[mayukh42]

Originally Posted by theabstractmind

I think in general this greed to create Monopoly which is largely a form of feudalism is an important from the West.
...
Can't agree with such monopolistic ideology.

+1

Monopoly makes money for the venture capitalists. Mr. Thiel, co-founder of Paypal and Ebay, is therefore a proponent of it. But this money is sometimes at the expense of a full industry taking away jobs of several people who had been self-sufficient and content.

And it is not that consumers save enough money in the long run, including the fact that we often spend more if it is convenient. Our money simply changes hands from the small traders earlier to the venture capitalists now. The traders lose their quality of life, VCs buy a yacht, and consumers have the false illusion of "saving" money due to innovation.

Originally Posted by theabstractmind

Even in an internal setup, I haven't appreciated that intense competition which often creates hostility

I agree. Competitive environment to increase efficiency is one thing, but just like anything else, too much of it induces stress and eats at the very efficiency it aimed to improve. So it is counter-productive beyond a certain limit.

[One]

Originally Posted by theabstractmind

I think in general this greed to create Monopoly which is largely a form of feudalism is an important from the West.

Interesting thought.

For me, monopolism is an just another state of ambition or excellence or both.

I would probably not attribute it
1. As being a feature of corporations only
2. As an import of West

A very basic example - in a classroom, I have seen a very small set of kids run away with all the prizes. Even though I see some resentment from other parents, the truth is, these set of kids are super impressive in the areas where competitions are conducted. This is an example of (1.) above. This held true even when I was in school - there was always an all rounder who excelled and had a "monopoly" over competitions. I would take this case as a free market scenario, where no rules/ bribes/ corruption existed in favour of a child, it is pure merit causing pure monopoly.

Again, an example for (2.) completely unrelated to West or capitalism but related to monopolistic behaviour - the princely states or monarchs were always looking to establish complete control (and extend it) wherever possible.

Anecdotally or historically, I have not come across any areas where a movement (intentional or not) towards monopolism is not a natural process. This is true even for tribal communities which did not have exposure to modern forms of commerce.

The West has a form of capitalism which might not be apt for us, but it is also the path of least resistance which is why a different form of capitalism has not intrinsically taken birth here.

There are a few models (Open Source software, Wikipedia, forums etc) which the intention has been inherently to avoid a monopolistic state but anyone involved in these areas will know how these also tend towards monopoly either in control or in structure without which reliable, predictable outcomes for masses has not been so far possible.

The reason for providing examples not restricted to Commerce/ Capitalism is just to indicate that monopoly is a state/ stage which is natural. Whether it is good/ bad and to what degree is matter for another topic though.

[prajwalmr62]

Originally Posted by am1m

That was my point. Why does society/the economic system we've built compensate these vital roles so badly? What will it take to correct that? (Not sure if schadenfreude at IT layoffs is the answer.)

Because your "salary" depends on how hard it is to replace you, and how much money can be made with your produce. Also, you are comparing apples to oranges here.

Even if you consider 1$ from each guy who consumes your produce, Google makes a cool billion dollars compared to a typical Indian farmer who produces 1 or 2 tons of rice a year. Assuming a person consumes just 30kg a year, that's 67 people a year, which means 67$.

An "average farmer" in other developed countries have ~5000 hectares of land for cultivation, and have very few direct employees. This farmer earns far far better (even more than software engineers in those countries) and has very very less people to split the gains.

Compare this to our Indian farmers, who usually have very small land. And this is just a downward spiral. Because of this, we don't have money for automation, which means less automation ==> need more people for same job ==> less money per person ==> no money for advanced equipment.

India's software engineers salaries are comparable to European salaries, and nowhere near to US counterparts. It is not "high" for advanced economies (where the goods are sold). It is unimaginable for an Indian farmer, who is form a very low economy, because the value creation from the little land we individually own is very very less.

[am1m]

Originally Posted by prajwalmr62

Also, you are comparing apples to oranges here.

That was also the point I was trying to make.

There are economic system reasons why IT salaries are so high. Justified or not, it is what it is.

But are high IT salaries to blame for the other professions' salaries being much lower? Unfortunately it always ends up as an emotional argument.

