7 ms·

Anyone can shed light on Goldman's chances to get fair trial from the Malaysian courts? 7.5b is more than 10 times the fee collected by Goldman, why stop there

by theosp 8y ago

Anyone can shed light on Goldman's chances to get fair trial from the Malaysian courts? 7.5b is more than 10 times the fee collected by Goldman, why stop there?

baybal2 8y ago
10 fold punishments for proceeds of crime are not that rare, why stop there?
- Theodores 8y ago
  10x was legit in Babylon, circa 1754 BC, with the oldest written law concerning this: Ex. Law #265: "If a herdsman, to whose care cattle or sheep have been entrusted, be guilty of fraud and make false returns of the natural increase, or sell them for money, then shall he be convicted and pay the owner ten times the loss. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_of_Hammurabi https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_of_Hammurabi Innocent until proven guilty was also in the Code of Hammurabi, not sure about the 'eye for an eye' bit or the treatment of slaves though. Nonetheless the precedent of 10x is there.
  - baybal2 8y ago
    I'm surprised that somebody caught that line on a forum like HN :)
  - chucksmash 8y ago
    The eye for an eye bit was in there[1], but apparently only for men of the same class: > 196. If a superior man should blind the eye of another superior man, they shall blind his eye. > 198. If he should blind the eye [...] of a commoner, he shall weigh and deliver 60 shekels of silver. > 199. If he should blind the eye of a slave of a superior man [...], he shall weigh and deliver one half of the slave's value (in silver). [1]: From page 106 of "Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind" which I was just coincidentally reading on the bus and would def recommend.
    - Theodores 8y ago
      Thanks for the tip, I will go for the YouTube talk before investing in the book. baybal2 - sibling comment - was correct and unfairly modded down. A well known leader referenced the Law of Hammurabi the other day. Coincidentally I was listening to this press conference whilst procrastinating on HN, to come across this story. New to the Law of Hammurabi, I had to check out the Wikipedia page, to read the 'ten times' bit, enabling me to conveniently cut 'n' paste the above comment. Despite going to school I had not ever heard of Law of Hammurabi before. I have not read it in depth but just that small bit of knowledge regarding the history of written laws has changed how I see and understand the world.
sorokod 8y ago
Likely to be as ethical as the financial system GS gamed. All in all I think it is fair.
onetimemanytime 8y ago
Risk vs. Reward. Fraudsters and thieves can easily return the amount stolen. The fact that they rarely get caught works for them. Now make them pay 10x, jail or ban them from doing business and they're likely to think 10x before doing it again.
ReptileMan 8y ago
Because that is the rough amount of 1MDB bonds that Goldman helped sold. They government just wants to unravel that mess without paying money.
andrepd 8y ago
If you steal 100$, and the punishment is to return 100$, then it's worth it for you to keep stealing. The punishment has to be 5000$ and personal punishment such as imprisonment.
mruts 8y ago
It seems to me that the prosecutor and finance minister are probably just as corrupt. They just see a pot of money and want to steal it, masquerading it as reparations. I don’t think GS did anything wrong and I hope they tell the Malaysians to fuck off.
- dm3730 8y ago
  > It seems to me that the prosecutor and finance minister are probably just as corrupt. They just see a pot of money and want to steal it, masquerading it as reparations. Could you provide some data to substantiate these accusations? The prosecutor is the first non-Muslim Attorney General in Malaysia's history, picked right after a historic election for Malaysia where the opposition party won for the first time. I don't see any evidence of corruption from what I scanned. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Thomas_(barrister) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Thomas_(barrister) The finance minister is Lim Guan Eng. A politician who was previously imprisoned for defending a rape victim. Allegations of corruption against him were proven to be false and planned by, ironically, a corruption-funded organization under the former regime (the one that was partnered with GS). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lim_Guan_Eng https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lim_Guan_Eng > I don’t think GS did anything wrong and I hope they tell the Malaysians to fuck off. You seem to have very strong opinions. I'm wondering if you realize that Tim Leissner, Goldman's VP already pled guilty to money laundering. https://www.forbes.com/sites/korihale/2018/11/08/goldman-sachs-ex-hip-hop-banker-pleads-guilty-to-money-laundering/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/korihale/2018/11/08/goldman-sac... I'm very curious about your motivations for your post.
  - mruts 8y ago
    I do think that the two partners Leissner and Ng are probably complicit to some degree. They probably do deserve to get prosecuted by the justice department. But GS are just the underwriters of the bond, they aren't guaranteeing the bonds. They didn't steal the money either. The Malaysian government is claiming that because the fee was large (around 10%) that it's clear evidence that the organization as a whole was complicit and guilty. I don't think that's a very strong argument. But the Malaysians don't seem as interested in justice (certainly the two partners should be jailed) as they are in finding someway to get their money back. So instead of looking at the people in their own country who stole the money, an investigation that might implicate other powerful people besides Jho Low, they turn their eyes to easiest target they have, GS, a foreign company. It might even be reasonable to ask for the underwriting fee back (though I'm on the fence about that), but 7.5 Billion USD? Do you think that number of motivated by justice? Do you think it's motivated by "teaching them a lesson?" Or do you think that the number is so high because Malaysia wants the money and they see an easy way to get it? 7.5 Billion is almost 10% of the entire company's shareholder equity, truly a staggering sum for GS to pay. Total revenue for GS in 2017 was around 30 Billion, net profits were just 4 billion. How is almost 2 years of net profits in the least bit fair as a punishment? And if it is fair, why stop at that? Why not 15 billion? Or 30 billion? Why not just take all their equity and turn it into a state corporation. Surely Goldman Sachs, the blood sucking squid, deserves a comeuppance for all the proletariat ire they have received over the years. Maybe that last paragraph is a little much, but the point still stands. I think people irrationally hate banks and hate wall st, and their view of justice for the banks is colored by that discrimination.
Whack-kneed 8y ago
Even the Romans worried. About "who would be there to clean after the janitors" Time for a financial death penalty: state imposed maximum impoverishment as penalty for such corruptions. It's GS types only real fear...

