March 2024 - cypherpunks - lists.cpunks.org

Wokeism is Doomed
by grarpamp 06 Mar '24

06 Mar '24

Why Wokeness Is Doomed https://bombthrower.com/why-wokeness-is-doomed/ https://bombthrower.com/deconstructing-wokethink/ https://www.resilience.org/stories/2011-01-20/onset-catabolic-collapse/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/chrisdorsey/2021/03/17/americas-mass-migration… https://www.ronjohnson.senate.gov/2021/7/helping%20people%20be%20seen,%20he… Four Megatrends of Reality Have Become Impossible To Ignore What we call “Wokeism” today has its roots in so-called “political correctness” which goes back decades. It began to accelerate in the early years of the 21st century, and while it was always driven by left-wing, liberal, impulses, who seemed to have the upper hand in culture and media; they still always feigned powerlessness and victimhood. Even in 2012, at possibly the apogee of the Liberal World Order, Paul Krugman wrote, with no sense of irony, “the big threat to our discourse is right-wing political correctness, which – unlike the liberal version – has lots of power and money behind it. And the goal is very much the kind of thing Orwell tried to convey with his notion of Newspeak: to make it impossible to talk, and possibly even think, about ideas that challenge the established order.“ This victimhood-as-bedrock continues to this day, especially since 2016 when the unthinkable happened. Brexit and Trump (basically, a backlash of populism) precipitated a full fledged psychotic break in the progressive zeitgeist, which until that moment was consolidating its hegemony. Political correctness metastasized into terminal Wokeness, where all aspects of discourse, popular culture and even public policy became delineated into whether it meshed well with left-wing sanctimony, or not. “Wokeness” takes the otherwise noble aspirations of egalitarianism and stewardship and twists them into a dogma that provides a Trojan Horse for despotism. The high priests of this mindset assert total moral authority and claim an elevated consciousness over the infantile, sub-human masses. Especially if those masses live in fly-over country, hold blue-collar jobs or are otherwise un-credentialed and without pedigree. This ideology (a word invented by rudderless Jacobins who went to work for Napoleon, helping him consolidate absolute power), translated well into modern times. The “science of ideas” provides the camouflage of choice for the totalitarian impulses of an elite class – increasingly destined for secular, sclerotic decline under the weight of its own corruption, internal contradictions and excess. For years we (the contrarian, non-compliant “we”, the “racist”, “fringe” we) have been sounding the alarm that the pillars of “Wokethink”, such as “all or nothing”, emotional thinking, catastrophizing and seven other markers, were highly congruent with mental illness. Worse, they are detrimental and destructive to society on a fundamental level. Where many fear a coming, Davos-inspired technocracy of owning nothing, eating bugs and living in the pod, I think the COVID pandemic created an irreversible phase-shift. Where before we were headed for a totalitarian dystopia that would ultimately fail, but probably last for large swaths of our lifetimes, COVID (more accurately, the overbearing policy response) created an inflection point in history. Several decades of creeping authoritarianism was compressed into eighteen months, and that was Too Much, Too Soon, for everyone. Serious question. My contention is that The Lockdown Era was the crescendo of Peak Wokeness. Under the guise of a not-so-cataclysmic pandemic, the moralizing and sermonizing reached fever pitch. Wokeness itself degenerated into Mass Formation Psychosis on a global scale. Only recently, in this year, has The True Cost of Wokeness begun to make itself apparent: In Germany, where they shut down their nuclear reactors on misguided environmental concerns, the citizenry there is now looking at chopping down trees and burning the wood to remain warm this winter. Residents are being told to take shorter showers. Large commercial landlords are setting limits on thermostats and rationing hot water. They’re restarting their coal plants. Sri Lanka, which embarked on a WEF-inspired campaign of “sustainable” farming and stakeholder capitalism, collapsed into anarchy as rioters stormed the presidential palace and drove the government there into exile. Liberal run cities and states across the US are facing mass exoduses of citizens, capital and tax revenue as their socially motivated policies like “defund the police” cause them to descend into chaos and criminality. Political leaders everywhere look more out-of-touch than ever as they try to run economies and respond to geo-political events with unhinged platitudes. The list is endless, growing, and we are just into the early innings. The Four Megatrends Exposing True Cost of Wokeness Wokeness as an ideology will fail, it’s just a matter of how much damage will it do to the rest of us before it collapses under its own internal contradictions and failures. #1 Wokeness is Inherently Unprofitable The expression “Get Woke, go broke” is more than sardonic wit. It’s a powerful meme that captures the essence of wokenomics’ never-ending failures. Whether it’s so-called “green energy” sources that have larger carbon footprints than their hydrocarbon or nuclear counter-parts, or Hollywood perpetually losing their shirt on “woke” reboots, politically correct sitcoms or short-lived streaming channels, Wokeness is economically unviable across the board. 