11 ms·

Why Isn't Wall Street in Jail?

158 points by kongqiu 16y ago

Pooter 16y ago
Cause they're able to get laws written to suit them, cause they're richer and more motivated than you are.
- grav1tas 16y ago
  The presence of wealth and the presence of motivation do not entail the existence of the other in a person.
ebaysucks 16y ago
Because what they did was unlawful, but legal.
maeon3 16y ago
Money is power, and with power you can manipulate the system around you for your own purposes. Simple as that. It provides additional incentive to do a good job, provide superior goods and services so you can get a few "get out of jail free" cards. I propose we formalize this so everyone in the working world has an equal shot at getting out of jail. Earn 20 million dollars, you get a pass for 2 premeditated murders, earn only 2 million and you get a pass for 1 hit and run. The system is unfair as it is. We might as well make it not fair equally for all exceptional wage earners.
beoba 16y ago
Rich people don't go to jail. Example: http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/26164101/detail.html http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/26164101/detail.html
- expertio 16y ago
  Yes, they've got the money. They can do whatever they want. Jail is prepared for poor people.
brc 16y ago
Who doesn't love some popular culture - a virtual lynch mob piece? I would have less issues with writing like this if they actually cited some exampes where laws were broken, and which laws were broken. I'm not pretending that the whole thing was always on the right side of the law - I'm not - but you can't just say 'they're all criminals, lock them up!'. Because from what I've read, most of what caused the issues were not only legal, they were government backed up and sanctioned. They might have been a bad idea, some morally wrong, some the result of some very poor judgement or influence by the wrong lobbyists. But criminal in the popular sense is vastly different from criminal in the law sense. I'm right behind locking people up for breaking the laws. But if it's going to happen, someone needs to cite specific examples where specific people (or companies) broke specific laws. Because all I've seen is a case where the government relaxed regulations regarding speculating with depositors money, opened up the monetary taps to let debt flow freely, and then guided that money into questionable lending for social and political purposes. Completely unlike the insider trading accusations from the 1980's most of all the obscene money that was taken off the table was done in plain view of the regulators, and backed up by politicians convinced they'd found the magic cure for endless economic growth.
- dman 16y ago
  Part of the problem in my opinion is that the financial industry is faster at creating financial instruments than the government is at creating regulations. Afaik there is little regulation in place for trading in dark pools, collateralised debt obligations and for what exactly constitutes conflict of interest.
  - brc 16y ago
    But don't forget that a lot of these instruments and strategies were also around in the 1920s. The fallout from the 1929 crash and subsequent depression was many changes in regulation. As these were gradually unwound, the products and strategies came to exist again, with the same consequences.
  - jon_hendry 16y ago
    Um, the fine minds of the Fed, Congress, and the Clinton and Bush administrations declared some of the instruments off limits from regulation. Then they went off to Wall Street and collected their millions of dollars.
stretchwithme 16y ago
The bigger problem is why our politicians are underwriting irresponsible risk taking, why they believe bubbles are the only way to prosperity, and why they simply cannot stop spending money we don't have.
- mkr-hn 16y ago
  This is one of those rare times that I agree politics should be avoided on HN. This comment is simplistic and seemingly driven by emotion. There's no development to any of the points. You lay them out as a given without any support. And people are upvoting you.
  - DanielBMarkham 16y ago
    Could you explain yourself a little better? The parent comment was overly broad and emotional, sure, but the markets in this case were clearly defined by some kind of political mechanism. Blaming it on the politicians doesn't seem all that outrageous at all to me (as long as we don't start calling out specific parties and politicians, which would then obviously degenerate quickly into asshattery) Just wondering. I agree it was simplistic and emotional, but I must have missed the baiting or other part that made it bad for HN. (Also, in all fairness, this entire article and comment thread is nothing more than an emotional internet lynch mob, out with their pitchforks and torches, ready to start the inquisitions and begin burning the witches, so compared to the article, the comment seemed rather tame and your response oddly incongruent)
    - mkr-hn 16y ago
      At the time it was the only comment that was strictly political. One sentence of support on each point to give people something to drop in Google would be enough to take it from "emotional drivel" to "bad idea, but not entirely useless."
      - DanielBMarkham 16y ago
        Thanks. I know as soon as I looked at the title, I groaned as I clicked the link to the comments. Sometimes you just know how these things are going to go.
danenania 16y ago
Wall Street owns the jails.
- lotusleaf1987 16y ago
  Dick Cheney and Alberto Gonzalez have a stake in some prisons: http://wonkette.com/404469/dick-cheney-and-alberto-gonzales-indicted-for-prison-profiteering http://wonkette.com/404469/dick-cheney-and-alberto-gonzales-... http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/Dick-Cheney-Indicted-Over-Prison-Abuse-Claims-US-Vice-President-Owns-Jail-Related-Enterprises/Article/200811315154864 http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/Dick-Cheney-Indi...
- michaelty 16y ago
  http://www.correctionscorp.com/ http://www.correctionscorp.com/ http://www.thegeogroupinc.com/ http://www.thegeogroupinc.com/ Yes, you can buy stock in them.
mech4bg 16y ago
The problem with Rolling Stone pieces if even when they have a good point to make, they're far too emotional and devoid of details. There's a real bias to how they attack their stories, and rarely seem to do much fact checking. I wish more places reported like the New Yorker.
- Cadsby 16y ago
  People tend to get emotional when they see such despicable behavior with absolutely no consequences.
tzury 16y ago
single page link http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/why-isnt-wall-street-in-jail-20110216?print=true http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/why-isnt-wall-stre...
ljordan 16y ago
Because the bottom line in life is power, not laws or beliefs.
xcjamie 16y ago
What about all the people living above their means with the mortgages they couldn't afford. Didn't they play a part? Should they go to jail too? Plus what they did was unethical, not illegal, and therefore not punishable through jail-time...
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
juddlyon 16y ago
He with the gold makes the rules.

