{"id":24125,"date":"2023-03-16T21:09:06","date_gmt":"2023-03-16T21:09:06","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/lelandhale.com\/wordpress\/?p=24125"},"modified":"2023-09-03T19:34:41","modified_gmt":"2023-09-03T19:34:41","slug":"woke-goes-for-broke","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lelandhale.com\/wordpress\/woke-goes-for-broke\/","title":{"rendered":"Woke Goes For Broke"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Woke seems to be on the lips of many conservatives of the right wing persuasion these days. It doesn’t take much imagination to hear their sneer and see lips, purple with rage. I have to ask, though… What’s the opposite of “woke?” Broke? Or maybe it’s “asleep.” Is that what people want? A return to eternal somnolence? Too soon, my friends. You will experience eternal somnolence all too soon. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"broke\"\/
(Courtesy Bahai)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

As for the term’s originators, their<\/em> meaning has been lost to the fox. There’s nothing worse than terms of art being stolen by bogscum. Here’s the memo<\/a>: “Woke is an adjective derived from African-American Vernacular English meaning ‘alert to racial prejudice and discrimination.'” Which, the foxes will have you believe, doesn’t exist. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Never Waste An Opportunity<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

“Woke” is so useful that some folks are attempting to attach it to — got this? — bank failures. Yeah, the Silicon Valley Bank (SVB)<\/a> is all over the news. And now we learn they failed not because they were broke but because they were woke. The broke part we can prove. So broke they sold their own stock at a loss, just to pretend they were solvent. It also had diversity policies, derisively classed by some as “woke.” So, given the choice between bad bets and wokeness… What’s a wingnut in good standing to do? <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Of course, the SVB failure has nothing to do with woke. In fact, if you’re invoking woke, you’re scraping the bottom of your rhetorical barrel. This has everything to do with the deregulation of greed. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Let’s start with the basics. Conservatives of every stripe follow an abiding trope: Regulation is bad. Regulation, especially when it applies to business, must be extinguished. [Regulation of bodies and relationships, of course, is another matter entirely. But I digress.]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I saw it first hand in the late 70s, when I worked for a conservative, pro-business Trade Association. My boss had a regulation chart that looked like the cryptographic key to an Egyptian tomb. As a concept, deregulation may wane, but it never disappears. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"broke\"\/
Rainy Days in Silicon Valley<\/strong> (courtesy Sky News)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Go Full Tilt Boogie<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

In fact, the deregulation bug hit again under TFG. The Former Guy has no abiding principles, so he is very persuadable. Hence, the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act<\/a>, passed in 2018 during his administration. It “revised” key requirements designed to minimize bank failures. The target was Dodd-Frank<\/a>, which was itself a response to the 2007-08 Financial Crisis<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Under Dodd-Frank, a wide swath of banks were subject to a host of regulations, including “stress tests,” designed to assure they had sufficient assets to withstand broad economic disasters. Specifically, banks were to maintain certain levels<\/a> of capital (to absorb losses) and liquidity (to meet cash obligations), and to file a \u201cliving will\u201d plan<\/a> for their quick and orderly dissolution were they to fail. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The 2018 bill rolled that back, excluding all but the largest dozen or so banks from the stress test requirements. That wasn’t the only weakening in play. Executive orders and agency appointments<\/a> also took their toll. So when interest rates started rising, and SVB holdings went sideways, oops<\/a>… At least SVB had a living will before they went broke.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n