95% coal, actually. Love this clip. "The elEctrIcitY cOmeS fRoM iNsIde tHe bUIldiNg!" https://t.co/hP2dgHn32e — Mark Jeftovic, The C̶r̶y̶p̶t̶o̶ ₿itcoin Capitalist (@StuntPope) June 8, 2022 Without government subsidies there wouldn’t be a profitable “woke” company anywhere and with governments increasingly teetering on the edge of insolvency, the money spigot for the platitude industry may be drying up fast. #2 Conspicuous Hypocrisy of The High Priests of Wokeness People are getting sick of being told they’re going to own nothing, eat bugs and live in a pod in order to save the climate by people who are flying around in private jets, lounging on super-yachts and dining on grass fed beef. Here’s UN Climate Change ambassador Leonardo DiCaprio aboard a 315ft, £110 million superyacht, complete with a helipad and six decks that spew out as much as your average car does in a year by sailing as little as 7 miles. Remember that as you watch his climate catastrophe movie. pic.twitter.com/jfSp95xXZa — Darren Grimes (@darrengrimes_) January 10, 2022 It goes beyond self-important celebrities or messianic politicians who flagrantly live a “my rules are for other people” lifestyle. The double-standard is so palpable and abrasive that to ignore it requires hyper-normal rationalizations. Justin Trudeau lands in Costa Rica for holidays with his family all unmasked in a private jet. You can see Trudeau’s unmasked wife Sophie sneezing repeatedly into her hand before being greeted.pic.twitter.com/fbb2n58Cke — Citizen Free Press (@CitizenFreePres) August 6, 2022 #3 Negative Externalities Are Being Re-shored If the well-meaning rank-and-file of the social justice warriors were right about anything, it’s that the global economic system has been rigged. Since at least the onset Bretton-Woods Era the developed, industrial nations in orbit around the USA have been able to externalize their negatives to the rest of the world (inflation, conquest, etc) while leaching everybody else’s wealth and natural resources. This was “the exorbitant privilege” of running the world’s reserve currency. But once the anchor to gold was severed in ’71, it began an inexorable process of what people like Michael Greer call “catabolic collapse“. The perimeter of the economic leaching began to contract. Once the 80’s or so hit, began to hollow out the homelands of the developed countries themselves. We can see this dynamic when we look at how GDP diverged from median earnings. If the working class didn’t really participate in the GDP gains, who did? This chart from a former Chief Economist at the World Bank Group isn’t fully current, but if anything, the trends accelerated after 2015. The table showing the stratification of wage growth does capture 2022 and we see what’s happening quite starkly: He’s using data from Thomas Pikkety, who often argues for redistribution schemes I oppose, but mainly for the reason that I don’t trust policy makers to distribute anything effectively, let alone redistribute other people’s wealth. But the point is clear, the globalist financial system is “structurally unjust”. However this is not, as the social justice warriors believe, because of systemic racism, or the patriarchy. It’s because of a deeply flawed (rigged) financial system that enables aristocratic elites to print value ex nihilo, and then distribute it to their Cantillionaire cronies. As everybody should know by now, the Cantillon Effect provides benefit from newly printed money for the insiders, before it turns into inflationary cost-of-living increases for everybody else. The Cantillon Effect Since The Lockdown Era (which is now being opportunistically pivoted into intensified climate hysteria), this dynamic has only intensified to blow-off top levels. We can see this in the trajectory of M2 money supply: Before the fiat currency era started, this economic leaching could work when its effects were largely externalized to far off shores, where it could be dolled up under the rubrics of “spreading democracy” and “economic development”. But now that the fiat currency system is eating itself (too much debt, not enough actual productivity, supply chain failures), that thin scab of elites that sits atop the global cap table now needs to somehow convince the