What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

JP Morgan & Chase. Worse than Enron. (1 Viewer)

Wilfredo Ledezma

Footballguy
Now We Know: JPMorgan Chase Is Worse Than Enron


(Photo: Thomas Hawk / Flickr)It's beginning to look as if JPMorgan Chase has had a hand in every major banking scandal of the last decade. In fact, it's the Zelig of Wall Street crime. Take a snapshot of any major bank fraud and chances are you’ll see JPMoragan Chase staring out at you from the frame.

Foreclosure fraud, investor fraud, cheating customers, market manipulation, LIBOR … and now, the coup de grâce to JPM’s tattered reputation: a $2 billion fine for closing its eyes and covering up as Bernie Madoff literally bilked widows and orphans, along with a lot of other families and charities. (Here's a list of investors.)

Does Jamie Dimon, the bank’s CEO, still think people don’t say enough nice things about him? Do his friends?

More importantly, how does the largest bank in the country (measured in assets) get away with being worse than Enron? That one’s easy: By being the largest bank in the country.

Guilty as Sin

JPMorgan Chase was hit with a “deferred prosecution agreement” for criminal behavior in this latest settlement, which basically means they won’t be prosecuted as long as they honor the agreement and keep admitting to their own wrongdoing. As the New York Times notes, this kind of arrangement is “nearly unheard-of for a giant American bank,” is “typically employed only when misconduct is extreme,” and “underscores the magnitude of the case against JPMorgan.”

According to publicly available information, the case against JPMorgan Chase is extremely damning. Even after highly suspicious facts came to light about the Madoff operation, JPM continued to package and sell Madoff-fed funds to its customers. It failed to report him to the authorities even after concluding that he was engaged in massive fraud.

No wonder JPM tried to block investigators from probing its handling of the Madoff account. According to Newsweek, the Justice Department even shielded the bank from obstruction charges.

Worse Than Enron

There’s no question about it: JPMorgan Chase is worse than Enron. It’s true that Enron’s energy market manipulations were horrible. Enron executives and employees deprived people of their life savings, drove up the price of a vital public utility, and concealed their crimes with all the wiliness of history’s worst master conspirators.

But JPMorgan Chase did everything Enron did – and much, much more. Consider:

A few weeks ago JPM paid $13 billion to settle well-documented charges of massive and widespread foreclosure fraud. Although that was the largest fine paid by a corporation in American history, there’s a compelling argument that it should have been larger – as much as 22 times larger.

JPM paid $296.9 million for lying to investors about the payment status – and hence, the investment quality – of its mortgage-backed securities.

JPM paid more than a third of a billion dollars to settle charges that it bilked customers by charging them for credit monitoring services it never provided.

JPM agreed to pay between $1.8 billion and $4.5 billion, depending on how you tally the cost, for illegally foreclosing on American families and throwing them out of their homes.

JPM paid another $56 million for cheating active-duty service members and their families, and for illegally foreclosing on them as well.

JPM paid $228 million for rigging the bidding for 93 municipal bond transactions in 31 states. (You know those cities that supposedly can’t honor their pension agreements with retired workers? That’s the kind of client they cheated here.)

JPM paid $410 million to settle charges related to its rigging of electricity prices, which is what Enron did.

JPM has paid multiple fines and settlements over the “London whale” case, in which traders sought to manipulate market prices, engaged in unlawful “reckless conduct” (while CEO Dimon bragged about the bank’s risk management and “fortress balance sheet”), then unlawfully concealed their behavior. There is no evidence that any investigation sought to determine how high the cover-up went. We do know that Dimon told investors the case was “a tempest in a teapot” after privately being told that losses were running in the billions.

JPM paid $1.2 billion for colluding with credit card companies and other institutions to rig merchants’ credit prices.

JPM has paid two major fines for illegally investing with customers’ money.