(Also used by auto drivers in Bangalore: "You IT guys make so much, why not pay double/triple meter?! Then it becomes: "You IT guys pay double meter, why spoil it for the rest of Bangalore?!")

[redcruiser]

Originally Posted by deehunk

A SEMI company laid off 7% of its global workforce, 35% of them were contractors working in Bangalore. A highly revered person globally in the SEMI industry too was not spared.

Is it Intel that you are alluding to.

[vinit.merchant]

Originally Posted by SnS_12

But still the SVB bank was bailed out and the govt says its not from tax payers money. So where is the money coming from?

They will most probably just print it, and fuel inflation even further.
Most often they have resorted to printing dough to come out of difficult situations, but may not be apt in its present predicament and will back fire.

[AutoDowntowner]

Originally Posted by speedmiester

More bloodbath and pain is expected in the coming weeks and month post the SVB debacle. This was the go to bank for many startups including Indian startups with presense in US.

SVBs banking systems are down. Lot of companies are facing issues for accessing their money.
Any amount over $250K is at risk.

SVB crisis: Indian startups receive jolt after regulators take over bank

I feel so worried about present situation since I am working in US. Now the giant Credit Suisse also defaulted, if I am not wrong. but I am also happy to see the sleeping Lion (India) is finally awaken and is doing so well on many fronts.
Since 2009 (when I was just 25 year old) I am travelling to many places abroad & I can see a significant, better difference about the image of India. I feel so proud now.
By the way this Sleeping Lion is a serious term used for India on international stage & a friend of mine who is MBA finance & doing PhD now explained me this term.

[Latheesh]

Originally Posted by redcruiser

Is it Intel that you are alluding to.

May be Applied Materials/Lam Research.

[speedmiester]

Originally Posted by vinit.merchant

They will most probably just print it, and fuel inflation even further.
Most often they have resorted to printing dough to come out of difficult situations, but may not be apt in its present predicament and will back fire.

The ones affected by SVB were all rich and connected, there was some very frantic activity across US and many other countries to effect the US govt into ensuring liquidity for the depositors of SVB. Close to 60% of US startups had deposits in SVB and many overseas startups prefer to work with SVB as they were the only one to take deposit without SSN.

The below article highlights only a part of the action that went on behind the curtains over the last weekend.

The Incredible Tantrum Venture Capitalists Threw Over Silicon Valley Bank

For the time being, the issue is hurriedly sorted.
But mark my words, just the way the events of 2020 and 2021 lead to the downfall of SVB, this event will have a larger repercussion down the lane.

Originally Posted by AutoDowntowner

I feel so worried about present situation since I am working in US. Now the giant Credit Suisse also defaulted, if I am not wrong. but I am also happy to see the sleeping Lion (India) is finally awaken and is doing so well on many fronts.
Since 2009 (when I was just 25 year old) I am travelling to many places abroad & I can see a significant, better difference about the image of India. I feel so proud now.
By the way this Sleeping Lion is a serious term used for India on international stage & a friend of mine who is MBA finance & doing PhD now explained me this term.

You worry is not without substance, the market sentiment is negative throughout. Just today I got an email from an US head hunter exploring a corporate role since the hiring freeze has hurt his business badly. Mind you, he is not a novice, he has over 20 years of experience in the industry.

India is growing and will continue to grow. Our major challenge is that most of our startups/industry are service oriented, this needs to change. We need to focus on building world class products, this is essential to ensure a robust growth and to become market leader.

[deehunk]

@Lateesh, the latter as of January 2023. I worked at both these places. They are very stringent and track internal matters discussed on public forums.

[tsk1979]

Originally Posted by SnS_12

FDIC as per their own website has only a reserve ratio of 1.26% or $125 billion. This is not enough even to save SVB bank, which had assets under management of over $200 billion.

But still the SVB bank was bailed out and the govt says its not from tax payers money. So where is the money coming from?

Attachment 2429482

SVB bank bailed out? Nope, the investors lost money.

What happened is that depositers did not lose money. Once upon a time depositors lost money, and that was the great depression of 1939. I think since then there has been only one instance after 1939 where depositors lost money. I don't think Fed will ever allow that to happen.

Now where the money comes from. Well not from taxpayers but from fees.

Last but not the least, its not that SVB does not have the assets to pay off the depositors. The problem is that the bonds are long term and interest rates went up.

