I feel like there's almost a level of glee about SVB going under. But as far as I can tell, it's a big loss for folks who like innovation. And unless arrangements are made to unlock liquidity for depositors, many people may not get paid for their labor and many otherwise viable businesses could fall into crisis.
@acjay "not a bank for rich people" yet it held billions for venture capitalists. 
Real innovators typically don't have millions lying around in the bank... the lucky few with the right connections to get absurd funding for their absurd ideas do.
So, yes, us underfunded innovators are enjoying a bit of schadenfreude watching their incestuous self-dealing finance rings collapse.
@LouisIngenthron When I was in grad school a decade ago, a classmate and I started a company with a couple thousand of student loan money. We opened an account with SVB completely online, and were treated like the business we hoped to become one day. Like most businesses, it didn't pan out. We had 99 problems, but business banking wasn't one.
@LouisIngenthron Had SVB collapsed then, FDIC would have made us whole. But probably not in time for us to survive.
@LouisIngenthron also you're completely wrong about who keeps more than 250k in the bank. Rich people tend to invest their wealth. Companies need liquidity for payroll and services. You don't have to be a very big company at all to have payroll that exceeds 250k.
@acjay Those are fair points. And I absolutely do feel bad for the employees living paycheck-to-paycheck who might not get paid.
But I still struggle to have any sympathy for the people and companies hoarding millions, especially when I see how often that money passes hands through nepotism.
It's definitely messier than anyone would like, but when the rich spend so much time concentrating their wealth instead of using it to fairly compensate the people doing the actual work, they shouldn't expect much sympathy when an event comes along that levels the playing field, even a little.
@LouisIngenthron I mean, if it were a bank that focused on high net wealth taxes dodgers, I'd be right with you. And to be fair, I think they did do some personal banking focused on the needs of people with a lot of equity wealth. But as banks go, as far as I know (not an expert here), they were one that actually played a productive role in the economy.
I'm so for critiquing Silicon Valley-style entrepreneurship, but the implosion of SVB is probably going to have some level of collateral damage to people who did nothing to deserve it. And even if the system contains it, it's still the loss of an institution that didn't suck, IMO.
