i wonder why you don't get whistleblowers about it?

single-payer will fix it.

republicans are the party of grift. democrats are the party of a nice sinecure.

“numbers do not adequately capture the sense of intensifying lawlessness that seems to have pervaded the health care system.”

yes! i think Munger frequently quoted / elaborated on the idea.

it isn’t true until there’s a denial.

it cones from JK Galbraith! www.goodreads.com/quotes/54331...

they’ll want us all to cheer a “great economy” while it kills us with impunity. but check out those GDP numbers!

the new york times is just vogue for mids.

from the sketch i’m getting, it sounds like a backing bank is short on capital, and simply disclaims its indebtedness. the fintech synapse has records that says the bank owes it, but it’s dead, its forensics are complicated and insufficient to force recognition of a legal obligation on the bank.

we can have *wild* fintech, or we can have bitcoin. that’s the choice they are looking to set up. not your keys, not your coins, elderly person.

I'm a customer of a bank, with a DDA. I make a demand to withdraw my money. The bank refuses. The bank, then, has failed. Where's FDIC? St Louis Fed is a supervisor and regulator, but has nothing to do with this question.

Is it FDIC insured? Is FDIC simply welching on its obligations?

I'll accept your word on that! You definitely have a deeper knowledge of this than I do.

That's why clear, and if necessary quite pervasive, regulation is often required. Obviously it should be "good" regulation — as incentive compatible as possible, no more burdensome than is necessary. Ideally its structural, rather than supervisory! But enforcement is always a whac-a-mole approach.

It is a dereliction by banking regulators up the chain. Absolutely. But it is first and foremost a dereliction of the businesses that made and supervised these arrangements, on behalf of nonprofessional customers.

Oh yeah. The problem is we need more aggressive, harder-working regulators than Lina Khan.