If US treasury gives 4% and your savings bank gives 0.2% people are going to be withdrawing money. I am assuming when you factor in the assets and losses from interest rate, FDIC has enough money to pay depositors, and just like insurance, every banks rates went up by some ampunt


BTW they did come out with a press release on what will be done and how it will be funded

After receiving a recommendation from the boards of the FDIC and the Federal Reserve, and consulting with the President, Secretary Yellen approved actions enabling the FDIC to complete its resolution of Silicon Valley Bank, Santa Clara, California, in a manner that fully protects all depositors. Depositors will have access to all of their money starting Monday, March 13. No losses associated with the resolution of Silicon Valley Bank will be borne by the taxpayer.

We are also announcing a similar systemic risk exception for Signature Bank, New York, New York, which was closed today by its state chartering authority. All depositors of this institution will be made whole. As with the resolution of Silicon Valley Bank, no losses will be borne by the taxpayer.

Shareholders and certain unsecured debtholders will not be protected. Senior management has also been removed. Any losses to the Deposit Insurance Fund to support uninsured depositors will be recovered by a special assessment on banks, as required by law.

On the exact assets thing

And the two failed banks hold billion of dollars in Treasuries and loans that can be sold and used to make many of the depositors whole. On top of that, the FDIC has other resources it can tap to raise more funds as necessary.

[SnS_12]

Originally Posted by tsk1979

FDIC has enough money to pay depositors, and just like insurance, every banks rates went up by some ampunt


BTW they did come out with a press release on what will be done and how it will be funded



On the exact assets thing

Well, again as per FDIC’s own website the total deposits in SVB was $ 175.4 billion and the reserves FDIC have is $ 125 billion .

Further, they still maintain that only accounts with deposits under $ 250k are insured and the others remain uninsured and these account holders MAY be paid as dividend payments for the money owed to them by SVB once the FDIC sells the assets of SVB, which god only knows what is it worth now.

If a company with more than $ 250k had all its money parked with this bank then that is not good news at all.

[tsk1979]

Originally Posted by SnS_12

Well, again as per FDIC’s own website the total deposits in SVB was $ 175.4 billion and the reserves FDIC have is $ 125 billion .

If SVB had zero assets it would be a problem

Further, they still maintain that only accounts with deposits under $ 250k are insured and the others remain uninsured and these account holders MAY be paid as dividend payments for the money owed to them by SVB once the FDIC sells the assets of SVB, which god only knows what is it worth now.

Well the USA has not collapsed so I am assuming Treasury bonds are still worth what they were. They are not worth +4% but +1.5% where the problem came from

As for depositers with more than 250K, if they get a certificate from FDIC that is as good as money.
The only people who will lose a good amount of money are the shareholders

[V.Narayan]

For about 13 years super low global interest rates have allowed venture capitalists to accumulate huge funds to give increasingly unprofitable firms with unrealistic business models increasingly larger valuations Now rising interest rates to combat inflation have meant less free money for science-fiction projects, delivering make-up just on time, aggregators that add little value but squeeze the suppliers will compel investors to change their entire approach and actually fund realistic ventures at realistic valuations with realistically sized funds and deals.

[theabstractmind]

Originally Posted by SnS_12

Well, again as per FDIC’s own website the total deposits in SVB was $ 175.4 billion and the reserves FDIC have is $ 125 billion .

Further, they still maintain that only accounts with deposits under $ 250k are insured and the others remain uninsured and these account holders MAY be paid as dividend payments for the money owed to them by SVB once the FDIC sells the assets of SVB, which god only knows what is it worth now.

If a company with more than $ 250k had all its money parked with this bank then that is not good news at all.

Attachment 2429717

Attachment 2429718

I'm an SVB employee. It is not like SVB went bust due to losses. It faced liquidity crunch due to all depositors asking for their money immediately while much of the assets were locked up. In simplistic terms, you have 100 cr assets in buildings, PF, etc. And 20 crore in Cash; your depositors asked 50 cr to be paid immediately.

I won't make further statements but only affirming information which is in the public domain. The bank is operating again and many depositors have returned. The FDIC doesn't need to pay from its pocket largely. It is making efforts to recapitalize the bank via normal operations. This is all I can say - as such information is publicly issued by FDIC.