Re: Bernie Madoff
- From: "AllYou!" <idaman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 21:17:20 -0400
In news:h2dvaq$5gc$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
Nunya Bidnits <nunyabidnits@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> mused:
In
news:A9ednYvyVYl-7tfXnZ2dnUVZ_oednZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
AllYou! <idaman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> typed:
In news:h2dbh9$ma4$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
Nunya Bidnits <nunyabidnits@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> mused:
In
news:WLednY0vpM3ZidfXnZ2dnUVZ_jGdnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
AllYou! <idaman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> typed:
In news:ka4i45tqp46li675t6k7p0k9rdcukj20u8@xxxxxxx,
11@xxxxxxxxxx <11@xxxxxxxxxx> mused:
Now that Bernie Madoff has been sentenced to 150 years
in the slammer every voter who voted for that fraud Reagan
should be joining him. After all it was Reagan's
deregulation that allowed Bernie to steal Billions of
dollars.
So how could Mafoff have been convicted of stealing billions
if it was legal for him to do so? You do know, right, that
the regulations already existed that would prevent Madoff from
having done what he did?
In fact, that's the exact problem with regulation. People
come to place too much faith in the notion that because
something is against the law, it must be nearly impossible
for frauds like this to occur. Conversley, if people were
more conditioned to understand that they should reply upon
their own due dilligence when it comes to who handles their
money, frauds like this might not happen to this extent.
Simplisitc thinking: If it's a bad thing, pass a law against
it, and it won't happen.
Unintended consequence: It's useless unless the reulatory and
enforcement agencies are properly funded, and it creates a
false confidence about the system.
That is just completely ignorant.
LOL! I guess it takes someone as enlightened as you to keep an
open mind.
Enlightened does not equal gullible.
Neither does an open mind.
No matter what laws you pass,
there are always criminals who make it their profession to
figure out ways to circumvent the laws.
Ironically, that's the logical extension of what I just said,
and which you branded as ignorant. Hmmmmm.
Say whaaat? Then the logical extension of that is that we should
have no laws, and therefore, nobody will try to find ways to
break them, and we will live in Utopia.
That would be true if we used your limited logic.
When that happens, a
better law is often passed, after which a smarter criminal
figures out a way to trick that law too. When that cycle no
longer happens, we will be living in Utopia, with no need for
laws or prisons.
The notion that Madoff's fraud was facilitated by the existence
of regulations is the most bizarre leap of non-logic I have
read this month,
I would agree. Wherever did you read that? You're not thinking
that's what I said, is it? If so, that would be complete
ignorance.
Well, you wrote
In fact, that's the exact problem with regulation. People
come to place too much faith in the notion that because
something is against the law, it must be nearly impossible
for frauds like this to occur.
Did I miss something out of that?
It seems that you missed most of it.
What I get from it is that the
regulations caused people to be complacent which caused Madoff
to be able to figure out a way around the regulations.
What you should've gotten out of it was that an over-reliance upon
the effectiveness of regulations leads people to be complacent about
protecting themselves. As you stated so well, more regulations just
breed more innovative criminals.
I'll agree that diligence is always necessary. But I'll also
make the point that the person who walks a tightrope 100 feet in
the air is far less likely to try it than the same rope 3 feet
in the air. It's called deterrence.
How'd that work for Madoff's investors?
.
- Next by Date: Re: Bernie Madoff
- Next by thread: Re: Bernie Madoff
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
