Ultimately it falls on the taxpayer. The existence of the FDIC not only incentivizes but almost forces banks to be risky with their investments. It doesn’t matter if their lending fails because the government has to come in and clean it all up and those expenses are passed on to the public.
Banks aren't defaulting because they held bad PE loans. The recent memorable case was SVB, but it held quality paper, just with a duration risk. Banks aren't investing depositor funds in loans to Toys R Us.
Fractional reserve banking means the bank only has a small percentage of the money its customers deposit on hand (currently 0% since 2020). What do they do with the rest of that money? They invest it. They take on risky investments because it will either pay off or they will be bailed out by the taxpayer through FDIC. There is zero risk on the banks part.
Once you get as far as FDIC insurance being involved, the bank generally ceases to exist (ideally via a fire sale to another, more stable bank) and the shareholders generally get (all but) wiped out, at best.
Competent risk management so that doesn't (generally) happen is a core competency for a bank, and if regulators think you're doing it wrong they will come down on the bank's leadership like a ton of bricks.
If anybody reading this comment would like to learn more from people who understand the area far better than I do, I would recommend patio11's 'Bits About Money' and Matt Levine's 'Money Stuff.'
FDIC has as much to do with what you're talking about as the gravity that holds you down. Yes its technically correct that they're covered by both, but you're miles away from any kind of rational point.
I believe the original point was that McLaren had an easier time winning the constructors because they had two drivers collecting points, while Red Bull — due to Checo not performing — only had one
Checo (Sergio Perez) was Max Verstappen's teammate at Red Bull. Red Bull had a dominant start to the season which set Verstappen up to win the driver's championship. Lando Norris at McLaren mounted a challenge to Verstappen as the McLaren car went from good to great at Miami, but couldn't pass Verstappen. He did, however, have a strong teammate in Oscar Piastri, and the two of them handily accumulated enough points for McLaren to beat Red Bull for the constructor's championship.
Which brings us back to Checo. There's a strong argument to be made that he, driving the dominant car for the first six races and probably second best car for the remainder of the season, should have been able to score enough points to keep McLaren from winning the constructor's championship. He did not and Red Bull cut him loose at the end of last season.
The second seat at Red Bull has been a brutal spot to be in since Verstappen came along. Arguably their car is very tailored to his preferences, and it's hard for another driver to get the most out of it, or even set it up to suit their preferences. Whatever the case, it's been a bit of a revolving door.
I'd second it. F1 racing is an interesting combination of sport, physics, aerospace engineering and manufacturing. But most of us don't have the background to fully enjoy what you've said without at least some background.
It's actually not hard to eat a diet that doesn't have a lot of fructose. More difficult to avoid heavily processed carbohydrates that are absorbed too quickly.
It’s the name of the distribution company a bunch of brands are housed under.
> By the end of 1999 an idea that has been talked about for years begins to take seed. The Habitat is formed under the Sovereign Sect in December…The Alien Workshop and its divisions are guided by this philosophy to this day. A Sovereign Sect of individuals with the goal to evolve skateboarding, projects and ideas free from outside pressures or rules.
I’ve never drank in my life and never had any issues abstaining. “No thanks,” is almost always enough and rarely do I have anyone question why or try to pressure beyond that. Even when I was in high school or college.
It seems to me people who do drink, even if only occasionally, have a harder time justifying to themselves why they shouldn’t drink when the opportunity presents itself.
Yes - as someone with this problem, you are spot on.
That says nothing about why they have trouble abstaining.
One element of it: teasing, judgement. Sometimes you fear those reactions to your decision so you pick the easy path and avoid that type of interaction. I know it sounds silly.
And you may also fear the broader possibilities when someone asks you why you are abstaining. Lots of people do.
Does teasing and judgement happen often? I live in Vegas where being inebriated is fairly accepted but I can’t think of a time where I’ve been teased or pressured. They may be silently judging but I don’t notice or care.
I think a lot of it has to do with how you turn down a drink. I usually say, “No thanks,” or “I’m good, thanks,” and it rarely goes beyond that. When I hear people respond with, “I don’t drink,” or “I’m not drinking right now/tonight/this month,” that seems to invite discussion.
Everyone’s experiences are different though and I’m painting with a broad brush.
Valid point that how you respond invites or discourages certain types of commentary.
Otherwise - to your question, very circumstantial. Unsurprisingly, the more bro-like the setting, the higher the chance. I don’t surround myself with that environment constantly but it’s there from time to time.
I also had the same experience, but not everyone has the same qualms about rejecting other's invitations. I know for a fact that I was considered rude for politely rejecting drinks when I decided against drinking, possibly cultural.
I order soda water or whatever so I can participate in toasts and just be part of the group. If anyone questions me — which rarely happens because people understand that someone can have deeply private reasons — I say "I don't drink." If someone questioned me further, "I just don't drink" because my reason is not something I want to share with everyone (probably not the reason you're assuming).
My point is that it's not a big deal socially in my experience.
Same here, so I assume it depends a lot on one's entourage and we shouldn't generalize the way other commenters seem to enjoy. I have a group going out regularly for drinks and actually about third of them are teetotallers. No issue for either side to blend in, the only concession made is that we meet in a craft beer bar.
I know that in certain circles that some people in positions of power, for lack of a better way of putting it, socialize around drinks. The broader problem isn't necessarily being perceived as rude or odd, it's simply being left out when these things happen "because so and so wouldn't be interested in that". Everyone involved can be well intended and it can still have ripple effects.
If I create a new login on mobile it never syncs to the vault/desktop correctly. I have so many empty vault items that then sync back to mobile. Nothing seems to fix it.
