Poll: Is an $11B Fine The Right Justice for JPM?
Posted by Larry Doyle on September 26, 2013 8:56 AM |
The rap sheet that has developed on JP Morgan over the last few years might have made John Gotti proud.
But remember, even though the Teflon Don escaped justice for a long time, ultimately the Feds caught up to him and he spent his last days listening to this.
Oh how the Don wishes he could have been a Wall Street banker rather than in the carting business and other organized activities. If so, he probably wishes he could be Jamie Dimon. Why so?
Jamie and the folks at JP Morgan are now hoping to leave all their troubles behind by putting in wall to wall carpeting to cover up all the dirt of numerous and sundry transgressions. What might be the cost of this plush carpet?
Jamie hoped that he could shop at the discount store and buy a $3 billion carpet to cover all the dirt. The rug merchants feigning appearance as regulators seem to have informed Jamie that, given his Mcmega-bank, he really needs a larger, thicker, and more expensive carpet, the price of which is more in the $11 billion range.
Given that money flowing into JPM from the Fed window comes with a cost of 0%, is a rug (er, I mean a fine) even of $11 billion the appropriate form of justice for this institution?
Might one think that the American taxpayers subsidizing JPM might want to not only know all the details of the dirt in the house but also who was responsible for it and who will be held personally and professionally accountable?
I would like to know how you believe justice should be delivered in this case. Should heads roll? Should regulators aerate the JPM house and provide a public expose documenting all the dirt?
If an $11B wall to wall carpet is rolled in, how are we ever to know that the dirty behaviors might ever change?
Comments encouraged and appreciated.
Please pre-order a copy of my book, In Bed with Wall Street: The Conspiracy Crippling Our Global Economy, that will be published by Palgrave Macmillan on January 7, 2014.
For those reading this via a syndicated outlet or receiving it via e-mail or another delivery, please visit the blog and comment on this piece of ‘sense on cents’.
I have no business interest with any entity referenced in this commentary. The opinions expressed are my own. I am a proponent of real transparency within our markets so that investor confidence and investor protection can be achieved.