IGX

dead man walking wrote:how many other instances of deceit are there? more than have been prosecuted, no doubt.

JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) was sued by two investors who claim the bank was “at the very center” of Bernard Madoff’s Ponzi scheme.

The investors, Stephen and Leyla Hill, claim JPMorgan should have been aware that Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC was passing all the money he stole from customers through a JPMorgan account known as the “703 Account.” They seek to represent all investors who had money invested with Madoff in December 2008, when he was arrested and the fraud collapsed. He was convicted and sentenced to 150 years in prison.

“While numerous financial institutions enabled Madoff’s fraud, JPMC was at the very center of that fraud, and thoroughly complicit in it,” the Hills said in a complaint filed today in Manhattan federal court. “JPMC could not perform even cursory due diligence on Madoff or BLMIS without bumping up against evidence of Madoff’s fraud.”

Grandpa's Spells wrote:http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2011/ ... s-unhappy/

A similar lesson emerges from a classic experiment conducted by Franz de Waals and Sarah Brosnan. The primatologists trained brown capuchin monkeys to give them pebbles in exchange for cucumbers. Almost overnight, a capuchin economy developed, with hungry monkeys harvesting small stones. But the marketplace was disrupted when the scientists got mischievous: instead of giving every monkey a cucumber in exchange for pebbles, they started giving some monkeys a tasty grape instead. (Monkeys prefer grapes to cucumbers.) After witnessing this injustice, the monkeys earning cucumbers went on strike. Some started throwing their cucumbers at the scientists; the vast majority just stopped collecting pebbles. The capuchin economy ground to a halt. The monkeys were willing to forfeit cheap food simply to register their anger at the arbitrary pay scale.

This labor unrest among monkeys illuminates our innate sense of fairness. It’s not that the primates demanded equality — some capuchins collected many more pebbles than others, and that never created a problem — it’s that they couldn’t stand when the inequality was a result of injustice. Humans act the same way. When the rich do something to deserve their riches, nobody complains; that’s just the meritocracy at work. But when those at the bottom don’t understand the unequal distribution of wealth — when it seems as if the winners are getting rewarded for no reason — they get furious. They doubt the integrity of the system and become more sensitive to perceived inequities. They start camping out in parks. They reject the very premise of the game.

johno wrote:

Fat Cat wrote:

Seems to me, the ^ implication ^ is that Jesus was a political philosopher, that his example & exhortations to love one another and to be our brother's keeper were a societal prescription.

Fat Cat wrote:

Grandpa's Spells wrote:http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2011/ ... s-unhappy/

A similar lesson emerges from a classic experiment conducted by Franz de Waals and Sarah Brosnan. The primatologists trained brown capuchin monkeys to give them pebbles in exchange for cucumbers. Almost overnight, a capuchin economy developed, with hungry monkeys harvesting small stones. But the marketplace was disrupted when the scientists got mischievous: instead of giving every monkey a cucumber in exchange for pebbles, they started giving some monkeys a tasty grape instead. (Monkeys prefer grapes to cucumbers.) After witnessing this injustice, the monkeys earning cucumbers went on strike. Some started throwing their cucumbers at the scientists; the vast majority just stopped collecting pebbles. The capuchin economy ground to a halt. The monkeys were willing to forfeit cheap food simply to register their anger at the arbitrary pay scale.

This labor unrest among monkeys illuminates our innate sense of fairness. It’s not that the primates demanded equality — some capuchins collected many more pebbles than others, and that never created a problem — it’s that they couldn’t stand when the inequality was a result of injustice. Humans act the same way. When the rich do something to deserve their riches, nobody complains; that’s just the meritocracy at work. But when those at the bottom don’t understand the unequal distribution of wealth — when it seems as if the winners are getting rewarded for no reason — they get furious. They doubt the integrity of the system and become more sensitive to perceived inequities. They start camping out in parks. They reject the very premise of the game.

Home run with this post.

bigpeach wrote:

Pinky wrote:Mostly a). Economists have enormously less influence on policy than people think. Even when a good idea is sent to Congress lobbying efforts water it down or kill it completely.

But I apologize for sounding smug. It's an epidemic in my profession, and something that I'm trying to work on.

Economists don't influence public policy because they rely on logic and analysis. Politicians have to appeal to the lowest common denominator, and due to our evolutionary history, concepts like math and probability were of little to no value compared to concepts like fear and fight-for-your-life, so to really get the masses to support them in an election, politicians have to play the fear card over the logic card.

The coffee and hot dog carts were located in Civic Center Plaza, the same location as the Occupy San Diego protesters.

That group first settled in to the plaza Oct. 7 and set up a tent city which has since twice been taken down by police.

Coffee cart owner Linda Jenson and hot dog cart operators Letty and Pete Soto said they initially provided free food and drink to demonstrators, but when they stopped, the protesters became violent.

And according to one city councilman, bodily fluids were used in the attacks.

“Both carts have had items stolen, have had their covers vandalized with markings and graffiti, as well as one of the carts had urine and blood splattered on it,” said Councilman Carl DeMaio.