rabble that the most important thing in the world right now is for everybody (else) to drastically ratchet down their standard of living. Wokeness looked perfect for this, except for one last problem: #4 Wokeness is Inherently Self-Destructive Once catabolic collapse had already started in earnest, it hit a disorderly phase transition in COVID. The legacy of that chapter in recent history has been so defined by failure that a crisis in legitimacy has set in. This has left policy-makers no choice but to double-down. Globalists had to resort to a more intense, emotionally charged zeitgeist that justifies running the rigged tables at much closer quarters: the ESG movement was elevated to primacy. This is now resulting in self-induced energy crises, supply chains seizing up, and if this new obsession on demonizing fertilizer goes well (for policy makers), global famine. Rationalizations about climate emergencies aside, the underlying reality is that we’re in a genuine Austrian-school style crack-up boom. The global elites are facing a crisis in credibility and desperate to ensure that they get to stay in charge after the whole system derails. It bears repeating: globalism, as exemplified by the likes of the World Economic Forum is essentially a Malthusian and Marxist philosophy. The reality behind all forms of collectivism is that collectivists create inclusive-sounding mythologies that are really intended to apply to everybody else, not themselves. The consequences of Woke-ism manifest in absurd policies that lead to self-destruction. When everything is politicized, it becomes impossible to correct a bad trajectory. If undoing previous policy errors means abandoning core tenets of the ideology, the policy makers will choose destruction instead. Anything is better than loss of credibility, especially it’s only the rabble that has to bear the consequences for the policy-makers’ failures. Here we arrive at why Woke-ism is ultimately doomed, because one of its own internal contradictions is a glaring example of creating its own headwinds: The COVID pandemic was politicized beyond any rationality, and the Woke are now fully committed to a course of action that could result in incalculable damage to themselves and the public. Where vaccine uptake is plummeting among the normies, (people who aren’t ideologically committed to COVID), the most devoted, brainwashed Covidians are continuing with rabid adherence to COVID as a religion: including a desire for lockdowns, the more masks the better, and a regimen of never-ending boosters. For the longest time I thought the people who were talking in terms of “Nuremberg 2” and “tribunals” were, in word, unhinged. But when you look at official, vetted data, there is no sugar coating it. The same way I became a lockdown skeptic by tracking the government supplied numbers, and I knew by June 2020 that COVID was not an existential threat. In this case the data coming out from official vacine injury databases is painting just as stark a contrast between reality and official narrative: Via Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI) with data sourced from CDC VAERS and FDA FAERS databases Somewhere along the line, “safe and effective” turned into “sudden and unexpected”. Even if the economic and reality-based failures we’ve mentioned so far were not enough to put an end to this, the Woke have gone too far with hard-line vaccine policies. Too much, too young in this case. Trying to jab children being the line in the sand for many adults. I take no joy nor solace in pointing out that since the woke are truly committed to these vaccines, they may actually be thinning themselves out as the data and evidence continues to mount that the probability of an adverse affect from the “cure” may exceed the risk of dying from the disease itself, at least for adults under the age of 70 and especially in children. The public is catching on: despite the best efforts of the mainstream media to demonize people asking questions about this as “anti-vaxxers” and Big Tech duly co-operating through concerted deplatforming, public compliance is rapidly dwindling (and the most boosted people among us keep catching COVID). In Canada, where 81% of the population received two doses in order to be deemed “fully vaccinated”, we have the lowest uptake of boosters throughout the entire G7. This despite Health Canada’s declared intention to move the goalposts such that Canadians would be required to get boosted every nine months. That won’t happen, and the only people who will comply going forward are the über-woke… It’s a parody account, but it is hard to tell these days. These four super-trends are converging to create a zeitgeist saturated with hyper-normality and failure. As The True Cost of Wokeness plays itself out with accelerating consequences, the logical conclusion is that it will be abandoned en masse by a disgruntled populace feeling increasingly betrayed.

