driven in his explanations but if there's one thing no one beats Johnny at, it's narration and breakdowns
I think Johnny did necessarily did enough research on the subject. The taxpayer didn’t bailout svb. Silicon Valley bank has more assets than deposits so the government will just sell those assets slowly until all depositors are paid back. The gov giving everyone their money back even the money that wasn’t insured is basically the gov loaning out money until they sell svb assets. For the executive it’s just a coincidence that the bonus were paid a day before it failed. The bank exec have to let the sec know 3months prior to giving out bonus so it’s just not overnight
You're welcome!
@@koikoi5520 "did necessarily did"
@@koikoi5520 Also poorly researched, since he thinks the reserve rate is 10%. It *not* being 10% is a huge part of the problem.
And I agree, it's not technically a bailout under SVB's circumstances. SVB will cease to exist as an entity, and that ain't no bailout.
Worst thing is that nobody will be held accountable for this mess and all previous ones.
Well, a lot of people lost their jobs, stock and bondholders lost their money. Since they didn't break any laws (regulations on mid sized banks were "rolled back" a few years ago), what accountability do you think is missing?
This does show a need (I think) for increased regulation of financial institutions that will cause systemic impacts. We seemed to only have partially learned that lesson after 2008...
And, like the Catholic Church with problem priests, the perpetrators will just shuffle around from one institution to another.
That would be antisemitic
there isnt much to hold accountable as all banks do this. The fed needs to raise the reserve amount so loan will be more expensive especially to poor people.
Well I'm sure there will be bonuses for those responsible
Banking industry is still as corrupt and inefficient as managing customer funds as ever, not a shock.
Love how tax money keeps propping up a system that is not stable in any way. If capitalism is natural, then it shouldn’t have a crisis every decade.
@@Neptunestef propose a system without crisis cycles
The banks that failed are banks that fell outside of regulatory capital requirements imposed by the Fed on the big banks.
Another way of saying it is that the Fed runs simulations on all of the big banks every year to see what would happen if a certain number of scenarios occurred.
If you fail one of these stress tests, then the Fed requires the bank to liquidate some of their investments to raise capital.
All of the banks should be subject to the same requirements.
The FDIC and the big banks are the ones propping up places like First Republic and SVB, not taxpayers.
Just research the FDIC, it’s pretty straight forward.
Banks pay premiums into an insurance pool, and the pool is used to cover depositors.
All the big banks have passed their stress tests in each year since the financial crisis, which is why you see they are doing just fine right now, and if SVB had been subjected to the same tests, their capital risks would likely have been identified.
Frankly, if the government had just taken a passing glance at SVB’s balance sheet, they would instantly have seen something was wrong.
The corruption surprisingly has not been from the big banks, but from the Community Banking lobby which fought hard and spent a lot of money to be exempted from the big bank requirements.
@@Neptunestef why shouldn't it have a crisis if it's natural? The people in charge at the bank and the politicians both make way more money
The broken part is US politics and regulations
The problem in the US is the missing backlash and penalties for effectively corruption
@@Neptunestef Bailing out a failing company isn't capitalism at all. The US is FAR from a pure capitalist society. Any form of "Government" that relies on any form of a monetary system is never ever ever going to be looking out for the citizens.
I believe your 10,000 just becomes part of the banks 10% reserves... they then create 90,000 out of thin air to loan into the economy in the form of debt. They never actually "loan" depositors money.
It's amazing how this guy keeps making these great videos at this tempo.. Keep it coming!
He's not alone, there's a whole team working on his videos. Gotta credit them too.
He's a drama queen
Nobody cares
He is Woke liberal with work views
@@Didnt_ask69 obviously you do. Since you have commented multiple edgy dumb comments on this channel. 🤡 Clown
As a second year economics student I've studied this bank run and money multiplier effect extensively; but I've never been able to explain it as well as you have here. Thank you!
You're probably not gonna believe a random TH-cam commenter about this, but both this video and what you've been taught about the 'money multiplier' at undergrad are wrong. The Bank of England explain here: www.bankofengland.co.uk/-/media/boe/files/quarterly-bulletin/2014/money-creation-in-the-modern-economy.pdf?la=en&hash=9A8788FD44A62D8BB927123544205CE476E01654
Ha same
LMFAO its funny how people call crypto a ponzi scheme but when banks run a literal ponzi scheme y'all call it "multiplier effect" and praise it🤣🤣🤣
@@alexalex66666 What do you expect from sheep that think they aren't sheep? I am a sheep.
damn now ill step my game up for my next video on this
I think you hit the nail on the head - saving the bank is only good in the short run. In the long run it erodes all senses of accountability and a greater loss overall.
