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.

(The New York Times)   "Why only one banker went to jail over the financial crisis" Because we're run by the banking industry?   (nytimes.com) divider line 126
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

4833 clicks; posted to Main » on 01 May 2014 at 9:48 AM (16 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



126 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-05-01 09:50:47 AM
Thread's pretty much over already. Subby, get the lights.
 
2014-05-01 09:50:52 AM
Too big to jail?
 
2014-05-01 09:51:05 AM
Because he's the only one who landed on the go to jail square?
 
2014-05-01 09:51:45 AM
They should have at least placed a few of them on yacht arrest.
 
2014-05-01 09:52:28 AM
And people hate the cops.....
 
2014-05-01 09:52:51 AM
Because the private sector pays its lawyers better.
 
2014-05-01 09:54:46 AM
Appears most of them are dying anyways.
 
2014-05-01 09:57:29 AM
Because of the golden rule. He who has the gold, makes the rules.
 
2014-05-01 09:58:36 AM
Screw ALL of those greedy b*stards.  They should all be in jail.  But money talks, BS walks.  It's the American way.
 
2014-05-01 10:00:12 AM
Because holding them responsible for their crimes would be socialism. You don't hate America, do you?
 
2014-05-01 10:01:20 AM
Since when do we need to prosecute these companies at all? The Constitution provides the means for States and the Federal governments to merely cancel the Corporations charters if they become a danger to the Republic. No trial is needed. All it takes is an act of the relevant legislative body. A simple majority vote. fark prosecuting them, just yank their charters, seize their assets and auction them off to pay off the investors. Those laws are almost as old as the Constitution itself.
 
2014-05-01 10:01:54 AM
'cause 'murica and capitalism?
 
2014-05-01 10:04:40 AM

Deathfrogg: Since when do we need to prosecute these companies at all? The Constitution provides the means for States and the Federal governments to merely cancel the Corporations charters if they become a danger to the Republic. No trial is needed. All it takes is an act of the relevant legislative body. A simple majority vote. fark prosecuting them, just yank their charters, seize their assets and auction them off to pay off the investors. Those laws are almost as old as the Constitution itself.


And where's the congressmember to introduce such a measure? Anybody? Surely there is one with the courage to bring this up.
 
2014-05-01 10:05:25 AM

Deathfrogg: Since when do we need to prosecute these companies at all? The Constitution provides the means for States and the Federal governments to merely cancel the Corporations charters if they become a danger to the Republic. No trial is needed. All it takes is an act of the relevant legislative body. A simple majority vote. fark prosecuting them, just yank their charters, seize their assets and auction them off to pay off the investors

TAXPAYERS. Those laws are almost as old as the Constitution itself.
 
2014-05-01 10:06:13 AM
Because the DoJ's run by pussies who couldn't give two farks about justice.
 
2014-05-01 10:08:07 AM
www.bonappetit.com

because they gave the subpoenas to this guy?
 
2014-05-01 10:08:14 AM

imfallen_angel: 'cause 'murica and capitalism?


cdn.motinetwork.net
 
2014-05-01 10:08:56 AM
Over in zero. But the time of the collapse, Corporate America had already bought the US Government.
 
2014-05-01 10:09:40 AM
I was wondering why all the rich bashing articles were going green today then I remembered it's pay day for a lot of people
 
2014-05-01 10:10:25 AM
The obvious answer is that he's the only guy who broke the law. All of the rest of them were playing by the rules, and this asshole came along and farked it up for everyone. Thanks a lot, jerkface.
 
2014-05-01 10:10:47 AM

Deathfrogg: Since when do we need to prosecute these companies at all? The Constitution provides the means for States and the Federal governments to merely cancel the Corporations charters if they become a danger to the Republic. No trial is needed. All it takes is an act of the relevant legislative body. A simple majority vote. fark prosecuting them, just yank their charters, seize their assets and auction them off to pay off the investors. Those laws are almost as old as the Constitution itself.


Wake up. You're dreaming. Time to go to work.
 
2014-05-01 10:13:27 AM

socoloco: Deathfrogg: Since when do we need to prosecute these companies at all? The Constitution provides the means for States and the Federal governments to merely cancel the Corporations charters if they become a danger to the Republic. No trial is needed. All it takes is an act of the relevant legislative body. A simple majority vote. fark prosecuting them, just yank their charters, seize their assets and auction them off to pay off the investors. Those laws are almost as old as the Constitution itself.

Wake up. You're dreaming. Time to go to work.


Can't sleep anyway, I have a Mathematics midterm tomorrow.
 
2014-05-01 10:18:50 AM

In the case of HSBC, caught red-handed laundering money for terrorists and drug cartels the "Justice" Department actually said they were too big to jail:

"Had the U.S. authorities decided to press criminal charges," said Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer at a press conference to announce the settlement, "HSBC would almost certainly have lost its banking license in the U.S., the future of the institution would have been under threat and the entire banking system would have been destabilized."
 
2014-05-01 10:21:32 AM
Pay no attention. Some d-bag NBA owner is a racist. That's all you need to be concerned with.
 