Den of Thieves

All in all, JPMorgan Chase has paid $20 billion in fines in the last year alone. But none of these fines were personally charged to the executives who committed the crimes. Instead, they were paid by shareholders – some of whom were also bilked by the executives in question.

What’s more, most (if not all) of these fines are tax-deductible. That means that taxpayers will take a hit for JPM’s criminality. Even the Enron guys didn’t think of that.

Do some good people work at JPMorgan Chase? Of course. I have a couple friends there myself, and they’re honorable people. But they’re living in a nest of fraudsters. Either CEO Dimon thinks that’s just fine, or he’s not competent enough to clean the place out and should be fired forthwith.

It's Who You Know …

How does the JPM Gang get away with all of this fraud? One simple answer is: Access. Political access. Even Bernie Madoff had it. The Madoff family was heavily involved in SIFMA, the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, a trade group with deep Washington DC connections. (Madoff’s brother Peter was honored by SIFMA in 2006.)

Dimon’s DC connections, of course, are the stuff of legend. They extend to members of both parties. Until scandal completely scarred the bank’s reputation, Dimon was routinely referred to as “the President’s favorite banker.” And as a high-powered Wall Street lawyer, Attorney General Eric Holder undoubtedly crossed paths with Dimon many times.

Our leaders insist that those personal connections carry no weight in their decision-making process. People are free to form their own opinions about that. The argument is also made, as the Attorney General did in a rare moment of candor, that some banks can’t be indicted because that would put them in danger – which, in turn, would pose a systemic risk to the global economy.

And yet nobody in the Administration is claiming that this is a problem, much less proposing solutions. Solutions are available: the breakup of systemically risky institutions or the indictment of individuals and not of institutions.

Unfortunately, nobody in the government seems very interested in solutions. They just keep making these deals, even when the malefactors involved are much, much worse than Enron.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The incestuous relationship between business and government will inevitably lead to corruption. The people at the top levels of government will end up being multimillionaires if not billionaires, because they benefit from crony capitalism. And the more power we give the government over the economy the worse the problem becomes.

 
The simplest form of banking is essentially a lie. Why wouldn't more complex forms of banking these banks engage in essentially be lies too? Liars tend to engage in more lying.

Banking should be like Public Storage, or like peer to peer lending sites like Prosper. If you want the money you deposit to be available for on demand withdraw, then pay the bank a fee for them to store it, just like you pay Public Storage to store your stuff. If you want the money you deposit to earn interest, then choose what enteties you want it loaned to, or let the bank manage it and chose... but know your money is NOT in the bank until the lendors make payments on their loans. At that point you can turn around and loan it out again, or withdraw it. This is honest banking.

Unfortunately banks use fractional reserve lending instead, whch appears to be a fine system as long as the demographics of the population produces larger and larger generations. If however one generation is smaller than they one that proceeds it, this system produces massive deflation upon the economy. Which motivates the liars who run the system of lies to make even bigger lies to cover up the problem.

The trillions and trillions that the US Federal government has borrowed into existence in the past 6 years is because they are fighting a TON of massive natural deflation in the fractional reserve lending system with a TON of massive artificial inflation in the Federal Reserve system. To us it appears like everything is okay. Prices appear stable. Businesses stay profitable, etc, etc.... But really it's like a plane flying through a category five huricane and dealing with massive forces the plane wasn't designed to deal with just to maintain a consistent altitude and speed and keep the passengers believing everything is all right. At any minute, a part of the system can fail, and the passengers will experience forces they didn't even know they were dealing with.

It will take until at least 2030 until the baby boom generation is purged and the negative influence on the fractional reserve lending system is purged from the system. Until then the government and the bankers will continue to lie and lie and lie, just hoping they can continue lying for another 18 or so years without the system failing. It's possible... but not likely. It could fail tomorrow.

The good news is that the baby boom generation had a lot of positive influence on the fractional reserve lending system, which produced some very prosperous years economically for us in the 80's ad the 90's. But now it's time to deal with the negative aspects. Sucks, but it's real. All the lying by banks and governments just makes it worse, not better.

