If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(USA Today)   SEC wins its first case in the war on Wall Street over the mortgage meltdown 5 years ago. Guilty on six counts with $100,000 max fine per count = $600,000. That'll learn 'em   (usatoday.com) divider line 40
    More: Interesting, Wall Street, Goldman Sachs, Securities and Exchange Commission, John Paulson, subprime mortgage, mortgage crisis, short position, institutional investors  
•       •       •

683 clicks; posted to Business » on 01 Aug 2013 at 7:56 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



40 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-08-01 04:25:37 PM
That amount probably fell out of his pocket yesterday.
 
2013-08-01 04:29:37 PM
That's what... what's under one sofa cushion?
 
2013-08-01 04:29:40 PM
If this is a 'war', than the SEC brought a well used cap gun to an insta-gib shock rifle fight.
 
2013-08-01 04:36:43 PM
graphics8.nytimes.com

Look how many farks he gives.
 
2013-08-01 04:44:17 PM

make me some tea: That amount probably fell out of his pocket yesterday.


MaudlinMutantMollusk: That's what... what's under one sofa cushion?


Eh.  This guy is 31, meaning he was 26-29 at the time he was working for Goldman.  He made a few million at GS, so it's not like he's hurting, but it's not quite "sofa cushion" money.
 
2013-08-01 04:50:19 PM
Consider the jobs that could have been created with that money. Instead, it will be paid to the government, and unemployment will increase.
 
2013-08-01 05:03:17 PM
Why are the fines a flat rate and not a percentage of profits?
 
2013-08-01 05:24:36 PM
If Goldman paid for his defense (which they did) it does make one wonder if they will pay his fine.  FTA it could be as low as $5,000 per count.  I'm guessing that he could afford a $30K fine.  Also the max fine is $130K making it $780K max, not $600K.
 
2013-08-01 05:55:20 PM
So, less jail time than a guy who got busted with half a joint in his ashtray.

Justice FTW!
 
2013-08-01 07:39:24 PM
Fark the SEC. They need to watch out for Ohio State or Oregon this year.
 
2013-08-01 08:32:04 PM

Eddie Adams from Torrance: So, less jail time than a guy who got  bustedJOINT with half a joint in his ashtray.

Justice FTW!


FTFY
 
2013-08-01 08:50:14 PM
If the lesson is that "crime does pay", then yes, Wall Street learned that lesson quite well.

They also learned that they can stupid and greedy as the government will bail them out.
 
2013-08-01 08:57:37 PM

MaudlinMutantMollusk: That's what... what's under one sofa cushion?


I believe on wall street $600000 is known as a "rounding error".
 
2013-08-01 08:58:07 PM

Honest Bender: Why are the fines a flat rate and not a percentage of profits?


Because the folks committing the crimes are the ones lobbying Congress to ensure that the fines don't reflect the seriousness of the crime.
 
2013-08-01 09:00:50 PM

dustman81: If the lesson is that "crime does pay", then yes, Wall Street learned that lesson quite well.

They also learned that they can stupid and greedy as the government will bail them out.


They learned that during the Reagan Administration. The trick was finding another dumbass to fall for the same shiat.
 
2013-08-01 09:06:03 PM

MFAWG: They learned that during the Reagan Administration. The trick was finding another dumbass to fall for the same shiat.


Lucky for them they got two in a row...
 
2013-08-01 09:17:19 PM
Yeah, bagging a low-level employee is really showin' them who's boss.
 
2013-08-01 09:29:39 PM
Well there goes happy hour tonight.
 
2013-08-01 09:30:43 PM

skozlaw: MFAWG: They learned that during the Reagan Administration. The trick was finding another dumbass to fall for the same shiat.

Lucky for them they got two in a row...


No, the legislation passed in October, 2008 required that the funds be disbursed in 2 stages, the second being just after the inauguration.

So try again.
 
2013-08-01 09:31:44 PM
He got a mean helping of "justiss"

It's kind of like justice, but not really.
 
2013-08-01 09:45:57 PM

MFAWG: No, the legislation passed in October, 2008 required that the funds be disbursed in 2 stages, the second being just after the inauguration.


Good luck selling that theory. That the guy that authorized the $80bn GM bailout isn't for bailouts.
 
2013-08-01 10:20:56 PM

skozlaw: MFAWG: No, the legislation passed in October, 2008 required that the funds be disbursed in 2 stages, the second being just after the inauguration.

Good luck selling that theory. That the guy that authorized the $80bn GM bailout isn't for bailouts.


Nice. It's real to you, though.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-110publ343/html/PLAW-110publ343.ht m
 
2013-08-01 10:26:20 PM

Honest Bender: Why are the fines a flat rate and not a percentage of profits?


Because F*CK YOU, that's why.

/$ome people are more equal than others
 
2013-08-01 10:28:45 PM

MurphyMurphy: He got a mean helping of "justiss"

It's kind of like justice, but not really.


He got just-is.

As in, why is it that the rich and powerful can get away with anything, with at most a slap on the wrist as punishment?

It just-is.
 
2013-08-01 10:32:38 PM

Honest Bender: Why are the fines a flat rate and not a percentage of profits?


The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike from sleeping under bridges, begging in the streets, and stealing loves of bread.
 
2013-08-01 10:37:42 PM
FTFA: The maneuver ended up making $1 billion for the hedge fund and its wealthy president, John A. Paulson, and millions of dollars in fees for Goldman.

Well, then, hand it over, guys.  Every single penny.  Twice over.

img835.imageshack.us
 
2013-08-01 10:44:43 PM

MusicMakeMyHeadPound: Honest Bender: Why are the fines a flat rate and not a percentage of profits?