It’s not even good in the short run. I thought capitalism had this all figured out and needs govt to stay out the way??
@@newagain9964 govt needs to intervene constantly or else capitalism destroys all our lives and the entire living world.
Yeah people keep saying letting the banks fail will tank the economy, what they don't realize is constantly bailing them out can also tank the economy. This bailout model is unsustainable. The government doesn't have unlimited money. More bailouts encourages more incompetence and riskiness, which in turn leads to more bank runs, which in turn leads to more drain in government budget.
@@One.Zero.One101 the government does have unlimited money though, the problem is just inflation if they create lots of money to bail out banks.
@@One.Zero.One101when you bail them out the Gov eats the loss when you don’t you eat it.
Thank you so much for your high quality content, is fun, engaging genuine and easy to chew. Keep up the hard work!
There's been updates already. Janet Yellen at her testimony suggested that there wasn't unlimited deposit insurance. Rather it will be determined on a case by case basis depending on if the bank is classified as systemically important. Funds are already moving from small regional banks to the big banks.
This story is deeper as well. You should talk about the easy money policies since 2008 that have exacerbated if not flat out caused each of these financial crises.
Idk why people say you need to invest your money or else it just gets loss to inflation.
Even banks with teams of financial experts lose it to investing at times
I’m gonna be that guy, I watched the 2hour documentary by PBS about this “easy money policies” and I didn’t understand anything. TH-cam then recommended this video the next day lol
@@Bee-tj8gc to avoid losing value in hard earned money to inflation
@@Bee-tj8gc If you simply put your money in an etf and hold it for a long time your very unlikely to lose money. If you just leave your money in the bank account inflation will slowly gobble it up.
@@just4interest996 Coldfusion did a good explainer, too. Well worth a watch.
One of the policies that were snuck in under the radar during COVID was that the US Federal Reserve adopted the "zero reserve ratio" model that Canada has been using since 1992.
I haven't read the bill yet, but if it's like Canada, banks cannot go under unless the powers that be decide they want it to happen. There is no federally mandated reserve ratio requirement.
Canadian big banks can loan out as much money as they want with no deposits. Smaller banks and credit unions must still hold 10% of loans in reserve.
So infinite loan money with no reserve, that's not going to cause a problem in the future, riiiiiiighhtt???
@@darkionx It's probably a major natural disaster is coming and that's why they don't care, because it won't matter. The rich are hoarding money to build massive underground paradises for them to go after it all goes down
I think you are not explaining it very well because this sounds really stupit, zero reserve? what would happen if everyone pulls out the money at ones there? It sounds like an even bigger problem
This is not true, we have the highest reserve ratio in the world.
@@manyakus8919 ok you have that, but would you not also have that when their would be a 10% mandated? How does saying you do not need to have a reserve be the reason for having the highest reserve? I do not see the connection
Johnny
This was awesome, sent to both my kids who are studying business in college! You make a complex subject very simple to understand. And your editing skills are amazing. I love the last clip that was a brilliant ending!
Not sure the Federal Government raises rates I thinks it's the Federal Reserve.
This video was a HUGE improvement from the Inflation one. The one correction I have is that SVB and the other banks that failed were not actually bailed out. They were left to fail, but the depositors were bailed out in the sense that they got all their uninsured money back.
I love the video & how you were able to put it all together comprehensively. One note I have though, is to look into the controversy over the Dodd-Frank regulations. Signed post-2009, it introduced stress tests to be mandated for all banks: basically going through hypotheticals, such as what happens if theres a run on the bank when most of our assets are in federal bonds worth less than before. Then, in 2018 there was a bipartisan push & eventually was signed by Trump the repealing of a provision that required stress tests for banks between $50bn to $250bn: guess where SVB lies? $200B. smells fishy to me, but I understand coincidences happen too. Just thought you'd be interested! Great video :)
Excellent comment.
And because SVB was using long-term assets to pay short-term investments, any risk assessment would catch this very easily.
This only works if you never will be forced to sell the long-term bonds, and they had *A LOT* of these bonds.
Yeah this was mentioned in the WSJ video.
Your story telling and ability to keep up on current events is so amazing I can't tell you how much I have learned from just watching your videos keep up the good work
Financial services continually demand deregulation, cut corners, get in trouble, and demand a bail out. NO.
Unfortunately corruption breeds corruption.
There is a reason banks and investment companies are one of the top donators to politicians.
It's for moments like this after all
There's another side to this argument where deregulation allows new competitors into the market, and the increase in competition ensures that no single bank gets too big and the risk is spread out. If a small-medium bank collapses, the system won't go down with it.
