Here's an interesting chart that liberal commentators are crowing about, totally oblivious of what it actually tells us.
[Full Disclosure: I don' watch any of these channels, or any other, although I do read news coverage from a few of them.]
2. What it says is that Republicans watch at least one channel that does not confirm their natural biases. Democrats take no such risks.
3. What it also says is that the 'news' channel Democrats trust the most (@CNN) is also the cable news channel that Americans watch the least. Interesting dichotomy there. Maybe Democrats trust it so much they only watch it on special occasions.
@CNN 4. Why does USA Today even exist if Republicans don't trust it at all and the Democrats trust it the least?
@CNN 5. The chart makes it clear no one trusts @MSNBC, not even Democrats. But viewership numbers for @MSNBC are much larger than those for @CNN which Democrats trust the most of course. So why do people watch @MSNBC? Is it that even Democrats are snickering at Maddow and Scarborough?
@CNN@MSNBC 6. I close with this sobering thought for WaPo. Americans trust @MSNBC the least, and even Democrats trust WaPo less than even @MSNBC. Congratulations, Mr. Bezos! You have been had.
The End
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Pay heed folks. The below tweet is from a patriot who I believe served our blessed nation in uniform with honor. Now I am going to say something I would never have thought I would say even a few days ago. It's a stream of consciousness thread. Bear with me.
2. Back in early 2016 and for years prior to that, I detested Donald Trump as a rich blowhard who had no relevance to my life. So I ignored him almost entirely. I have never watched a single episode of any of his TV programs and his other exploits were a source of irritation.
3. I only started paying attention to Trump in the second half of 2016 when he became the Republican nominee for president. I had serious reservations about him. But once he got elected, I was compelled to take him seriously. So I reflected diligently on Trump presidency to come.
What do you think the result of the below mentioned survey would be if the question was changed
from:
"Do you think companies should publicly support..."
to:
"Do you think companies should publicly profit from..."? nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-ne…
2. Where public company actions are concerned, there is not a dime's worth of difference between "supporting" and "profiting from." No public company deliberately and willfully takes any action that might hurt their profits.
3. We as a society should of course treat gays with exactly the same respect and dignity and rights and everything else that is accorded to straights. We are all equal.
1. Message for Anyone Bothered By SVB Customers Being Made Whole
Stop with the nonsense. You either don't understand or are scratching a rash you got from somewhere else. It doesn't matter who SVB customers are or what they do. No depositor is ever responsible for a bank failure.
2. Bank failures are always the fault of the bank management and the regulators. And as for the "due diligence," it is fair to expect the bank investors and shareholders to do that and take a bath when they get it wrong. It's not fair to expect bank customers to do that.
3. Expecting depositors to do due diligence on the bank where they deposit their money is like asking every customer who uses electricity to graduate in Electrical Engineering before flipping a power switch to turn on the lights in their home. It is stupid blather.
1. How to Solve a Problem Like SVB
Having delineated in the enclosed thread how we got here, this thread addresses where we go from here. The SVB problem by itself is not that hard to solve, but it is possible politicians (of both parties) will plunge the nation into crisis.
2. First and foremost, let me dispense with the buzz on Twitter created by @elonmusk with his enclosed tweet. This ain't gonna happen. So please stop wasting time reading myriads of columns that have sprung up from this font. Musk is just having fun.
3. JP Morgan Chase would be a natural buyer but government screwed Jamie Dimon badly in 2008 after he came through and bought Washington Mutual at government’s urging. WaMu was the largest bank failure in U.S. history, SVB being the second largest.
There was plenty of mismanagement at SVB, but first and foremost I want to reassure my followers (maybe the events that unfold next week will make a liar out of me, so take everything I say as unauthoritative stream of consciousness).
2. The main thrust of this thread is to point out why the SVB blowout is nothing like the root cause of 2008 financial crisis, and people shouldn't jump to those kind of fears or conclusions. This is very different. Things like this have happened before but ~50 years ago, not 15.
3. 2008 financial crisis was brought on by banks making too many bad loans that were prone to risk of default. SVB was brought down by not making enough loans, but investing the deposited funds heavily in safe bonds which were nonetheless exposed to interest rate risk.