 
Unfortunately, nobody in the government seems very interested in solutions. They just keep making these deals, even when the malefactors involved are much, much worse than Enron.
There's someone fighting this battle, who has become a bit of a populist hero for it. But powerful rich people have given their base a bunch of off-topic talking points about her, and they're pretty much lapping it up. We'll see if she can get any traction.


 
Makes me sick to my stomach.

Massive fines that get passed on to consumers who were defrauded. Nobody admits fault. How do the fines help the people? It's Other People's Money. No personal responsibility. Corruption. We're turning into Russia.

 
bostonfred said:
Unfortunately, nobody in the government seems very interested in solutions. They just keep making these deals, even when the malefactors involved are much, much worse than Enron.
There's someone fighting this battle, who has become a bit of a populist hero for it. But powerful rich people have given their base a bunch of off-topic talking points about her, and they're pretty much lapping it up. We'll see if she can get any traction.
The next guy can deal with it.

 
bostonfred said:
Unfortunately, nobody in the government seems very interested in solutions. They just keep making these deals, even when the malefactors involved are much, much worse than Enron.

There's someone fighting this battle, who has become a bit of a populist hero for it. But powerful rich people have given their base a bunch of off-topic talking points about her, and they're pretty much lapping it up. We'll see if she can get any traction.
She's got plenty of traction on the left, though her timing is tough for '16. I'd vote for her in a heartbeat.

 
Steal from a guy and then make him pay to get you out of jail over and over. This is some backwards stuff. :X

 
It's crazy, reading through the "extremely damning" link. But these frauds always appear so obvious in hindsight. It's been the same thing with a recent scandal in Dixon, IL. You wonder how on earth people miss this stuff.

 
It's not just the politicians that are complicit, it's our news media as well. Where are the front page headlines? Where are the in-depth features? Where are the big nightly news stories? Where are the 60 Minutes reports? Where's any of that stuff? Don't tell me that they're not aware of all of this. The entirety of our news media has been bought and paid for by Big Banking. They know what side their bread is buttered on.

 
Maybe it's time to reboot OWS with a leader and a concise message. And rules against drum circles. Talk about a wasted opportunity.

 
It's not just the politicians that are complicit, it's our news media as well. Where are the front page headlines? Where are the in-depth features? Where are the big nightly news stories? Where are the 60 Minutes reports? Where's any of that stuff? Don't tell me that they're not aware of all of this. The entirety of our news media has been bought and paid for by Big Banking. They know what side their bread is buttered on.
Frontline did an episode called "Too Big to Jail". It's about as close as any media outlet has gotten to being honest about what is going on. Well worth the watch, even though it only skims the surface of the corruption.

 
Maybe it's time to reboot OWS with a leader and a concise message. And rules against drum circles. Talk about a wasted opportunity.
It isn't only a WS problem; it's a government problem, because they share the same bed.
I don't think they share the same bed. I think one sleeps in a king size bed in the executive suite while the other sleeps on the floor at the foot of the bed and is happy just eating the crumbs left on the floor.

 
bostonfred said:
Unfortunately, nobody in the government seems very interested in solutions. They just keep making these deals, even when the malefactors involved are much, much worse than Enron.

There's someone fighting this battle, who has become a bit of a populist hero for it. But powerful rich people have given their base a bunch of off-topic talking points about her, and they're pretty much lapping it up. We'll see if she can get any traction.
She's got plenty of traction on the left, though her timing is tough for '16. I'd vote for her in a heartbeat.
I'd agree with the timing bit. Assuming Hilary runs, it's going to be tough for anyone else to get the nomination. However, I'd suggest there's probably no better way for Warren to get her message out than to hammer it over and over during the primary process. All she would need is to be one of top three throughout the primaries and to make this a key point during the debates, and the media would be forced to tell her narrative, wouldn't they?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
bostonfred said:
Unfortunately, nobody in the government seems very interested in solutions. They just keep making these deals, even when the malefactors involved are much, much worse than Enron.