4 104

PR Newswire: Quantum Computing Market Size to Grow by USD 9.01 Billion, The growing use of quantum cryptography to drive the market growth, Technavio
by jdb10987＠yahoo.com 06 Mar '24

06 Mar '24

1 0

Re: [tiactivism] Deterrence For Being “Suicided”
by Baffo 32 06 Mar '24

06 Mar '24

On Tue, Mar 5, 2024 at 17:05 Baffo 32 <baffo32(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Excerpted from > http://endritualabuse.org/safety-tips-for-ritual-abuse-survivors/ the > entirety of which is worth exploring. Given the severity of the topic I > would recommend skipping any parts of the below that get in the way of > accomplishing the rest. > > Survivors who believe they may be killed or “suicided” should make a clear > and convincing video-taped statement of their fear of being murdered and > their desire to live rather than to suicide. This may increase an enemy’s > or enemy group’s fear of being identified upon committing a murder or a > murder staged to appear as a suicide, accident, or willful disappearance. > This should reduce one’s risk of being murdered. Here are some guidelines > for making a Safety Video-tape: > > Video-tape Protocol for People who Fear Being Murdered, Directly or Staged > to Appear as a Suicide, Accident, or Willful Disappearance > > Steps: > > 1. Fill out your responses to the following questions. > > 2. Have someone ask you these questions while video-taping you. > > 3. Refer to this form to remind you of all of your key points. > > 4. Express genuine emotion to get your point across and to make the press > more likely to air the video-tape if you are killed. > > 5. Distribute copies of the video-tape widely. > > 6. Have holders of the tape secure the safety of the tape. > > 7. Make it publicly known (e.g., speaking engagements, publications, > e-mails, conversations on telephones you believe to be tapped) that the > video-tape is widely distributed and will be released to the press, > concerned parties, and law enforcement, if you die of unnatural or > suspicious causes. > > Questions: > > 1. What individuals or groups do you believe want you dead? > > 2. Why would these parties want you dead? > > 3. Can anyone support or corroborate that these parties are your enemies? > > 4. What methods do you believe these parties use to murder people? > > 5. Do you believe there have been any previous attempts on your life? If > so, describe the suspected assailants and methods used. > > 6. Are you suicidal? > > 7. Why do you want to live? > > 8. Under what circumstances would you ever suicide? > > 9. Do you abuse life-threatening substances? > > 10. Do you have lethal weapons or substances in your home? > > 11. Do you drive safely? What is your record of traffic accidents and > violations? > > 12. Do you have any desire to flee your current home and support persons? > > This process can also be done without use of a videotape. I recommend a > 2-step process. > > 1. Prepare a statement that includes all of the details of the crimes; > > a) real identifiers: name, birth date, Social Security Number, etc. > > b) crime history; places, time, names of perpetrators > > Provide this statement in person or via snail mail to a select few trusted > individuals to place in a secure location. > > 2. Send a statement via e-mail to a larger number of people: > > a) Statement of concern for survivor’s safety (Questions 1 through 5 > above). > > b) Statement about the survivor’s not being a danger to self, or wishing > to flee (if true) (Questions 6 through 12 above). > > c) a statement that a number of people (do not name them) have the > specific crime facts- names, places, dates, etc., and that this information > will be made public and reported to law enforcement if anything happens to > the survivor. > > Use a pseudonym in this e-mailed statement. Do not name the perpetrators. > > This 2-step process may increase the safety of the survivor because the > main fear of these criminals is that of public exposure. > > _._,_._,_ > ------------------------------ > Groups.io Links: > > You receive all messages sent to this group. > > View/Reply Online (#2218) <https://groups.io/g/tiactivism/message/2218> | Reply > To Group > <tiactivism@groups.io?subject=Re:%20%3D%3FUTF-8%3FB%3FW3RpYWN0aXZpc21dIERldGVycmVuY2UgRm9yIEJlaW5nIOKAnFN1aWNpZGVk4oCd%3F%3D> > | Reply To Sender > <baffo32@gmail.com?subject=Private:%20Re:%20%3D%3FUTF-8%3FB%3FW3RpYWN0aXZpc21dIERldGVycmVuY2UgRm9yIEJlaW5nIOKAnFN1aWNpZGVk4oCd%3F%3D> > | Mute This Topic <https://groups.io/mt/104757070/6048544> | New Topic > <https://groups.io/g/tiactivism/post> > Your Subscription <https://groups.io/g/tiactivism/editsub/6048544> | Contact > Group Owner <tiactivism+owner(a)groups.io> | Unsubscribe > <https://groups.io/g/tiactivism/leave/12323543/6048544/1587734859/xyzzy> [ > gmkarl(a)gmail.com] > _._,_._,_ > >