2014-05-01 10:23:06 AM

Gulper Eel: And where's the congressmember to introduce such a measure?


Just look for one with a (D) after his/her name.
 
2014-05-01 10:25:17 AM

Deathfrogg: Since when do we need to prosecute these companies at all? The Constitution provides the means for States and the Federal governments to merely cancel the Corporations charters if they become a danger to the Republic. No trial is needed. All it takes is an act of the relevant legislative body. A simple majority vote. fark prosecuting them, just yank their charters, seize their assets and auction them off to pay off the investors. Those laws are almost as old as the Constitution itself.


Real answer? Because all that poses no credible threat to the life, liberty and wealth of individual bankers. It is only the credible threat to spending the next several decades getting cornholed by Bubba in cell block D, along with impoverishing your children, seeing you hottie wife divorce you for some other banker, and people making Bernie Maddoff jokes about you that will change behaviors.

And of course, this guy made the unfortunate choice of being born brown...throw him under the bus!
 
2014-05-01 10:25:35 AM
Noooooo! That's not whyyyyyyyy. Bankers are good guys. Without bankers, we would not have banks, now would we?
 
2014-05-01 10:25:39 AM
...because being a greedy dick isn't illegal in this country, and the state doesn't arbitrarily jail people it doesn't like?
 
2014-05-01 10:25:52 AM
Because crimes weren't committed, I suppose.

Don't worry, little tinfoil hatters, the govt managed to extort billions from banks in the wake of the crisis.
 
2014-05-01 10:26:19 AM
coincidentally the only guy to go to jail is named  Kareem Serageldin
 
2014-05-01 10:28:04 AM
www.salem-news.com


/Because FARK YOU!  That's why.

//Thread was over before it started.

///Now get off my the banks lawn.
 
2014-05-01 10:28:54 AM
Ah, just another poignant reminder of the historical importance of one man with an axe and the will to use it.

/no gods, no kings!
 
2014-05-01 10:34:08 AM

Cold_Sassy: money talks


That was the official court opinion in Citizens United, correct?
 
2014-05-01 10:38:01 AM
"You may say that I've grown bitter but of this you may be sure,
the rich have got their channels in the bedrooms of the poor,
and there's a mighty judgment coming
but I may be wrong.
You see, you hear these funny voices in the tower of song."
 
2014-05-01 10:38:58 AM

DontMakeMeComeBackThere: ...because being a greedy dick isn't illegal in this country, and the state doesn't arbitrarily jail people it doesn't like?


well, I can agree with the 1st half of that sentence.... and as the author quoted - "most of the lossess were due to recklessness not not criminality"
 
2014-05-01 10:39:19 AM

Debeo Summa Credo: Because crimes weren't committed, I suppose.

Don't worry, little tinfoil hatters, the govt managed to extort billions from banks in the wake of the crisis.


How is the air on your planet? You certainly aren't alive and well on this one.
 
2014-05-01 10:40:16 AM
Gulper Eel:
And where's the congressmember to introduce such a measure? Anybody? Surely there is one with the courage to bring this up.

Well, there's no way to prove if he would or wouldn't (one of the few perks of being dead) but I'd like to think Paul Wellstone would.

/not a conspiracy guy, but I still think that crash was fishy
 
2014-05-01 10:46:31 AM

Deathfrogg: Since when do we need to prosecute these companies at all? The Constitution provides the means for States and the Federal governments to merely cancel the Corporations charters if they become a danger to the Republic. No trial is needed. All it takes is an act of the relevant legislative body. A simple majority vote. fark prosecuting them, just yank their charters, seize their assets and auction them off to pay off the investors. Those laws are almost as old as the Constitution itself.


The problem is, if you shut down all or most of the largest banks in the country, unemployment would go to 25% or so overnight.  The point of a bank is that it loans money to other companies and individuals; if all of those people and companies started having serious trouble getting loans, the economy would crash and another recession would start.

One problem with articles like this is they never list any specific people who "should" have been prosecuted but weren't.  The number could be zero, for all I know.  Give some specifics, man, not "bankers suck and the government sucks" generic crap.
 
2014-05-01 10:48:52 AM

Geotpf: One problem with articles like this is they never list any specific people who "should" have been prosecuted but weren't. The number could be zero, for all I know. Give some specifics, man, not "bankers suck and the government sucks" generic crap.


No GED in law, and Nancy Grace notwithstanding, but wouldn't that open them up to libel lawsuits?
 
2014-05-01 10:50:00 AM
getsoutalive:

[cdn.motinetwork.net image 640x612]

i478.photobucket.com
 
2014-05-01 10:51:32 AM
On the same subject, I am presently reading Mark Taibbi's _The Divide_.  Highly recommended.
 
