Unless specific instances of fraud can be proven, I see little reason to blame rating agencies for the losses investors incurred. The markets have risk. If they

Unless specific instances of fraud can be proven, I see little reason to blame rating agencies for the losses investors incurred. The markets have risk. If they didn't, you couldn't make money. If the ratings agencies are to blame for the losses becasue they overestimated the stability of certain companies, then by the same token shouldn't investors have to PAY the ratings agencies if they make money on stocks that ended up being better than the agencies predicted?