SVB depositors were mildly interrupted, no doubt, but there's little reason not to exercise extreme moral hazard in banking. OPM will bail you out via FDIC. Theoretically that has a limit but in practice FDIC usually will bail out the full balances even over the nominal limit.

If I had an FDIC account I would basically want a bank that invests my money in the most wildly hazardous ways with the most reckless financial controls to give the max returns and flexibility, then let everyone else bail me out if it went south.

“in practice FDIC usually will bail out the full balances even over the nominal limit”

That’s not true. It takes the systematic risk exemption and agreement between the fdic/fed reserve board and the president to make that happen. I think it’s happened like 4 times out of the thousands of bank bailouts that have happened.

There are other cases where the acquiring bank took on uninsured funds (like jpmc did for first republic) but in that case your gamble is that the other depositors on the banks balance sheet are desireable to the acquirer. Which presumably isn’t the case for your hypothetical max risk run bank.

Go back to the SVB failure threads here and observe the freak out before the decision was made to reimburse deposits above FDIC limits. Sometimes you’re lucky, but luck is not effective risk management.

> OPM will bail you out via FDIC.

I'm waiting for the demands for a bailout when the next big stablecoin goes bust. Especially if it's Trump's.[1]

[1] https://finance.yahoo.com/news/trump-usd1-stablecoin-hits-5b...