I don't see what the big deal is in terms of consequences for them. This stuff was known years ago. All the big banks were engaging in this type of fraud. Goldman Sachs paid a fine to the SEC for the exact same thing in the Abacus scandal, where they had emails of GS employees scoffing at their customers for buying their fraudulent securities. They got off selling fraudulent mortgage securities. They got off money laundering terrorist and drug cartel money. They got off rigging LIBOR. They got off rigging the foreign exchange markets. What makes anyone think Chase won't just pay a fine, if the government even decides to do anything about it?
This thread belongs in Civics. Some economists may be interested in economics that involve whistleblowers, but the involvement of the federal government is more consequential.
I don't see what the big deal is in terms of consequences for them. This stuff was known years ago. All the big banks were engaging in this type of fraud. Goldman Sachs paid a fine to the SEC for the exact same thing in the Abacus scandal, where they had emails of GS employees scoffing at their customers for buying their fraudulent securities. They got off selling fraudulent mortgage securities. They got off money laundering terrorist and drug cartel money. They got off rigging LIBOR. They got off rigging the foreign exchange markets. What makes anyone think Chase won't just pay a fine, if the government even decides to do anything about it?
The moral: if you want to be a thief, be a banker: when caught there's not even a jail term.
The moral: if you want to be a thief, be a banker: when caught there's not even a jail term.
The thing is, bankers, brokers and finacial managers do go to jail. You have to be connected to the very top echelon of banks, which is what makes it so absurdly conspiratorial.
Comment