@@James-gm9cs If everyone weren't so corrupt maybe this could work.
@@James-gm9cs I respect your point of view, it is a valid one. But the priority has to be stability of the system. At the end of the day, an executive's recklessness should not destroy someone's financial wellbeing.
@@ZachBobBob exactly. Too many of these systems rely on good faith which we all know is impossible
You work for 40yrs to have $1m in your retirement, Meanwhile some people are putting just $10k in a meme coin for just few months and now they are multi millionaires. I pray that anyone who reads this will be successful in life
This is actually an amazing video, I don't usually comment, but the quality of this and level of clarity it has is unmatched. Keep up the great work Johnny!
LMAO. Money doesn't "multiply".
He can't withdraw money until the baker repays the loan.
So. Say the bank closes its doors. A new bank takes over the oven loan (a bond).
The new bank has the oven loan and this guys account balance. In a equilibrium.
Stop spreading ignorance. #TH-cam
Regardless of what happens, those execs that paid themselves bonuses NEED to be held accountable, at the very least for their attempt to profit and run.
Johnny was flat out wrong about that. The bonuses were for all employees, and it was for work done from 2022. Nothing about it was out of the ordinary.
@@AndorranStairway Can you provide a source for that? Now I'm not sure who to believe.
@@AndorranStairway It may be part of the regular bonus schedule, but if the work being done in 2022 (and before) contributed to the collapse in 2023, I think a lot of people would still take issue with that. By holding those bonuses hostage when a bank collapses, it ensures a level of accountability by both the employer and the employee. Maybe an employee who knew something was fishy could have called out the company about poor money management practices, but if they have a bonus hanging over their head as a carrot, there's no way they're going to speak up and give themselves the stick by potentially puting themselves out of that money.
@@Guru_1092 The source: m.th-cam.com/video/3_lAb8m9MpI/w-d-xo.html
Not a single mention of the banks donating millions to BLM and left wing foundations before their collapse.
These videos take a TON of time to make. The fact that you cranked this one out so quickly is amazing. I think I can speak for everyone when I say THANK YOU!
Not that long if you have a team of editors lol
After a horrendous 2022, shell-stunned financial backers have misfortunes to recover and a lot to consider, as an expansion report and a pile of different information did close to nothing to change assumptions that the Central bank would probably keep climbing interest rates regardless of whether the economy dials back, And that implies more red ink for portfolios for the principal quarter of year 2023. How might I benefit from the ongoing unstable market, I'm currently at a junction choosing if to exchange my $250k security/stock portfolio.
Centre around two key targets. In the first place, remain safeguarded by realising when to offer stocks to cut misfortunes and catch benefits. Second, get ready to benefit when the market turns around. I suggest you look for the direction a representative or monetary consultant.
With the assistance of an investment advisor, I was able to diversify my $401k portfolio across multiple markets, earning over $980k in net profit from high dividend yielding stocks, ETFs, and bonds in just a few short months.
@Mark George She is Julie Anne Hoover my consultant. Since then, she has devoted section and leave attention to safeguards that I have been keeping an eye out for. You can locate information about the chief online, on the off chance that you're interested. I made no regrets about substantially adhering to their exchange strategy.
Odd that Johnny didn’t include how FDIC works. The “I” is for insurance. SVB deposits weren’t paid in full because of some “fund” the banks have for funsies. The insurance is covered by premiums they pay to FDIC to cover their risk. It’s one of the greatest programs put together by FDR and has no burden on normal people. Banks pay insurance to cover their risk. It’s beautiful.
*_"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered."_*_ - Thomas Jefferson_
*_"I sincerely believe that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies, and that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale."_*_ - Thomas Jefferson_
Amazing quote!
Thomas Jefferson held a deep-seated distrust of banking institutions, particularly central banks, and this distrust was grounded in his views on individual liberty and the sovereignty of the United States government.
Jefferson believed that banking establishments posed a serious threat to individual liberties, as they had the power to control the issuance of currency and, in doing so, could manipulate the economy in ways that favored the wealthy and powerful. He argued that banks had the power to create inflation and deflation, which could lead to the impoverishment of the masses and the enrichment of the few. Jefferson believed that the people's property was at risk if banks were allowed to control the issuance of currency, as they could use their power to take advantage of the people and enrich themselves.
Moreover, Jefferson was concerned about the potential for central banks to undermine the sovereignty of the United States government. He believed that private central banks issuing public currency would give too much power to a few wealthy individuals, who could then use that power to influence government policy and undermine the principles of democracy. Jefferson argued that the power to issue currency should belong to the people, not private banks, and that allowing private banks to control the issuance of currency was a threat to the sovereignty of the United States government.
