3 ms·
Stuff like this leaves me wondering...is that bad? I mean it's bad from an honesty and ethics standpoint, but is what JP is doing honest and ethical? And the
by iancmceachern 3y ago
Stuff like this leaves me wondering...is that bad?
I mean it's bad from an honesty and ethics standpoint, but is what JP is doing honest and ethical? And the enemy of my enemy is my friend?
The world is complicated
- mandmandam 3y agoThe same JPMorgan that financed Epstein, failed to keep mandatory records, "lost" 47 million emails and were fined nearly a billion dollars for spoofing metals markets? The JPMorgan that taxpayers "gave" a $12 billion bailout to? ... Probably not your friend, unless your 'net worth' is in the 8 figures range.
- iancmceachern 3y agoSorry, I meant the friend being whomever swindled JP and the enemy to be JP in my weird thought experiment
- orangepurple 3y agoJP could have purchased rocks and pretended it was nickel from the very beginning. Where is the Epstein client list?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- bequanna 3y agoWell, this scheme temporarily added more “supply” to the tradable market which theoretically could have lowered overall prices some amount.
- rz2k 3y agoFor the net impact to the economy it depends on few things. What did suppliers do in response? If suppliers believed there was a nickel reserve that could potentially enter the market, they would be less likely to choose strategies such as constraining supply in order to increase prices which helps consumers of nickel. However, they also would be less motivated to store up surplus nickel of their own that would help alleviate natural shortages. The other thing to consider is that we think the nickel did exist at some point in time, so in this case crime did pay. Therefore the thieves' ill-gotten gains will have increased their capacity to carry out future scams.
- csomar 3y agoIt’s bad because it can’t be settled. If Chase is to assume the clawback from a default settlement, then they are essentially non secured contracts and could have been traded so without the extra cost of the rocks. But in general you want the people responsible of delivery to be responsible and actually deliver even if 99% of the time the underlying is just exchanged electronically.
- Salgat 3y agoIt's similar to if you provided insurance to someone and happily accepted payments knowing you could never actually pay out their insurance claim. The person making payments is a victim even if he never realizes it.
- pc86 3y agoAre you though? You never had a claim that couldn't be paid out. If you needed that insurance in order to do or buy something, you were able to do or buy that thing. You have no damages. You absolutely could have, but you didn't.
- galaxyLogic 3y agoYou would be a victim of fraud, assuming the insurer knew they didn't have the assets. They were selling you security which didn't exist.
- Salgat 3y agoIf someone points a loaded gun to your baby's head but you never notice, is your baby really a victim of assault? In both situations it's irrelevant if you never knew, you were still exposed to a massive amount of risk, making you a victim.
- pixl97 3y agoA war starts tomorrow and you need need X to produce the stuff to protect your country. Not a problem right, you have plenty of X. Ooops, not really, it's lies and corruption all the way down.