158 points by kongqiu 16y ago

Pooter 16y ago

Cause they're able to get laws written to suit them, cause they're richer and more motivated than you are.

grav1tas 16y ago
The presence of wealth and the presence of motivation do not entail the existence of the other in a person.

ebaysucks 16y ago

Because what they did was unlawful, but legal.

maeon3 16y ago

Money is power, and with power you can manipulate the system around you for your own purposes. Simple as that. It provides additional incentive to do a good job, provide superior goods and services so you can get a few "get out of jail free" cards. I propose we formalize this so everyone in the working world has an equal shot at getting out of jail. Earn 20 million dollars, you get a pass for 2 premeditated murders, earn only 2 million and you get a pass for 1 hit and run. The system is unfair as it is. We might as well make it not fair equally for all exceptional wage earners.

beoba 16y ago

Rich people don't go to jail. Example: http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/26164101/detail.html http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/26164101/detail.html

expertio 16y ago
Yes, they've got the money. They can do whatever they want. Jail is prepared for poor people.

brc 16y ago

Who doesn't love some popular culture - a virtual lynch mob piece? I would have less issues with writing like this if they actually cited some exampes where laws were broken, and which laws were broken. I'm not pretending that the whole thing was always on the right side of the law - I'm not - but you can't just say 'they're all criminals, lock them up!'. Because from what I've read, most of what caused the issues were not only legal, they were government backed up and sanctioned. They might have been a bad idea, some morally wrong, some the result of some very poor judgement or influence by the wrong lobbyists. But criminal in the popular sense is vastly different from criminal in the law sense. I'm right behind locking people up for breaking the laws. But if it's going to happen, someone needs to cite specific examples where specific people (or companies) broke specific laws. Because all I've seen is a case where the government relaxed regulations regarding speculating with depositors money, opened up the monetary taps to let debt flow freely, and then guided that money into questionable lending for social and political purposes. Completely unlike the insider trading accusations from the 1980's most of all the obscene money that was taken off the table was done in plain view of the regulators, and backed up by politicians convinced they'd found the magic cure for endless economic growth.