1 0

Video: I think she is annoyed with us
by Gunnar Larson 05 Mar '24

05 Mar '24

I think she is annoyed with us video: https://www.instagram.com/reel/C4ItSnguYcu/?igsh=MXVpemtzdDF6NGtlZA==

1 0

Women Need Extra 19 Years In Work To Close Pension Gap
by Gunnar Larson 05 Mar '24

05 Mar '24

Subject: Women Need Extra 19 Years In Work To Close Pension Gap Women Need Extra 19 Years In Work To Close Pension Gap <https://www.law360.co.uk/financial-services-uk/articles/1795041?nl_pk=a94fc…> By Joel Poultney Women in the U.K. would need to work for an additional 19 years on average to retire with the same amount of pension savings as a man, according to research published on Wednesday. Read full article » <https://www.law360.co.uk/financial-services-uk/articles/1795041?nl_pk=a94fc…> | Save to favorites » <https://www.law360.co.uk/financial-services-uk/articles/1795041?nl_pk=a94fc…>

1 2

Underwriters Freed From Suit Against Fintech Co. Ryvyl
by Gunnar Larson 05 Mar '24

05 Mar '24

Underwriters Freed From Suit Against Fintech Co. Ryvyl <https://www.law360.com/fintech/articles/1809594?nl_pk=d2b3e7ef-ab62-4a62-80…> By Katryna Perera A California federal judge has dismissed the underwriters and significantly trimmed the remaining claims in a case against fintech company Ryvyl Inc. and certain executives, accusing them of concealing accounting issues, saying the plaintiffs have adequately alleged only a few misleading statements and knowledge of wrongdoing by one executive. Order attached | Read full article » <https://www.law360.com/fintech/articles/1809594?nl_pk=d2b3e7ef-ab62-4a62-80…> | Save to favorites » <https://www.law360.com/fintech/articles/1809594?nl_pk=d2b3e7ef-ab62-4a62-80…>

1 0

Reporter Blasts NFL For Ignoring Discrimination Suit Claims
by Gunnar Larson 05 Mar '24

05 Mar '24

Reporter Blasts NFL For Ignoring Discrimination Suit Claims <https://www.law360.com/newyork/articles/1809067?nl_pk=ac5a3855-e47c-4403-be…> By David Steele The NFL's reasoning in moving to dismiss reporter Jim Trotter's discrimination and retaliation lawsuit "is way off the mark," and the motion itself "is more notable for what it ignores than what it states,'' Trotter said in a scathing opposition memorandum filed in New York federal court. Memorandum attached | Read full article » <https://www.law360.com/newyork/articles/1809067?nl_pk=ac5a3855-e47c-4403-be…> | Save to favorites » <https://www.law360.com/newyork/articles/1809067?nl_pk=ac5a3855-e47c-4403-be…>

1 0

USPTO Can't See Snapchat 'Spectacles' IP Win Ahead Of Trial
by Gunnar Larson 05 Mar '24