In summary, Jefferson's views on banking institutions were grounded in his belief in individual liberty and the sovereignty of the United States government. He believed that private banks, particularly central banks, posed a threat to these values, as they had the power to manipulate the economy and potentially influence government policy in ways that favored the wealthy and powerful. Jefferson argued that the power to issue currency should belong to the people, not private banks, in order to safeguard the liberties and sovereignty of the United States.
Bro it’s too late for that in California, anyone who financed or refinanced after 2008 owns a lien not land.
@@Bombstark Too bad they're bullshit quotes. Jefferson never said those things.
Shame on you for posting these "quotes" without googling for a couple minutes. They're not real; "deflation" wasn't even a word until the 20th century. Don't just believe the authenticity of "quotes" you find online.
How nice of the bank executives to pay themselves a bunch of bonuses for all the hard work they've done to run it
... into the ground
this is the worst comment i have ever read. it just irks me for some reason. so cringe
and get bailed by gov when they failed, ez $
How nice of them to give us a small cut of the profits they made from using *our* money
@@andreasp3700 As is your reply... How ironic.
All the banks are doing it. Your money isn't safe. Even if the banksters don't steal it, inflation will.
Johnny, your video production and explanations are top-tier. Well done, Sir!
I have watched many videos about SVB collapse since it happened, but only johnny harris can make it look so simple that my grandma can understand it (perfect as usual)!
It is a bit too long for everyone, but it should do. Try searching for Fractional Reserve, there is no need to point specifically to SVB, all banks are at risk, it is a systemic problem and there is no solution within the current hegemonic economy thinking. You need the Austrian school of Economy, anything else will just perpetuate the cycles of bubbles and crashes. The State intervention aggravated the problem, prolonging the distortion that "banks are safe", no they are not, stop giving money to them unless you are willing to say goodbye to it.
Exactly
I really like that you reference the old macroeconomy since I have been watching you for several years now and it feels like I can understand everything a little bit easier great work Johnny and the crew!
An interesting fact is that the CEO of Silicon Valley Bank sits on the board of Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.
The solution seems obvious, require higher reserve limits for banks. If currently 10%, why not 30 or 40% or even 100%. But moves like this get blocked by the federal reserve because it would essentially reduce their level of control over the economy
Nothing will happen to him, he will just laugh at the plebs
Thank you Johnny. I only wish you would also add a “SO WHAT DO WE DO ABOUT IT?” and talk about solutions like non-extractive finance, public banks and postal banking. Would love to see a video that takes us there for your audience to fight for these solutions!!!! Said with love.
Bitcoin
@@HoneybeeHollowGardens trading one fiat currency for an even more obtuse fiat currency is not the answer.
It's amazing that a single bank in California failing to do the one thing we thought they did made the entire country turn into panic mode
Its because our entire system is a house of cards.
They’re doing what we thought they do, what all banks are doing. Just need the right conditions and they failed. The 10% holding is the issue. We’re sacrificing stability for economic growth.
Hold on to your shorts when Credit Suisse goes under.
I do not believe it caused the entire country to panic but I will tell you what is.
My bank ..Key Bank . Had no money on Friday. No fifties, no hundreds, only small bills that had been deposited . Ok.
BUT, there was a huge moving truck. Parked at the side door of the bank, and all the banks files, etc.were being removed....the Bank is closing. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure it out. Yet there was no announcement to depositors....
That panic is why the Federal reserve exist in the first place.
Always learning something new with your videos 🙌🏼
This guy made a video for a 4 year old. There is no information included that you shouldn’t already know😂 this is why we have a shit system. They rely on people like you to blindly trust…
Say something about Silicon Valley edit : thank you for one like
Also his opinion that “we have nothing to worry about” is about the dumbest shit I’ve ever heard.
Did it teach you to join communism??? These collapses do NOT HAVE to happen
But everyone should know what banks do. It's nothing new.
Buying a stock is easy, but buying the right stock without a time-tested strategy is incredibly hard. Hence what are the best stocks to buy now or put on a watchlist? I’ve been trying to grow my portfolio of $560K for sometime now, my major challenge is not knowing the best entry and exit strategie;s ... I would greatly appreciate any suggestions.
Investing without proper guidance can lead to mistakes and losses. I've learned this from my own experience.If you're new to investing or don't have much time, it's best to get advice from an expert.
A lot of folks downplay the role of advlsors until being burnt by their own emotions. I remember couple summers back, after my lengthy divorce, I needed a good boost to help my business stay afloat, hence I researched for licensed advisors and came across someone of utmost qualifications. She's helped grow my reserve notwithstanding inflation, from $275k to $850k.