by theosp 8y ago

Anyone can shed light on Goldman's chances to get fair trial from the Malaysian courts? 7.5b is more than 10 times the fee collected by Goldman, why stop there?

baybal2 8y ago

10 fold punishments for proceeds of crime are not that rare, why stop there?

Theodores 8y ago
10x was legit in Babylon, circa 1754 BC, with the oldest written law concerning this: Ex. Law #265: "If a herdsman, to whose care cattle or sheep have been entrusted, be guilty of fraud and make false returns of the natural increase, or sell them for money, then shall he be convicted and pay the owner ten times the loss. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_of_Hammurabi https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_of_Hammurabi Innocent until proven guilty was also in the Code of Hammurabi, not sure about the 'eye for an eye' bit or the treatment of slaves though. Nonetheless the precedent of 10x is there.
- baybal2 8y ago
  I'm surprised that somebody caught that line on a forum like HN :)
- chucksmash 8y ago
  The eye for an eye bit was in there[1], but apparently only for men of the same class: > 196. If a superior man should blind the eye of another superior man, they shall blind his eye. > 198. If he should blind the eye [...] of a commoner, he shall weigh and deliver 60 shekels of silver. > 199. If he should blind the eye of a slave of a superior man [...], he shall weigh and deliver one half of the slave's value (in silver). [1]: From page 106 of "Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind" which I was just coincidentally reading on the bus and would def recommend.
  - Theodores 8y ago
    Thanks for the tip, I will go for the YouTube talk before investing in the book. baybal2 - sibling comment - was correct and unfairly modded down. A well known leader referenced the Law of Hammurabi the other day. Coincidentally I was listening to this press conference whilst procrastinating on HN, to come across this story. New to the Law of Hammurabi, I had to check out the Wikipedia page, to read the 'ten times' bit, enabling me to conveniently cut 'n' paste the above comment. Despite going to school I had not ever heard of Law of Hammurabi before. I have not read it in depth but just that small bit of knowledge regarding the history of written laws has changed how I see and understand the world.

sorokod 8y ago

Likely to be as ethical as the financial system GS gamed. All in all I think it is fair.

onetimemanytime 8y ago

Risk vs. Reward. Fraudsters and thieves can easily return the amount stolen. The fact that they rarely get caught works for them. Now make them pay 10x, jail or ban them from doing business and they're likely to think 10x before doing it again.