05 Mar '24

USPTO Can't See Snapchat 'Spectacles' IP Win Ahead Of Trial <https://www.law360.com/technology/articles/1809803?nl_pk=2bd720dd-746c-4744…> By Dorothy Atkins A California federal magistrate judge rejected Monday the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's bid for a summary judgment win in a lawsuit by Snapchat's parent company seeking to secure trademark rights to the word "Spectacles" for its flagship virtual-reality product, sending the intellectual property dispute to a March 12 bench trial. Report attached | Read full article » <https://www.law360.com/technology/articles/1809803?nl_pk=2bd720dd-746c-4744…> | Save to favorites » <https://www.law360.com/technology/articles/1809803?nl_pk=2bd720dd-746c-4744…>

1 0

Supreme Court Solidifies Whistleblower Protections - Whistleblowing - United States
by Gunnar Larson 05 Mar '24

05 Mar '24

https://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/whistleblowing/1430920/supreme-court-so… A recent United States Supreme Court ruling in Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC has held that whistleblowers do not need to show retaliatory intent, or retaliatory animus, on the part of their employers in order to be protected under federal law, specifically under the whistleblower provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX). The Act defines whistleblowing as "any lawful act done by [an] employee to provide information, cause information to be provided, or otherwise assist in an investigation regarding any conduct which the employee reasonably believes constitutes a violation [of enumerated laws]" or "to file, cause to be filed, testify, or otherwise participate in a proceeding filed or about to be filed (with any knowledge of the employer) relating to [such] an alleged violation."1 Whistleblowers are protected from retaliation by employers under federal law because of the important role they serve in combatting corruption and maintaining health, safety, and security, even when doing so requires taking action against their employer and, as such, risking their livelihood. It is for this reason that protections for whistleblowers, such as SOX, exist. The SOX interpretation question in Murray brought before the Supreme Court was whether retaliatory intent must be proven for an individual to be protected under federal law. Trevor Murray was fired from UBS for refusing to skew his research reports on commercial mortgage-backed securities in favor of UBS's business strategies despite being pressured to do so. A Manhattan federal jury found for Murray and awarded him $903,300 in damages. Upon appeal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit overturned the award, arguing that SOX required whistleblowers to prove that their employer acted with retaliatory intent when firing them (something Murray had not explicitly proven). In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court overturned this ruling, finding that the statutory text included no such intent requirement and that "showing that an employer acted with retaliatory animus is one way of proving that the protected activity was a contributing factor in the adverse employment action, but it is not the only way." Through the Supreme Court's ruling, the majority of justices make clear that, while a whistleblower must prove their protected activity was a contributing factor in the employer's unfavorable personnel action, there is no requirement a whistleblower show that their employer had retaliatory intent in terminating them, or otherwise issuing an unfavorable change in the terms and conditions of employment. As such, now, attorneys no longer need to prove that retaliatory intent for an act of whistleblowing was the primary reason for their whistleblower client's termination, but only need to show that retaliation (even if not retaliatory intent) was a factor which influenced the termination. While it may be difficult for an employee to resolutely prove the primary reason for their termination, especially when an employer can point towards factors they can claim motivated an acceptable termination, by not requiring proof of retaliatory intent, the Supreme Court has made whistleblower protections more accessible as a pathway for wronged employees to advocate for themselves. As a result of the Supreme Court's ruling, employees may have an easier time demonstrating that their termination was due to retaliation following their whistleblowing complaints about alleged illegal actions undertaken by their employers. The case is Murray v. UBS Securities LLC , case number 22-660, before the Supreme Court of the United States. Footnote 1. https://www.whistleblowers.gov/statutes/sox_amended

1 0

New York Community Bancorp Was JPMorgan’s Top Regional Bank Pick for 2024; It’s Lost 73 Percent Y-T-D and Had Its Deposit Rating Downgraded to Junk
by Gunnar Larson 05 Mar '24