How can one find a verifiable financial planner? I would not mind looking up the professional that helped you. I will be retiring in two years and I might need some management on my much larger portfolio. Don't want to take any chances.
Svetlana Sarkisian Chowdhury is the licensed fiduciary I use. Just research the name. You’d find necessary details to work with a correspondence to set up an appointment..
Thank you for this tip. it was easy to find your coach. Did my due diligence on her before scheduling a phone call with her. She seems proficient considering her résumé.
Diversify.... This is the key to success. If the banks main source of money was businesses which rely on a good economy, it's almost inevitable that when the economy is doing bad, so will the banks. They need to make sure that they attract clients from all areas of society to keep a well balanced portfolio.
Privatize the gains, socialize the losses. Government for the rich.
Time to nationalize everything
Yeah, that wouldn't really work. I mean I love the basic ideology of communism, and stuff, but people WILL want to be more equal. That's just how we are wired, and that's why all communist, and socialist countries fell apart, and the ones that are still up and running, calling themselves communist, are just autocracies where the government owns all the wealth, and people are equally starving to death. That's not communism, that's bullshit.
Props to you for making an amazing video in record time! People need to hear this stuff!
@Johnny Hariss, I recently started watching your videos and God I am so glad I did. Your contents and information you gather to make a 30 mins video with exceptional editing is phenomenal. The information we get are way better than anybody else. keep posting more.. God bless you.
Thank you very much for spelling it out Johnny. You covered points that I’ve been curious about and that nobody is covering. Most news outlets simply regurgitate the information. Thanks to you I now have a complete understanding of the A-to-Z as to how we’ve got here. And I love the graphics. And I love how the style changes from one video to the next. Very dynamic. Two things I don’t understand… How in the world can these executives be allowed to give themselves a bonus right before the government takes them over? Unconscionable. And how can something so foundational to the worlds most powerful nation be controlled, in large part, by something as fluid as human emotion? You’d think there’d be a mechanism to guard against that.
Johnny was wrong about the bonus being given to “executives”. It was part of standard payroll. Don’t you think the regular employees deserve to get paid? Or should they just lose their jobs with no money because the bank’s risk management team screwed up?
Also, the entire stock market is influenced by human emotion. A large chunk of the goods in the world have their value derived from human emotion. It’s been that way for millennia
@TH-camContentCreator01 he is a scammer be careful
Two things,
One: Money has no morals, it spends the same if it was acquired by stealing from children or from honest socially positive work.
Two: The financial system is a game and in any game cheating is allowed. The only thing that stops cheating is codified punishments. Those punishments would have to get written into law by people whos pockets are stuffed with the banks money... Because again, if there's no punishment then all cheating is valid and just part of the game.
Capitalism is the stupidest idea ever. Market Socialism keeps money around, but places people over profit. Most americans seem to be confused on which of those two we live under. Hint: It's the one that doesn't give a shit if you live or die.
Do you really consider “Bank Executives” “regular employees”?
Ahhhh I love waking up in the morning a couple times a week and seeing that you guys released another amazingly well done video. Always very interesting too. Keep it up!😊
Johnny's videos are way to dynamic and entertaining to miss.
This situation really reminds me of the covid supply chain disruptions. The system works incredibly well when all things are fine, but is not robust, and as soon as a step fails, it REALLY fails!
Just like the new Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) rolling out this year.
It’s a couple old sayings:
When you put “all your eggs in one basket” your entire ability to survive becomes a “house of cards” propped up on a perception of stability.
In 2008 too much money was in mortgages.
In 2001 too much money was in the internet.
In 1990 too much money was in the Gulf War.
In 1980 too much money way in Iran’s oil.
It’s always the same story.
The bank HAS to play with your money in order to make money…and they always take it too far and exceed the risk you are willing to accept.
And they mess up.
Waiting for banning TikTok.
It's done buddy 🎉
It's done buddy 🎉
"It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning." - Henry Ford
Well our monetary system has made the US far and away the richest most powerful empire in human history. So much so that the world uses our dollar as the international standard. While it's far from perfect it's done a damn good job so far
You basically walked through the reason why we need to have public banks without every realizing that we need to have public banks. Our banking system is pretty far from: "leads us to all work together for the prosperity and growth of society".
Lemme tell you, I live in a country which does have public banks. As well as public healthcare. Some places it may work, where the economy is less unequal perhaps, but here in Brazil it only serves to broaden the abyss between the rich and poor.