ReptileMan 8y ago

Because that is the rough amount of 1MDB bonds that Goldman helped sold. They government just wants to unravel that mess without paying money.

andrepd 8y ago

If you steal 100$, and the punishment is to return 100$, then it's worth it for you to keep stealing. The punishment has to be 5000$ and personal punishment such as imprisonment.

mruts 8y ago

It seems to me that the prosecutor and finance minister are probably just as corrupt. They just see a pot of money and want to steal it, masquerading it as reparations. I don’t think GS did anything wrong and I hope they tell the Malaysians to fuck off.

dm3730 8y ago
> It seems to me that the prosecutor and finance minister are probably just as corrupt. They just see a pot of money and want to steal it, masquerading it as reparations. Could you provide some data to substantiate these accusations? The prosecutor is the first non-Muslim Attorney General in Malaysia's history, picked right after a historic election for Malaysia where the opposition party won for the first time. I don't see any evidence of corruption from what I scanned. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Thomas_(barrister) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Thomas_(barrister) The finance minister is Lim Guan Eng. A politician who was previously imprisoned for defending a rape victim. Allegations of corruption against him were proven to be false and planned by, ironically, a corruption-funded organization under the former regime (the one that was partnered with GS). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lim_Guan_Eng https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lim_Guan_Eng > I don’t think GS did anything wrong and I hope they tell the Malaysians to fuck off. You seem to have very strong opinions. I'm wondering if you realize that Tim Leissner, Goldman's VP already pled guilty to money laundering. https://www.forbes.com/sites/korihale/2018/11/08/goldman-sachs-ex-hip-hop-banker-pleads-guilty-to-money-laundering/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/korihale/2018/11/08/goldman-sac... I'm very curious about your motivations for your post.
- mruts 8y ago
  I do think that the two partners Leissner and Ng are probably complicit to some degree. They probably do deserve to get prosecuted by the justice department. But GS are just the underwriters of the bond, they aren't guaranteeing the bonds. They didn't steal the money either. The Malaysian government is claiming that because the fee was large (around 10%) that it's clear evidence that the organization as a whole was complicit and guilty. I don't think that's a very strong argument. But the Malaysians don't seem as interested in justice (certainly the two partners should be jailed) as they are in finding someway to get their money back. So instead of looking at the people in their own country who stole the money, an investigation that might implicate other powerful people besides Jho Low, they turn their eyes to easiest target they have, GS, a foreign company. It might even be reasonable to ask for the underwriting fee back (though I'm on the fence about that), but 7.5 Billion USD? Do you think that number of motivated by justice? Do you think it's motivated by "teaching them a lesson?" Or do you think that the number is so high because Malaysia wants the money and they see an easy way to get it? 7.5 Billion is almost 10% of the entire company's shareholder equity, truly a staggering sum for GS to pay. Total revenue for GS in 2017 was around 30 Billion, net profits were just 4 billion. How is almost 2 years of net profits in the least bit fair as a punishment? And if it is fair, why stop at that? Why not 15 billion? Or 30 billion? Why not just take all their equity and turn it into a state corporation. Surely Goldman Sachs, the blood sucking squid, deserves a comeuppance for all the proletariat ire they have received over the years. Maybe that last paragraph is a little much, but the point still stands. I think people irrationally hate banks and hate wall st, and their view of justice for the banks is colored by that discrimination.

Whack-kneed 8y ago

Even the Romans worried. About "who would be there to clean after the janitors" Time for a financial death penalty: state imposed maximum impoverishment as penalty for such corruptions. It's GS types only real fear...