There's someone fighting this battle, who has become a bit of a populist hero for it. But powerful rich people have given their base a bunch of off-topic talking points about her, and they're pretty much lapping it up. We'll see if she can get any traction.
She's got plenty of traction on the left, though her timing is tough for '16. I'd vote for her in a heartbeat.
I'd agree with the timing bit. Assuming Hilary runs, it's going to be tough for anyone else to get the nomination. However, I'd suggest there's probably no better way for Warren to get her message out than to hammer it over and over during the primary process. All she would need is to be one of top three throughout the primaries and to make this a key point during the debates, and the media would be forced to tell her narrative, wouldn't they?
That's why big business is already starting the talking point war against her. FoxNews and the meme machine can talk about the scandal related to this anti business liberal, and how she was in congress again talking about how we need to stifle growth, so they can minimize her message. It'll be up to the "liberal media" to push Warren's message, but the problem with that is that the DNC is so beholden to the Clintons that they'll have to promote Hillary while making Warren look like a sympathetic figure for already being behind in the race because of the right's smear campaigns. It's a fine line to walk. The reality is that she's probably more valuable in Congress than in the white house anyways. Like Obama, she would be better off with more seasoning and having developed more political connections on both sides of the aisle than if she ran just as soon as it was viable. And she's still young enough that it's reasonable to think she'd be able to run in 2020 or 2024.

 
Maybe it's time to reboot OWS with a leader and a concise message. And rules against drum circles. Talk about a wasted opportunity.
If people like you are just going to buy the media's spin about these groups, then there will never be an opportunity for them to succeed.

 
bostonfred said:
Unfortunately, nobody in the government seems very interested in solutions. They just keep making these deals, even when the malefactors involved are much, much worse than Enron.

There's someone fighting this battle, who has become a bit of a populist hero for it. But powerful rich people have given their base a bunch of off-topic talking points about her, and they're pretty much lapping it up. We'll see if she can get any traction.
She's got plenty of traction on the left, though her timing is tough for '16. I'd vote for her in a heartbeat.
I'd agree with the timing bit. Assuming Hilary runs, it's going to be tough for anyone else to get the nomination. However, I'd suggest there's probably no better way for Warren to get her message out than to hammer it over and over during the primary process. All she would need is to be one of top three throughout the primaries and to make this a key point during the debates, and the media would be forced to tell her narrative, wouldn't they?
That's why big business is already starting the talking point war against her. FoxNews and the meme machine can talk about the scandal related to this anti business liberal, and how she was in congress again talking about how we need to stifle growth, so they can minimize her message. It'll be up to the "liberal media" to push Warren's message, but the problem with that is that the DNC is so beholden to the Clintons that they'll have to promote Hillary while making Warren look like a sympathetic figure for already being behind in the race because of the right's smear campaigns. It's a fine line to walk. The reality is that she's probably more valuable in Congress than in the white house anyways. Like Obama, she would be better off with more seasoning and having developed more political connections on both sides of the aisle than if she ran just as soon as it was viable. And she's still young enough that it's reasonable to think she'd be able to run in 2020 or 2024.
Oh sure, I'm not suggesting she can necessarily win the nomination, either in 2016, 2020, or 2024. I just think that the public will be more likely to hear and understand her message if it's repeated over and over during the campaign than randomly sprinkled throughout the normal 24 hour news cycle.

 
Maybe it's time to reboot OWS with a leader and a concise message. And rules against drum circles. Talk about a wasted opportunity.
It isn't only a WS problem; it's a government problem, because they share the same bed.
Yes, it boils down to term limits, but it's about the influence of money on policy. The most significant industry this is coming from is the banking/financial industry.

