Thoughts? Please read the article before commenting. http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/why-isnt-wall-street-in-jail-20110216?page=1
Good question - according to some it should be, see link below: http://www.analystforum.com/phorums/read.php?1,1230973
I see a bubble forming in “Jailed Bankers” posts…
Oops nevermind…anyone see the movie Inside Job? Worth watching?
I think the bankers already did a CDS on jail cell space, if they are convicted, then the judge gets paid off and they don’t go to jail.
marcus phoenix Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Oops nevermind…anyone see the movie Inside Job? > Worth watching? no, but i meant to. they won an oscar for best documentary the other night so i guess its pretty bad.
A saying from classic Chinese literature from 2500 years ago: “To take more than you need is robbery”. That is the whole article right there, which interestly is the same eight word length as “Everything’s f-d up, and nobody goes to jail.” Both are high-quality summaries of what happened. Taking something has to come from somewhere, a few people taking from many people is what happened. But not just one of those scams where you steal $.01 penny from each person and it adds up, we are taking about taking tens of thousands from each person. The people who are taken from are the masses, uneducated, unsuspecting, naive as to the depths of the plot to financially enslave them. The people who did the taking are calculating cunning educated finance types with massive funds at their disposal and a desire to rob as much as possible as fast as possible. I worked in subprime in 2002, I know. So…recap…the robbers did the robbing, and they caused the global crash, then they bailed themselves out since the corporation owns the government, meanwhile the masses have their homes fall in value, and are the ones stuck to pay the price. Now…the really interesting part. If the masses really wanted justice they would just stop paying their mortgage. Put the price back on those who should pay the price. Strangely the masses haven’t had enough of being robbed yet and will actually wipe out their entire savings or continue to blow their pay check on an ARM loan…which will make the robber even richer. I would say people need to wise up.
That’s stupid. Who owns this country’s mortgage debt? The banks own some, sure, but a lot is held by investors, pension funds, mutual funds, etc, that are in turn owned by the American people (as are the banks, given that most are publicly traded). Don’t forget Fannie and Freddie, which own a ton of it AND are directly owned by the American people. If the masses stop paying their mortgages en masse, the whole system crashes.
John Hussman always asks “Why did we bail out the bondholders at the expense of the taxpayers.” My sense is that it may be because the bondholders are mostly pension funds and possibly 401k mutual funds. If the pension funds are underfunded, the taxpayers are largely on the hook anyway, so maybe they thought that by bailing out bondholders directly they were choosing the lesser of two evils.
bchadwick Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > John Hussman always asks “Why did we bail out the > bondholders at the expense of the taxpayers.” > > My sense is that it may be because the bondholders > are mostly pension funds and possibly 401k mutual > funds. If the pension funds are underfunded, the > taxpayers are largely on the hook anyway, so maybe > they thought that by bailing out bondholders > directly they were choosing the lesser of two > evils. Except, when it’s all tallied, the expense will be fairly minimal: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/02/25/us-usa-treasury-tarp-idUSTRE71O5SH20110225
Wasn’t “bailing out the bondholders” (whatever that means exactly) a side effect of whatever action(s) Hussman’s talking about rather than the goal? Seems disingenuous (if not confused) of him to talk that way.
NakedPuts Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- >If the masses stop paying their > mortgages en masse, the whole system crashes. No $hit. I think that is the point. A re-boot is needed. But the criminals need to actually be locked up. m
how do you lock-up an industry? especially one that’s supported by the govt?
mep_cfa’10 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > NakedPuts Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > >If the masses stop paying their > > mortgages en masse, the whole system crashes. > > No $hit. I think that is the point. A re-boot is > needed. But the criminals need to actually be > locked up. > > m When I say “whole system”, I don’t just mean the large money center banks. I mean “western civilization”. You’d have states and cities declaring BK en masse, interest rates would go haywire, liquidity would evaporate. Basic gov’t services would not be available. Imagine what happens to the real estate market if there’s no credit available because the banks don’t believe you’ll pay it back. This is a scenario in which gold is useless, and the only valuable assets are ammunition and fuel. Do I need to go on? Remember the 4 C’s of credit - one of them is “character”, and it may be the most important, as ultimately our entire financial system is based upon trust.
NakedPuts Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > mep_cfa’10 Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > NakedPuts Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > >If the masses stop paying their > > > mortgages en masse, the whole system crashes. > > > > No $hit. I think that is the point. A re-boot > is > > needed. But the criminals need to actually be > > locked up. > > > > m > > When I say “whole system”, I don’t just mean the > large money center banks. I mean “western > civilization”. You’d have states and cities > declaring BK en masse, interest rates would go > haywire, liquidity would evaporate. Basic gov’t > services would not be available. Imagine what > happens to the real estate market if there’s no > credit available because the banks don’t believe > you’ll pay it back. This is a scenario in which > gold is useless, and the only valuable assets are > ammunition and fuel. Do I need to go on? > > Remember the 4 C’s of credit - one of them is > “character”, and it may be the most important, as > ultimately our entire financial system is based > upon trust. Agree with NP. It amazes me that the ideas as lunatic as where we just shut the system down are even on this board. People do need to go to jail for crimes committed, but lets not go on a witch-hunt here.
This article was probably written by the same person who thinks Barney the dinosaur Frank has no liability at all in the crash 2 years ago… get over yourself article writer and stop whining…
Just saw Inside Job and thought it was actually pretty good. Glenn Hubbard comes off as a tremendous, tremendous douchebag - it’s almost impressive.
is Glen Hubbard the guy who authored the report on Icelandic banks and gets flustered during the intvw? or the other one who gets all rude at the end of the intvw ? found the movie much better than i ahd expected it to be.
reddevil_l3 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > is Glen Hubbard the guy who authored the report on Icelandic banks and gets flustered during the intvw? or the other one who gets all rude at the end of the intvw ? found the movie much better than i ahd expected it to be. Mishkin was the one who wrote the report about Iceland - Hubbard was the guy who freaks out/gets rude.