@@luckas221a i get it both pros and cons, and atleast they won't crash
Public banks are the worst. Try banking in India. Many of them don't even have computers.
They treat you like trash. That is why I prefer private banks.
Public banks would create worse inflation than private banks. The problem does NOT originate from private banks, it stems from centralized banking (ie central banks). Also, not having 100% reserve requirements.
Johnny always the man to explain everything in layman terms for common folks to digest, keep up the good work !
Lies again? Bang Bros Dallas Bull S**t
No. He made absolutely no mathematical sense.
@2:55 that money belongs to her. Now she is a predatory lender.
The baker will get money from paying customers to repay said loan.
He became a predatory lender to the baker. And she became a predatory lender too.
He became a predatory lender to a small business. Now his baguettes are more expensive from said interest rates on said loan. This caused inflation on the baguettes.
He will become a paying customer to the baker to repay his own loan. In an equilibrium.
Now the more expensive baguettes equals the money he made on collecting interest rates on loaning said money. In an equilibrium.
Some how. A business owner is in debt. Being charged interest rates.
Not only he has to work his but off feeding us baguettes. But support a predatory lender.
Is anyone going to protect this business owner from predatory lenders.
In a simple understanding. All of us can't save for a one star retirement and all of us receives a two star retirement this is impossible math. Inflation will happen.
@@noel7777noel thank you!
This video is very inaccurate! Watch "97% Owned" on TH-cam!
Most lucid explanation of what's happening (the core of the problem: the general banking system). No video from any other channel comes close to this... ❤
If the execs who received those bonuses at the final hour don't at the very least face criminal charges I've lost all faith in our justice system
How about setting up an international lottery; one in which every bank CEO & CFO are the tokens. If their name appears on the 'winning' ticket, they and their families are incinerated. The important question here is: should this lottery be played only once a year or every month? Lottery name: WE DON'T EXIST TO BE SCREWED OVER
u just said it urself, they recieved bonuses in the past, they recieved it now and will recieve in the future
The CEO also sold stock a week before. And whereas most bank exec stock sales are declared months in advance this was not.
Johnny I love how balanced your content is and how you strive to keep growing. Keep it up. Definitely one of the best creators on TH-cam
"The reality is that we don't have to worry." Spoken like a true economist. Someone who is looking at the system as a whole, but forgetting about the extreme inequality and poverty that this system is, relentlessly, creating.
Even then, as a “whole” to an establishment economists means the owner class is doing fine.
Yeah this video must be sponsored by the World Economic forum, right?
i'm sure what this middle class white man means is that the middle and upper classes must not worry because the system is not about to collapse. He doesn't look like the type of person who thinks very often about poverty.
@@luckas221a The US government spends hundreds of billions on welfare for poor people. Stop acting like there isn’t any help. The problem is cultural and political, not economic.
The economic system is the problem that keeps perpetuating it.
Your visualization of concepts makes viewers smarter. Wish I had this in my college days. Maybe my next lifetime. 🙏🏼
Johnny, please do more economic content! You make it so easy to understand
His video in inflation was one of the funniest things I have ever seen...
I work at a Bank & most of the things Johnny explained are pretty common knowledge among bankers like me. But these things are actually 'under-the-hood' kind of things that everyone should know to make sound financial decisions. Good Video Though! Love you Johnny Harris!
Question: Is going cashless a good idea...or a bad idea?
@@JusticeAlways good and bad.. don't leave ur entire money in bank.. invest in gold... Property.. good company stocks.. and hope for the best..
@@shahnawazansari119 ultimately it's all hope
@@JusticeAlways bad. If everyone decides to go cashless Banks will start raising charges on everything citing how everyone is utilizing their services so much and you won't be able to change your ways due to everyone collectively being reliant on them.
Use it in moderation . Unless you have way too much money cause then it won't be physically possible to make cash transactions all the time.
That’s scary to hear
Amazing how these videos are becoming more frequent! Love your work Johnny =)
Bro, This Man changes his videos' title every second
Sometimes, I’m so scared of the banking system that I realised that in ‘Mary Poppins’, Michael Banks had a point when he refused to give his tuppence to the bank and wanted to give it to feeding the birds.
I give the birds $28 /month. That's how much a 25 lb bag of sunflower seeds cost. (Actually $30...includes the $2 sales tax).
@@JusticeAlways Argh, I hope you are not one of the people who are the reason that pigeons shit all over the place. We have perfectly fine parks nearby, but those birds just stay in the little room for the trash, because they are fed seeds by someone twice a day. The little food they forage for is fast food from the bins. What a life. No wonder they are fat af.
