Banking scandals

[kallend 2,106]

Money laundering, interest rate manipulation, fraud...

If corporations are people, why aren't these folks in jail?

Does the financial services industry have any ethical standards at all? Why should it have when the rewards for bad behavior are huge and the downside risk negligible?

www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/the-monitors-view/2012/0717/As-bank-scandals-add-up-a-need-for-a-culture-of-integrity-in-banks

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[weekender 0]

Quote

Money laundering, interest rate manipulation, fraud...

If corporations are people, why aren't these folks in jail?

Does the financial services industry have any ethical standards at all? Why should it have when the rewards for bad behavior are huge and the downside risk negligible?

www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/the-monitors-view/2012/0717/As-bank-scandals-add-up-a-need-for-a-culture-of-integrity-in-banks

I dont think the OP wants a real discussion but i will post for those more moderates out there who read these threads.

from the article, "The survey reveals that a third of them feel pressure through bonus or compensation plans to violate the law or engage in unethical conduct. Only a quarter have faith that they will be protected if they blow the whistle on wrongdoing."

the pressure to perform is hard for many to understand. no matter how long you have been employeed, if you dont meet your numbers you are let go. its that simple.

sometimes you are let go because you pose a trading risk. I personally have had to let employee's go because i could no longer trust them after years of good service. Divorce, adultry, gambling debts or just poor performance. You can tell the signs and its not worth taking a risk on them. its a great lifestyle and people dont want to lose it. some will do anything to keep their numbers up. there is outsized money at stake and it creates an outsized temptation to be immoral.

More effective regulation is what is needed. the CTFC has proven to be a failure at it, IMO. FINRA is much better.

"The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird."
John Frusciante

[kallend 2,106]

Quote

Quote

Money laundering, interest rate manipulation, fraud...

If corporations are people, why aren't these folks in jail?

Does the financial services industry have any ethical standards at all? Why should it have when the rewards for bad behavior are huge and the downside risk negligible?

www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/the-monitors-view/2012/0717/As-bank-scandals-add-up-a-need-for-a-culture-of-integrity-in-banks

I dont think the OP wants a real discussion but i will post for those more moderates out there who read these threads.

...

Incorrect.

...

More effective regulation is what is needed. the CTFC has proven to be a failure at it, IMO. FINRA is much better.

What would you suggest? Given the enormous rewards of bad behavior, the downside should be proportionate, do you agree?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[weekender 0]

the problem is not new. the greater the temptation...

we need more effective enforcement. i read that Peregrine was asked by the CTFC for bank records. they provided paper copies and it worked. these are the same people who monitored Corzine's firm. that is unnacceptable. FINRA demands electronic doc's that cannot be forged. Why is the CTFC so much more lax? I have no idea but the Federal Gov't should address that.

Libor was a very simple act of collusion. the equity OTC markets were forced to stop that by the late 90's. FINRA demanded all markets were electronic and you could no longer communicate over phone. its hard to fix a market if you cannot talk to the other trader. i have no idea why they were permitted to do this in 2012.

IMO, they need to get more serious about ALL the markets and regulate them like they do equities. Post your quotes on an electronic board somewhere. there has to be a way to do this even for derivatives.

the pol's are more worried about sound bites than actual enforcement. who cares about credit card debit machines when people are fixing Libor rates. its a shame.

"The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird."
John Frusciante

[lawrocket 3]

There certainly is a great number of bankers facing jail time. And banks facing stiff penalties.

The problem is that in October of last year, the President explained that the Administration's position is that the banks didn't break any laws, just acted immorally. "If somebody they violated laws on the books, they need to be prosecuted, and that’s the Attorney General’s job.”- President Obama. He also said that what the banks did wasn't "necessarily against the law but they had a huge destructive impact."

Now, you or I may view fraudulent mortgages, deeds of trust and perjured assignments and foreclosures to be illegal. But the Chief Executive and Law Enforcement Officer and his Attorney General do not. Prosecuting the banks can, of course, get in the way of bailing them out (tough to dish out money to banks if the directors and officers are under indictment).

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Gravitymaster 0]

They aren't in jail because it's nearly impossible to bundle campaign contributions from a cell.

[jakee 1,563]

Quote

The problem is that in October of last year, the President explained that the Administration's position is that the banks didn't break any laws, just acted immorally. "If somebody they violated laws on the books, they need to be prosecuted, and that’s the Attorney General’s job.”- President Obama. He also said that what the banks did wasn't "necessarily against the law but they had a huge destructive impact."

