Goldman's penny punishment

[Jefferson23]

* At the very least, no admission of wrong doing should be worth a hell of a lot more imo.

By Hossein Askari and Noureddine Krichene

Jul 28, 2010

And he looked up, and saw the rich men that were casting their gifts into the treasury. And he saw a certain poor widow casting in thither two mites. And he said, Of a truth I say unto you, This poor widow cast in more than they all: for all these did of their superfluity cast in unto the gifts; but she of her want did cast in all the living that she had.
- Gospel According to St Luke


The Barack Obama administration and the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) must have missed the lesson of the parable of the widow's mite in their upbringing and education. They should read the parable over and over again to get the message. The New York judge, the Honorable Barbara S Jones, who must still approve the settlement of the SEC's case against Goldman Sachs, should do the same before passing judgment.


The pending settlement of the case against Goldman Sachs, which was originally filed in April of this year, calls for a payment of US$550 million ($300 million to the US Treasury and $250 million to investors who lost in mortgage-backed securities that Goldman marketed) and does not require an admission of wrongdoing on the part of Goldman Sachs (normally the case in such settlements); instead, Goldman just admits that it gave "incomplete information" and that this was a "mistake" that it "regrets", and hands over the $550 million.

Now $550 million is a lot of money to mere mortals, that nobody can deny. But to Goldman Sachs? It is equivalent to just 4% of Goldman's net earnings for just one year, 2009 ($13.38 billion); or 3.4% of its bonus pool ($16.2 billion) for 2009. All this in one year, a year while the rest of the world was suffering.


remainder: http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/LG28Dj02.html

[metapunditedgy]

1. Lesson to all psychotics out there: fraud is profitable. The fine will be less than the profits.

If this is REGULATION, how would ENABLEMENT look any different?

[Jackpine Radical]

4. Why psychotics?

Not that I disagree with your point.

[metapunditedgy]

5. There's a meme going around that people conducting fraud at this level are

incapable of basic human empathy. Unlike most internet memes, I think this one may be true...

On edit: Another way of looking at it is, I know I have the skill to defraud people, but could never imagine even trying it. I'm simply not wired the way the banksters are.

[Jackpine Radical]

6. I think you mean psychopaths, not psychotics.

Psychosis refers to disorders such as schizophrenia, in which the person's connection with reality is poor, often with delusions and/or hallucinations.

[metapunditedgy]

7. I think you're right. :-) I thought psychopathy was one type of psychosis, but

the internet tells me that is not true....

[kenfrequed]

2. For a fine to work

It must not only consume the benefit of the crime, it must also punish and deprive beyond that point else what is the point?

[Jefferson23]

3. The only point I've seen is they get away with everything. n/t

[kenfrequed]

8. Sad but true.

Unfortunately no one is making the right argument about the nature of fines.