Silicon Valley Bank, savers always lose out
Yet another bank in default? Certainly and certainly will not be the last. In the banking sector we find various specializations, for example: there are those who only deal with savings management, those who still work as a commercial bank and then many other banks have entered “new” sectors such as cryptocurrencies, derivatives, etc. The question, however, is always the same: why must the “poor” saver always lose out?
The question is certainly legitimate, but what perplexes, every time a bank sinks, are the excusatio which, from time to time, find many admirers acting as a sounding board. As usual, savings are betrayed by whoever becomes the Michael Milken on duty (inventor of “junk bonds or Junk Bonds), or the Gordon Gekko or the wolf of Wall Streetor the inventors and “peddlers” of derivatives (subprime mortgages, CDOs, CDSs, etc.), clear examples of how to do it money and quickly, to then unload the full weight of the RISKIO on the saver who, being hammered by advertising and by the various word-of-mouth, to enter the “tour of easy profits” has on his side the fault of be greedy and don’t pass for the only fool in the world who is not part of the “ox park”.
In addition to this, a good share of responsibility also has the supervisory bodies, in the USA the SEC, in Europe the European Banking Authority (EBA), the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) and in Italy the CONSOBand just to elicit a small smile, perhaps a little bitter, I’ll tell you an anecdote from the 2000s: the SECwithin it, he discovered that various market monitors, instead of monitoring transactions, watched red light films, receiving a salary of $120,000 a year.
It seems to me that the time has come to launch a massive information campaign on savings and on who owns and manages them, which should involve everyone starting from elementary school up to Popular Universities. Then, just to insist, it would be good for those who administer banks and savings [In economia, la rinuncia a consumare una parte del reddito netto; anche, la parte di beni non consumati e il loro equivalente monetario: r. reale (o in natura); r. monetario] who has already been taxed, should have an insurance policy for any “accidents” that there may be during the course of his mandate and if the cars have it I don’t see why it shouldn’t be made mandatory for bank administrators.
To conclude, I would really like that what is not regulated suffered immediate taxation and did not find people who say that certain “products”, classified in the savings market: “are immoral, but not illegal” because in this way we give rise to the crook of the moment to plunder savers by demonstrating that we are in the presence of unregulated markets and poorly monitored where sharks ferociously attack sardines only because they are in schools and are easier to catch. Sorry for the outburst, but “quanno ce vò, ce vò” (Trilussa).
Subscribe to the newsletter