But what was he talking about?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[kallend 2,106]

OK, it's Obama's fault that banks were deregulated, that Madoff screwed his investors..... Got it.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[lawrocket 3]

No. You're asking why asses aren't being kicked. Why bankers aren't going to jail. Unfortunately, we have a current administration (they are the ones who can presently do it) who does not view the banks as having done anything illegal.

I just happen to think that the Department of Justice is a pretty reasonable place to start. Bush didn't prosecute them? Then Obama can. And he isn't.

Am I wrong for suggesting that prosecutions (which is your subject) are not being performed by this admin? And that the President himself has said that it's because it's the banks just found loopholes and didn't break the law? We can look at Bush. We can also look at the current admin.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

Am I wrong for suggesting that prosecutions (which is your subject) are not being performed by this admin? And that the President himself has said that it's because it's the banks just found loopholes and didn't break the law? We can look at Bush. We can also look at the current admin.

You could, but I think it really doesn't matter who the president is.

The Finance, Insurance and Real Estate sector drives the biggest portion of your GDP. In the current economic climate, you need that sector to perform well.

Simplified, the bankers have you by the balls.

[lawrocket 3]

By the balls? I disagree. I believe they have the politicians by the balls. On all sides. (Think Enron: they only got buddy/buddy with the GOP. But Global Crossing greased both parties heavily. Hence, no political witch hunt because both sides would be equally, um, roastable).

The attorneys general are choosing politics over law. I do appreciate you pointing it out.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

The attorneys general are choosing politics over law. I do appreciate you pointing it out.

Of course they are. Why would you think they would do any different?

[kallend 2,106]

Quote

By the balls? I disagree. I believe they have the politicians by the balls. On all sides. (Think Enron: they only got buddy/buddy with the GOP. But Global Crossing greased both parties heavily. Hence, no political witch hunt because both sides would be equally, um, roastable).

The attorneys general are choosing politics over law. I do appreciate you pointing it out.

I think it goes deeper than politics with the financial industry. These crooks have basically got a gun to the head of the world's economy. Govt.s are scared to bring them down.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[jakee 1,563]

Quote

And that the President himself has said that it's because it's the banks just found loopholes and didn't break the law?

But what was he talking about?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[weekender 0]

Quote

Quote

By the balls? I disagree. I believe they have the politicians by the balls. On all sides. (Think Enron: they only got buddy/buddy with the GOP. But Global Crossing greased both parties heavily. Hence, no political witch hunt because both sides would be equally, um, roastable).

The attorneys general are choosing politics over law. I do appreciate you pointing it out.

I think it goes deeper than politics with the financial industry. These crooks have basically got a gun to the head of the world's economy. Govt.s are scared to bring them down.

they are not afraid they are smart. some banks are so big that they would cause more damage failing so they get bailed out and/or left alone.

no bank should be too big to fail. its pretty simple actually and everyone knows it. the problem is, just like i said about regulations, the pol's are more concerned with elections then actually passing sound policy. both parties.

"The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird."
John Frusciante

[billvon 3,069]

>the pol's are more concerned with elections then actually passing sound policy. both parties.

Right. If they weren't that way they wouldn't be elected.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

no bank should be too big to fail. its pretty simple actually and everyone knows it. the problem is, just like i said about regulations, the pol's are more concerned with elections then actually passing sound policy. both parties.

yes, this is where we blew it in the past couple decades. Any merger seems to get signed off these days. It was a bit shocking when AT&T was denied the T-Mobile bid. Banks are nearly as concentrated as wireless providers, however it's much easier for small competitors to continue to exist.

JPM Chase Manthattan Chemical Bank One WaMU Bear Stearns shouldn't have happened, now should be splintered like MaBell.

[Coreece 190]

Quote

Quote

By the balls? I disagree. I believe they have the politicians by the balls. On all sides. (Think Enron: they only got buddy/buddy with the GOP. But Global Crossing greased both parties heavily. Hence, no political witch hunt because both sides would be equally, um, roastable).

The attorneys general are choosing politics over law. I do appreciate you pointing it out.

I think it goes deeper than politics with the financial industry. These crooks have basically got a gun to the head of the world's economy. Govt.s are scared to bring them down.

Bingo...I was formerly involved with some of these pricks both professionally and romantically...Ifuk it, I was one of them, from the age of 13...they have no ethics. They get off on this shit and the power goes st8 to their heads...there is no other drug like it. They are lost and will meet there doom...I promise.

Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are...