dman 16y ago
Part of the problem in my opinion is that the financial industry is faster at creating financial instruments than the government is at creating regulations. Afaik there is little regulation in place for trading in dark pools, collateralised debt obligations and for what exactly constitutes conflict of interest.
- brc 16y ago
  But don't forget that a lot of these instruments and strategies were also around in the 1920s. The fallout from the 1929 crash and subsequent depression was many changes in regulation. As these were gradually unwound, the products and strategies came to exist again, with the same consequences.
- jon_hendry 16y ago
  Um, the fine minds of the Fed, Congress, and the Clinton and Bush administrations declared some of the instruments off limits from regulation. Then they went off to Wall Street and collected their millions of dollars.

stretchwithme 16y ago

The bigger problem is why our politicians are underwriting irresponsible risk taking, why they believe bubbles are the only way to prosperity, and why they simply cannot stop spending money we don't have.

mkr-hn 16y ago
This is one of those rare times that I agree politics should be avoided on HN. This comment is simplistic and seemingly driven by emotion. There's no development to any of the points. You lay them out as a given without any support. And people are upvoting you.
- DanielBMarkham 16y ago
  Could you explain yourself a little better? The parent comment was overly broad and emotional, sure, but the markets in this case were clearly defined by some kind of political mechanism. Blaming it on the politicians doesn't seem all that outrageous at all to me (as long as we don't start calling out specific parties and politicians, which would then obviously degenerate quickly into asshattery) Just wondering. I agree it was simplistic and emotional, but I must have missed the baiting or other part that made it bad for HN. (Also, in all fairness, this entire article and comment thread is nothing more than an emotional internet lynch mob, out with their pitchforks and torches, ready to start the inquisitions and begin burning the witches, so compared to the article, the comment seemed rather tame and your response oddly incongruent)
  - mkr-hn 16y ago
    At the time it was the only comment that was strictly political. One sentence of support on each point to give people something to drop in Google would be enough to take it from "emotional drivel" to "bad idea, but not entirely useless."
    - DanielBMarkham 16y ago
      Thanks. I know as soon as I looked at the title, I groaned as I clicked the link to the comments. Sometimes you just know how these things are going to go.

danenania 16y ago

Wall Street owns the jails.

lotusleaf1987 16y ago
Dick Cheney and Alberto Gonzalez have a stake in some prisons: http://wonkette.com/404469/dick-cheney-and-alberto-gonzales-indicted-for-prison-profiteering http://wonkette.com/404469/dick-cheney-and-alberto-gonzales-... http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/Dick-Cheney-Indicted-Over-Prison-Abuse-Claims-US-Vice-President-Owns-Jail-Related-Enterprises/Article/200811315154864 http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/Dick-Cheney-Indi...
michaelty 16y ago
http://www.correctionscorp.com/ http://www.correctionscorp.com/ http://www.thegeogroupinc.com/ http://www.thegeogroupinc.com/ Yes, you can buy stock in them.

mech4bg 16y ago

The problem with Rolling Stone pieces if even when they have a good point to make, they're far too emotional and devoid of details. There's a real bias to how they attack their stories, and rarely seem to do much fact checking. I wish more places reported like the New Yorker.

Cadsby 16y ago
People tend to get emotional when they see such despicable behavior with absolutely no consequences.

tzury 16y ago

single page link http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/why-isnt-wall-street-in-jail-20110216?print=true http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/why-isnt-wall-stre...

ljordan 16y ago

Because the bottom line in life is power, not laws or beliefs.

xcjamie 16y ago

What about all the people living above their means with the mortgages they couldn't afford. Didn't they play a part? Should they go to jail too? Plus what they did was unethical, not illegal, and therefore not punishable through jail-time...

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

juddlyon 16y ago

He with the gold makes the rules.