2014-05-01 10:52:02 AM
The bankers' behavior is kinda to be expected. You tell them go ahead have fun take as big risks as you want we'll foot the losses they're gonna do just that very thing. And when it all blows up in their face they can cry too big to fail, financial instability, great depression oogy boogy and get their bailouts. Then pay them back by being first in line for T-Bill auctions then reselling them and using those profits for repayment


Banks have a tendency to become very corrupt but people seem to forget that they don't want to store quantities of currency in their home and kind of like being able to purchase things without being required to have the entire bill up front in cash. Much less our financial system is really the only thing keeping us a superpower. There are tremendous perks to having the world's reserve currency and biggest banking system. You don't want to be around when that is no longer the case
 
2014-05-01 10:52:57 AM

MooseUpNorth: Geotpf: One problem with articles like this is they never list any specific people who "should" have been prosecuted but weren't. The number could be zero, for all I know. Give some specifics, man, not "bankers suck and the government sucks" generic crap.

No GED in law, and Nancy Grace notwithstanding, but wouldn't that open them up to libel lawsuits?


Maybe in some place like Great Britain (whose libel laws are so bad the US passed a law preventing using US courts to collect a UK libel lawsuit), but not in the United States.  The truth, or even an honest attempt to find the truth (even if it turns out to include false info that they honestly believed was true) is a 100% defense against a libel lawsuit in the United States.  Free speech protections are very strong in the US.
 
2014-05-01 10:53:58 AM

GoldSpider: Just look for one with a (D) after his/her name.


Okay, I'm looking...I see a LOT of crickets, but no congressmembers, D-tagged or otherwise.
 
2014-05-01 10:57:59 AM

generallyso: In the case of HSBC, caught red-handed laundering money for terrorists and drug cartels the "Justice" Department actually said they were too big to jail:

"Had the U.S. authorities decided to press criminal charges," said Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer at a press conference to announce the settlement, "HSBC would almost certainly have lost its banking license in the U.S., the future of the institution would have been under threat and the entire banking system would have been destabilized."


bearsrepeating.jpg

which is really important ...wait, a Kardashian scissored with Miley ? hold on...
 
2014-05-01 11:07:21 AM

Geotpf: The problem is, if you shut down all or most of the largest banks in the country, unemployment would go to 25% or so overnight. The point of a bank is that it loans money to other companies and individuals; if all of those people and companies started having serious trouble getting loans, the economy would crash and another recession would start.


Their investments wouldn't disappear overnight. They might get tied up for a while, and there would be significant impact, but I doubt 25% unemployment (didn't get that high when trillions vanished overnight, did it?) and a total freeze of the monetary system.

I think the bigger problem comes when people have no faith in the high-finance system (well, I'd assume most of us don't already) - but then again, once you've got the table minimum, it appears you lose some part of your humanity. The only ones who care don't matter; and the only ones who matter don't care.

That's supposed to be where the courts come in, but it appears they don't care much, either.
 
2014-05-01 11:13:51 AM

Deathfrogg: socoloco: Deathfrogg: Since when do we need to prosecute these companies at all? The Constitution provides the means for States and the Federal governments to merely cancel the Corporations charters if they become a danger to the Republic. No trial is needed. All it takes is an act of the relevant legislative body. A simple majority vote. fark prosecuting them, just yank their charters, seize their assets and auction them off to pay off the investors. Those laws are almost as old as the Constitution itself.

Wake up. You're dreaming. Time to go to work.

Can't sleep anyway, I have a Mathematics midterm tomorrow.


midterm? it's time for finals at the local University. What kind of schedule are you on?
 
2014-05-01 11:21:23 AM

Debeo Summa Credo: Because crimes weren't committed, I suppose.

Don't worry, little tinfoil hatters, the govt managed to extort billions from banks in the wake of the crisis.


Citation needed.
 
m00
2014-05-01 11:21:36 AM

Deathfrogg: Since when do we need to prosecute these companies at all? The Constitution provides the means for States and the Federal governments to merely cancel the Corporations charters if they become a danger to the Republic. No trial is needed. All it takes is an act of the relevant legislative body. A simple majority vote. fark prosecuting them, just yank their charters, seize their assets and auction them off to pay off the investors. Those laws are almost as old as the Constitution itself.


Because corporations are people that have a constitutional right to due process.

/In before someone on the right says "Why do you want to jail job creators" and someone on the left says "obstructionist Republicans prevented Obama from carrying out justice."
 
2014-05-01 11:22:26 AM

TwowheelinTim: Deathfrogg: socoloco: Deathfrogg: Since when do we need to prosecute these companies at all? The Constitution provides the means for States and the Federal governments to merely cancel the Corporations charters if they become a danger to the Republic. No trial is needed. All it takes is an act of the relevant legislative body. A simple majority vote. fark prosecuting them, just yank their charters, seize their assets and auction them off to pay off the investors. Those laws are almost as old as the Constitution itself.

Wake up. You're dreaming. Time to go to work.

Can't sleep anyway, I have a Mathematics midterm tomorrow.

midterm? it's time for finals at the local University. What kind of schedule are you on?


Sounds like a quarter system to me. Spring quarter started in late March or early April, midterms might be around the beginning of May, and finals would be 1st or 2d week of June, depending on the specifics.
 
Displayed 50 of 126 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report