The executives at these banks should never be bailed out and be prosecuted to the fullest!!! I also believe it's highway robbery that places of employment force you to have a bank account for direct deposit. If you want to do checks and invest your cash and keep your money to yourself. You should never have to be told what to do with your hard earned money. As long as it remains by legal standards and practices.
Near the end you presented a choice between 'let them fail' or 'bail them out' but the reality it isn't a dichotomy, there is a third option: force them to behave more safely in the first place (such as the dodd frank act), and have punishments for bad behavior's/failures rather than letting those responsible get away with no real consequences even when they fail.
What bad behavior did this bank do that directly caused this bank run?
From where I'm sitting this all could have been prevented if fund managers didn't literally tell their entire startup portfolios to withdraw their money at once.
Investing a large sum in bonds isn't even known to be a risky investment, it just hit them at the unluckiest time possible.
@@mattsmitt00 everyone and their mom knew the fed would raise rates eventually and this bank did nothing to hedge their bets.
Its mismanagement. They also lobbied against their bank facing the same rules as larger banks, claiming they were just a small regional bank.
@@mattsmitt00 They didn't keep sufficient reserves and did so legally because they had previously lobbied the government to allow them to be exempt. They probably engaged in some other bad practices given the recent behavior's of the staff (selling off shares and paying themselves bonuses right before the crash suggests they may have known it was coming.)
@@pahwraith Yes, everyone knew that the Fed would raise their rates. But fewer people bet on a bank run.
SVB was not (and is not) the most exposed to the risk of T Bills. In fact, it is not in the top 10. BUT, it does (unfortunately for them) have a high concentration in customers who acted in unison. That is a risk that was far harder (though not impossible) to plan for.
(I agree with you about the lobbing for reduced regulations. Obviously, they and all mid sized banks should have been regulated as they were originally after the 2008 crisis).
@osamabinladenssecondgirlfr4241 You are incorrect about the cost of behaving more safely. They don't actually keep cash or gold as deposits. My understanding (although I could be wrong) is that they keep it with the reserve bank or some other bank which can in turn lend it out. The difference being that if they ask for it back they don't potentially loose money because of the urgency.
Based on the video "Why Banks Fail," it is important to understand that the reasons behind bank failures can vary, but some common factors include:
Risky lending practices: Banks that lend money to individuals or businesses that are unlikely to repay their loans are at a higher risk of failure.
Poor management: Banks that are poorly managed or lack effective oversight can also be at risk of failure.
Economic downturns: During times of economic recession or depression, many banks may experience financial difficulties.
Fraud or corruption: Banks that engage in fraudulent or corrupt practices, such as money laundering or insider trading, can also face financial and reputational damage.
To avoid these risks, banks should prioritize sound risk management practices, maintain adequate capital reserves, and maintain strong regulatory compliance. Additionally, banks should focus on building trust and strong relationships with their customers and stakeholders to ensure long-term success.
Overall, it is important for banks to balance risk-taking with prudent management and regulatory compliance to ensure their long-term success and avoid the risks that can lead to failure.
Woo! Yes, a very safe and secure systems which has only failed multiple times and continues to do so
@OsamaBinLadensSecondGirlfriend *the risk they take with not-their-money.
I'm personally cool with banks but we need to start chopping heads when one goes under to incompetence. Interest rates were near zero for a while. Any dumbass should have known not to put all one's reserves into low interest rate bonds, particularly when they need liquidity because of the fact that they're a FUCKING BANK.
Nicely done Johnny - with the now famous line from Adam McKay's "The Big Short" about the '08 financial crisis..."people will blame immigrants and poor people." 😏😅
That's what they, in the business, call foreshadowing
You sir are the only living thing in this universe till now who was successful to make me watch a 21 mins long video related to a bank and not just that but make me understand the whole thing.... I still can't believe that this actually happened.... Boy am i glad to have found you!!!
I work in finance - you did a great job summarizing this at an approachable level.
The fact that we get free videos from Johnny Harris on TH-cam is priceless 🙏🙏🙏
This is one of the best explained videos you've ever made. Exceptional work.
It's completely wrong.
@@craigkourtu6164 Then pardon my ignorance. Can you explain it correctly and set the record straight?
@@RMSVA Banks don't loan out customers deposits. When they issue loans they are creating new money. The money multiplier model he put further is sophomoric nonsense(although it is still taught in some Econ textbooks). They are banks that don't even accept customer deposits that issue loans.
Johnny,Please can you do the same video but also explain CreditSuisse UBS, and a mention of the other US banks that failed in line with SVB.
The fact that this is still legal somehow is astounding. Great video as always Johnny!