 
Maybe it's time to reboot OWS with a leader and a concise message. And rules against drum circles. Talk about a wasted opportunity.
It isn't only a WS problem; it's a government problem, because they share the same bed.
Yes, it boils down to term limits, but it's about the influence of money on policy. The most significant industry this is coming from is the banking/financial industry.
I doubt changing term limits changes anything. Money rules all. End of story. Sting was likely right when he said, " there is no political solution. "

 
Maybe it's time to reboot OWS with a leader and a concise message. And rules against drum circles. Talk about a wasted opportunity.
If people like you are just going to buy the media's spin about these groups, then there will never be an opportunity for them to succeed.
And what "spin" are "people like [me]" buying?
:lol:
I don't speak emoticon. Could you try using your words?

 
bostonfred said:
Unfortunately, nobody in the government seems very interested in solutions. They just keep making these deals, even when the malefactors involved are much, much worse than Enron.

There's someone fighting this battle, who has become a bit of a populist hero for it. But powerful rich people have given their base a bunch of off-topic talking points about her, and they're pretty much lapping it up. We'll see if she can get any traction.
She's got plenty of traction on the left, though her timing is tough for '16. I'd vote for her in a heartbeat.
I'd agree with the timing bit. Assuming Hilary runs, it's going to be tough for anyone else to get the nomination. However, I'd suggest there's probably no better way for Warren to get her message out than to hammer it over and over during the primary process. All she would need is to be one of top three throughout the primaries and to make this a key point during the debates, and the media would be forced to tell her narrative, wouldn't they?
That's why big business is already starting the talking point war against her. FoxNews and the meme machine can talk about the scandal related to this anti business liberal, and how she was in congress again talking about how we need to stifle growth, so they can minimize her message. It'll be up to the "liberal media" to push Warren's message, but the problem with that is that the DNC is so beholden to the Clintons that they'll have to promote Hillary while making Warren look like a sympathetic figure for already being behind in the race because of the right's smear campaigns. It's a fine line to walk. The reality is that she's probably more valuable in Congress than in the white house anyways. Like Obama, she would be better off with more seasoning and having developed more political connections on both sides of the aisle than if she ran just as soon as it was viable. And she's still young enough that it's reasonable to think she'd be able to run in 2020 or 2024.
Yeah, the only thing holding her back is the evil right and the delicate balancing act that the left has to maintain because of Hillary. :lmao:

 
Ilov80s said:
Apple Jack said:
DiStefano said:
Apple Jack said:
Maybe it's time to reboot OWS with a leader and a concise message. And rules against drum circles. Talk about a wasted opportunity.
It isn't only a WS problem; it's a government problem, because they share the same bed.
Yes, it boils down to term limits, but it's about the influence of money on policy. The most significant industry this is coming from is the banking/financial industry.
I doubt changing term limits changes anything. Money rules all. End of story. Sting was likely right when he said, " there is no political solution. "
"Cash rules everything around me"- The Wu

 
GroveDiesel said:
It's not just the politicians that are complicit, it's our news media as well. Where are the front page headlines? Where are the in-depth features? Where are the big nightly news stories? Where are the 60 Minutes reports? Where's any of that stuff? Don't tell me that they're not aware of all of this. The entirety of our news media has been bought and paid for by Big Banking. They know what side their bread is buttered on.
Graphic: How Just 6 Corps Own 90% of The Media

CNN no longer has an investigative news division. Let that sink in.

Now they just show viral videos and have panels debate issues like blowhards.

 
GroveDiesel said:
It's not just the politicians that are complicit, it's our news media as well. Where are the front page headlines? Where are the in-depth features? Where are the big nightly news stories? Where are the 60 Minutes reports? Where's any of that stuff? Don't tell me that they're not aware of all of this. The entirety of our news media has been bought and paid for by Big Banking. They know what side their bread is buttered on.
Graphic: How Just 6 Corps Own 90% of The Media

CNN no longer has an investigative news division. Let that sink in.

Now they just show viral videos and have panels debate issues like blowhards.
CNN has been infotainment for years. Especially dig their air first, sort out reality later approach to a breaking story.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top