The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike from sleeping under bridges, begging in the streets, and stealing loves of bread.


True, but the rich have better lawyers.
 
2013-08-01 10:54:46 PM

MFAWG: skozlaw: MFAWG: No, the legislation passed in October, 2008 required that the funds be disbursed in 2 stages, the second being just after the inauguration.

Good luck selling that theory. That the guy that authorized the $80bn GM bailout isn't for bailouts.

Nice. It's real to you, though.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-110publ343/html/PLAW-110publ343.ht m


I think what you meant was: DERP.

What point are you trying to make here?
 
2013-08-01 11:03:10 PM

Lee Jackson Beauregard: FTFA: The maneuver ended up making $1 billion for the hedge fund and its wealthy president, John A. Paulson, and millions of dollars in fees for Goldman.

Well, then, hand it over, guys.  Every single penny.  Twice over.

[img835.imageshack.us image 400x150]


Hell, yeah! Drug law style. And we keep the car you drove in here too.
 
2013-08-02 01:44:58 AM
As long as the music industry is still able to prosecute college students and stoners for $28K for an MP3 of a BackStreet boys song they shared on Limewire back in 2001, at least we know justice is still being served.
 
2013-08-02 06:54:07 AM

technoblogical: Lee Jackson Beauregard: FTFA: The maneuver ended up making $1 billion for the hedge fund and its wealthy president, John A. Paulson, and millions of dollars in fees for Goldman.

Well, then, hand it over, guys.  Every single penny.  Twice over.

[img835.imageshack.us image 400x150]

Hell, yeah! Drug law style. And we keep the car you drove in here too.


When the War on Civil Liberties Drugs starts affecting the fat cats the same way as the rest of us, maybe it'll get changed.
 
2013-08-02 07:32:54 AM

Sandusky Knows Best: MaudlinMutantMollusk: That's what... what's under one sofa cushion?

I believe on wall street $600000 is known as a "rounding error".


Definitely less than they paid in attorney's fees.
 
2013-08-02 07:46:15 AM

Dimensio: Consider the jobs that could have been created with that money. Instead, it will be paid to the government, and unemployment will increase.


Why, why, why must we always persecute and crucify the poor, unfortunate Job Creators(tm)?
 
2013-08-02 09:27:55 AM

skozlaw: MFAWG: skozlaw: MFAWG: No, the legislation passed in October, 2008 required that the funds be disbursed in 2 stages, the second being just after the inauguration.

Good luck selling that theory. That the guy that authorized the $80bn GM bailout isn't for bailouts.

Nice. It's real to you, though.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-110publ343/html/PLAW-110publ343.ht m

I think what you meant was: DERP.

What point are you trying to make here?


From your own link:


By Z. BYRON WOLFWASHINGTON, Jan. 13, 2009
President-elect Barack Obama told Democratic senators in a closed lunch today that he needs the second $350 billion authorized by Congress as part of the TARP legislation last year and that he'll veto any move by Congress to cut that funding off.
 
2013-08-02 10:34:44 AM
DNRTFA , but I'm assuming this case was against the hot dog vendor on Corlandt Street for aiding and abetting these criminals by feeding them delicious hot dogs. That monster deserves what he gets.
 
2013-08-02 11:16:42 AM

MusicMakeMyHeadPound: Honest Bender: Why are the fines a flat rate and not a percentage of profits?

The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike from sleeping under bridges, begging in the streets, and stealing loves of bread.


I love that quote.
//You Commie! ;)
 
2013-08-02 11:19:30 AM

Lee Jackson Beauregard: FTFA: The maneuver ended up making $1 billion for the hedge fund and its wealthy president, John A. Paulson, and millions of dollars in fees for Goldman.

Well, then, hand it over, guys.  Every single penny.  Twice over.

[img835.imageshack.us image 400x150]


What bothers me about this is that apparently, the authorities know full well that those profits were received directly as a result of illegal action, and yet did not seize them. Those same authorities will happily seize the property of persons if used or received as part of an illegal action.

Why is it that corporations fight to be treated like persons when it suits them, but then get protections unavailable to persons on top of it?
 
2013-08-02 12:52:44 PM

FormlessOne: Because the folks committing the crimes are the ones lobbying Congress to ensure that the fines don't reflect the seriousness of the crime.


What's squeezing my brain is that this wasn't even tried as a crime, it was tried in a federal civil court.  We won't even get the satisfaction of putting him in jail for a while.
 
2013-08-02 02:07:57 PM

MFAWG: President-elect Barack Obama told Democratic senators in a closed lunch today that he needs the second $350 billion authorized by Congress as part of the TARP legislation last year and that he'll veto any move by Congress to cut that funding off.


So your entire alleged "point" is that Obama, who actively sought out the funds, doesn't support the program because he isn't the one who passed it?

What's it like being a drooling political whore anyway?
 
2013-08-02 02:26:24 PM

technoblogical: Lee Jackson Beauregard: FTFA: The maneuver ended up making $1 billion for the hedge fund and its wealthy president, John A. Paulson, and millions of dollars in fees for Goldman.

Well, then, hand it over, guys.  Every single penny.  Twice over.

[img835.imageshack.us image 400x150]

Hell, yeah! Drug law style. And we keep the car you drove in here too.


The fine should be to the company for the entire amount of the illegal transaction/s plus a percentage of gross revenue. It has to hurt the whole organization.
Individuals who commit these crimes should be barred for life from the financial industry at the very least, if not only bankrupted and imprisoned.
 
Displayed 40 of 40 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report