The fact that we get free videos on TH-cam by Johnny Harris is truly a gift. 👍👍👍
"When you let banks fail, they will feel the consequences of their actions and behave responsibly in the future."
Not unless the *executives* feel the consequences. If the policymakers at the top get to jump out with golden parachutes while everyone else crashes and burns, nothing will change.
WRONG. The fractional reserve rate at the time of this video was 0%. It is still 0% and has been since after the first 2020 lockdown. Which means you can make an infinite amount of money from 1 person's deposit... No-one will probably see my comment but I'll make my own video on it.
Johnny, I love your videos on economy. They are very educational!
First off, huge thumbs up for the awesome work explaining the nuance behing this whole fiasco. I could understand what was going on just fine for myself, but not well enough to explain to a layman like my father. So cheers for that. Now, I wish I could've given a second thumbs up for including the clip from The Big Short at the end. Such an awesome movie that I think everyone (or at least everyone affected by the 2008 crisis) should watch. Also, Steve Carell was absolutely brilliant in it. He wasn't his classic movie self, cheerful and silly and comedic. No, his view was bleak and harrowing and pessimistic and he brought it to the big screen in such an amazing way.
Well said!
Good movie, although the cause of the 2008 financial crisis has pretty much nothing to do with what we’re seeing today.
@@AndorranStairway Nobody said today has anything to do with 2008. But it's naive to think that some of the fundamental issues aren't the same. Similar lax money policies, similar reckless gambling from banks, asset bubbles etc. It's not a repeat of history, but it shows that we haven't learned all the lessons we should've. Still, the movie scene shown is as relevant to today as it was to back then.
@@959tolis626 what we’re seeing with the banks have nothing to do with gambling or asset bubbles either. I get that you watched the big short; I did too, but it doesn’t just mean you can hurl out phrases without understanding them.
Your so good at explaining these confusing things like I actually get it now! Thanks 😊
That part at the end of that movie is so bone-chilling that I watch it not really understanding what happened or anything about banking, but it was amazing
Great content! First video that I’ve watched of yours. I’m not an expert in financials, but my initial thoughts are that we need banks to be bailed out, but we need to see people punished and we need to see the $$ retrieved, lets get those bonuses back.
One other aspect that should be considered is public and institutional confidence that the FDIC will be able to meet the demands of the next bank failure. Like with the 10% deposit requirement, the FDIC collects insurance payments from member banks that is only a small fraction of the total assets covered by the insurance. It also depends on only an extremely small number of bank failures at any one time.
I’m convinced the only way I learn things is when Johnny and his team create this visual storybook for me to follow along. It really helps me understand it more. Visual Learners wya?
Yeah. The way the team presents stories is very accessible and easy to learn.
There's no such thing as a "visual learner". That is a pseudoscience that has stayed alive somehow, despite scientific evidence to the contrary
You're not a visual learner. There is not such thing. What you are doing is being told the underlying concept with images that match along with the story. You are then able to understand a concept, which, has a kind of narrative to it with how it works. That's why you could explain many different types of reserve banking systems to young people, even children, because of this method of learning through stories and analogies.
The "visual" part of visual learner is actually more to do with being able to form a mental image of the concept. You understand the story and so you can recall it through the analogies.
there is no such thing as visual learner. you learn better when more of your senses get involved. that's all. you might have preference for one over the other but the best way to learn is to get as much as yourself involved through ear, eyes, nose, touch etc.
@@karmanderdimdung223 That's actually incorrect. You confusing learning with things that help you to memorize a particular event, e.g. smells and sounds.
They aren't inherently the same thing.
ANOTHER great video!
Outstanding as always. Johnny makes videos that even my 11yrs old son also gets it - that's how clearly and entertainingly he explains every topic.
Can't wait for the one on Antarctica, next in the line I guess.
True,
Show your son "97% Owned", it's better and much more accurate!
Thanks for the swift reporting Johnny, staying informed on how everything works helps keep us calm 👍🏻
Johnny, Parjanya (your editor) is brilliant! You sure have some of the most talented people on your team.
Saambou bank, in South Africa also went bankrupt because it pushed itself to close to the limit. When rumours started going around that they were close to failure, everybody withdrew their deposits, destroying the bank's cash flow and it went under.
Johnny another banger. Keep up all the good work. You are far and away my favorite journalist. Until I can afford to pay for your subscription I will be liking and sharing everything. Thank you so much for everything you and your team do
The part of "please dont withdraw all your money at once" is what happened at Argentina in 2001. There was a huge crysis and all the people went to the banks, and what happened? Everyone of them was closed and then started something that no one expected: losing all their life savings from night to day.
We are still struggling from that period.