Banks’ Self-Dealing Super-Charged Financial Crisis

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandomGuy

You have more faith in the public's memory than I do.

If we had any guts and didn't have Congress and the Republican party on its knees worshipping the campaign contributions of the banking lobby blathering on about free markets as cover for naked self-interest, we MIGHT get some sane solution to the systemic risk posed by these hyper-huge banks.

Until they impose some pretty punitive capital requirements based on size (progressive scale) to force them to get smaller and act responsibly, all the fines in the world can, and are, simply priced into the cost of making canyonfuls of cash.

---

They spread it around pretty good:

http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/recips.php?ind=F

"pretty punitive capital requirements"

nah, they can't do that, Congress WON'T do it

SEC, etc needs send some top people, not just eg Fabulous Fabrice, to jail for a long time.

but SEC is part of Wall St, staffed by Wall Streeters with an eye on the revolving door.

Finance OWNS Exec and Legislature. that aint't NEVER gonna change. aka, America is fucked and unfuckable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandomGuy

You have more faith in the public's memory than I do.

If we had any guts and didn't have Congress and the Republican party on its knees worshipping the campaign contributions of the banking lobby blathering on about free markets as cover for naked self-interest, we MIGHT get some sane solution to the systemic risk posed by these hyper-huge banks.

Until they impose some pretty punitive capital requirements based on size (progressive scale) to force them to get smaller and act responsibly, all the fines in the world can, and are, simply priced into the cost of making canyonfuls of cash.

---

Prosecution and discovery would've the better route.

Wm. D Cohan of the NYT:

Quote:

---

That Mr. Holder prefers large settlements to prosecutions is no surprise to anyone familiar with the so-called Holder Doctrine, which stems from his now-famous June 1999 memorandum — when he was deputy attorney general — that included the thought that big financial settlements may be preferable to criminal convictions because a criminal conviction often carries severe unintended consequences, like loss of jobs and the inability to continue as a going concern. (See Andersen, Arthur, for instance.)


That Mr. Holder, as attorney general, is following through on an idea that he proposed as a subordinate 15 years ago does not make his behavior any less infuriating. The fact is that by settling with the big Wall Street banks for billions of dollars — money that comes out of their shareholders’ pockets — Mr. Holder is allowing them to avoid the sunshine that Louis Brandeis wrote 100 years ago was the best disinfectant. Instead of shining the bright light on wrongdoing that took place at the Wall Street banks, Mr. Holder’s settlements allow them to cover it up permanently.

---

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2014/08/...=fb-share&_r=0

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Winehole23

Prosecution and discovery would've the better route.

Wm. D Cohan of the NYT:

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2014/08/...=fb-share&_r=0

---

Holder was the guy who pushed Clinton to pardon Marc Rich. Apparently no one knows where Holder's suggestion came from

Holder's a piece of work.