05 Mar '24

https://wallstreetonparade.com/2024/03/new-york-community-bancorp-was-jpmor… By Pam Martens and Russ Martens: March 5, 2024 ~ New York Community Bancorp’s tumultuous share price descent began on January 31 when the bank filed an 8K form with the SEC indicating a $260 million net income loss in the fourth quarter; a dividend cut from 17 cents to 5 cents; and a $552 million provision for credit losses on commercial real estate. (Year-to-date, the company’s share price has lost 73 percent of its market value. Yesterday, its shares closed at $2.73, down 23 percent from the prior trading session on Friday, when the shares had lost 26 percent. ) Somehow, JPMorgan banking analyst Steven Alexopoulos was able to swat the gargantuan warning signs of January 31 away like a pesky gnat on an otherwise perfect day. On February 1, Alexopoulos penned a missive recommending that investors “take advantage of this valuation and accumulate shares on this weakness.” To drive home his strong buy recommendation, he wrote: “Not only do we maintain our Overweight rating, but NYCB remains our top pick for 2024.” JPMorgan’s bank analyst call on NYCB is turning out to be another embarrassing black mark at JPMorgan Chase, a bank that seems to have enshrined scandals and felony charges as part of its mega bank business model. JPMorgan’s strong buy rating on New York Community Bancorp came a mere 34 days ago. Here’s what has happened since then: On February 6, Moody’s downgraded the bank’s credit rating to junk. Moody’s also warned that a third of the bank’s deposits lack FDIC insurance. On February 29, NYCB made new filings with the SEC, this time announcing that its President and CEO, Thomas R. Cangemi, was being replaced by the Executive Chairman of the Board, Alessandro (Sandro) DiNello. In a separate filing, NYCB announced alarming “material weaknesses,” writing as follows: “…as part of management’s assessment of the Company’s internal controls, management identified material weaknesses in the Company’s internal controls related to internal loan review, resulting from ineffective oversight, risk assessment and monitoring activities. Although assessment of the Company’s internal controls is not yet complete, the Company expects to disclose in the 2023 Form 10-K that its disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting were not effective as of December 31, 2023. The Company’s remediation plan with respect to such material weaknesses is expected to be described in the 2023 Form 10-K.” “Material weaknesses” are two words that credit rating agencies never want to read in a deposit-taking bank’s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. After markets closed last Friday, Moody’s cut the deposit rating on NYCB’s commercial bank by four notches, moving it deep into junk territory. That can’t have gone over well with the folks holding large amounts of uninsured deposits at the bank. (The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) insures commercial bank accounts up to $250,000 per depositor, per bank. Corporations and institutions frequently hold sums much greater than that at commercial banks.) On March 28 of last year, the Chair of the FDIC, Martin Gruenberg, delivered a report to the Senate Banking Committee on why Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank had failed last year. Among numerous problems, he noted the following: “In the immediate aftermath of the failure of SVB [Silicon Valley Bank] and Signature Bank, some preliminary lessons can be identified. A common thread between the failure of SVB and the failure of Signature Bank was the banks’ heavy reliance on uninsured deposits. As of December 31, 2022, Signature Bank reported that approximately 90 percent of its deposits were uninsured, and SVB reported that 88 percent of its deposits were uninsured. The significant proportion of uninsured deposit balances exacerbated deposit run vulnerabilities and made both banks susceptible to contagion effects from the quickly evolving financial developments. One clear takeaway from recent events is that heavy reliance on uninsured deposits creates liquidity risks that are extremely difficult to manage, particularly in today’s environment where money can flow out of institutions with incredible speed in response to news amplified through social media channels.” Yesterday, we wrote about the insightful investigation by financial watchdog, Better Markets, into how New York Community Bancorp ended up in such a mess. Better Markets’ researchers found the following: “In late 2022 and early 2023, the federal banking regulators inexplicably approved not one, but two, mergers for NYC Bancorp in rapid succession. First, in December 2022, Flagstar was acquired by NYC Bancorp and at the same time Flagstar acquired [New York Community Bank]. Then, only about 100 days later, Flagstar was selected as the winning bidder by the FDIC to acquire the failed Signature Bank (‘Signature’). A bank acquiring and integrating any one of these transactions in isolation would be challenging under the best of circumstances, it is inexplicable that the banking regulators allowed them in tandem under extremely stressed conditions.” And this: “…over the course of just two quarters, Flagstar’s two acquisitions quadrupled its asset size, from $25 billion on September 30, 2022, to $123 billion on March 31, 2023. It also more than doubled its employee count, from about 2,800 in September 2022 to 6,800 in March 2023.”

1 0