The damages will likely require at least a complete cleaning if not a replacement of the cart covers, DeMaio said.

In addition to the attacks, the vendors also said they recently received death threats.

Turdacious wrote:Another experiment:

The coffee and hot dog carts were located in Civic Center Plaza, the same location as the Occupy San Diego protesters.

That group first settled in to the plaza Oct. 7 and set up a tent city which has since twice been taken down by police.

Coffee cart owner Linda Jenson and hot dog cart operators Letty and Pete Soto said they initially provided free food and drink to demonstrators, but when they stopped, the protesters became violent.

And according to one city councilman, bodily fluids were used in the attacks.

“Both carts have had items stolen, have had their covers vandalized with markings and graffiti, as well as one of the carts had urine and blood splattered on it,” said Councilman Carl DeMaio.

The damages will likely require at least a complete cleaning if not a replacement of the cart covers, DeMaio said.

In addition to the attacks, the vendors also said they recently received death threats.

http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2011/11/ ... ood-urine/

PC Polar Circle Person wrote:

Fat Cat wrote:

Grandpa's Spells wrote:http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2011/ ... s-unhappy/

A similar lesson emerges from a classic experiment conducted by Franz de Waals and Sarah Brosnan. The primatologists trained brown capuchin monkeys to give them pebbles in exchange for cucumbers. Almost overnight, a capuchin economy developed, with hungry monkeys harvesting small stones. But the marketplace was disrupted when the scientists got mischievous: instead of giving every monkey a cucumber in exchange for pebbles, they started giving some monkeys a tasty grape instead. (Monkeys prefer grapes to cucumbers.) After witnessing this injustice, the monkeys earning cucumbers went on strike. Some started throwing their cucumbers at the scientists; the vast majority just stopped collecting pebbles. The capuchin economy ground to a halt. The monkeys were willing to forfeit cheap food simply to register their anger at the arbitrary pay scale.

This labor unrest among monkeys illuminates our innate sense of fairness. It’s not that the primates demanded equality — some capuchins collected many more pebbles than others, and that never created a problem — it’s that they couldn’t stand when the inequality was a result of injustice. Humans act the same way. When the rich do something to deserve their riches, nobody complains; that’s just the meritocracy at work. But when those at the bottom don’t understand the unequal distribution of wealth — when it seems as if the winners are getting rewarded for no reason — they get furious. They doubt the integrity of the system and become more sensitive to perceived inequities. They start camping out in parks. They reject the very premise of the game.

Home run with this post.

Fat Cat wrote:Why is it that you have such a strong reaction to OWS, which is more or less harmless, and yet have been largely silent on the issue of corporate corruption?

High Velocity Lie-Nap! wrote:I speculate that most of the protesters are not people who are underwater with their mortgage or people who have lost their homes, I speculate it's mostly a bunch of spoiled white kids who have no clue as to how hard their families worked to get them as far as they did.

High Velocity Lie-Nap! wrote:It is not your fault that those at the bottom 'don't understand'. Are you being 'rewarded for no reason'? Or do you think OWS'ers would give you (or me) a pass?

High Velocity Lie-Nap! wrote:

Fat Cat wrote:Why is it that you have such a strong reaction to OWS, which is more or less harmless, and yet have been largely silent on the issue of corporate corruption?

Way back on the first few pages of this thread, I voiced my opinion of there being three groups responsible for the mess. Government officials, Corporate and finally, the Consumers who bought-in to the caper.

My strong reaction to OWS is they have no message and no end game, there is evidence of corruption within the ranks of what has been alleged to be a flat org, they are destructive and are harming small businesses and property owners. I believe they (the fulltime protesters) need to be looking for jobs instead of bitching for hand outs. I speculate that most of the protesters are not people who are underwater with their mortgage or people who have lost their homes, I speculate it's mostly a bunch of spoiled white kids who have no clue as to how hard their families worked to get them as far as they did.

Grandpa's Spells wrote:

High Velocity Lie-Nap! wrote:It is not your fault that those at the bottom 'don't understand'. Are you being 'rewarded for no reason'? Or do you think OWS'ers would give you (or me) a pass?

Of course they would. You and and IN actually provide products and services. This is why OWS doesn't hate Steve Jobs.

But when those at the bottom don’t understand the unequal distribution of wealth — when it seems as if the winners are getting rewarded for no reason — they get furious.

High Velocity Lie-Nap! wrote:

Grandpa's Spells wrote:

High Velocity Lie-Nap! wrote:It is not your fault that those at the bottom 'don't understand'. Are you being 'rewarded for no reason'? Or do you think OWS'ers would give you (or me) a pass?

Of course they would. You and and IN actually provide products and services. This is why OWS doesn't hate Steve Jobs.

Apple uses bank loans. How granular are we getting here?

Grandpa's Spells wrote: Not very. Nobody objects to fair market b2b loans.

Fat Cat wrote:

High Velocity Lie-Nap! wrote:

Fat Cat wrote:Why is it that you have such a strong reaction to OWS, which is more or less harmless, and yet have been largely silent on the issue of corporate corruption?

Way back on the first few pages of this thread, I voiced my opinion of there being three groups responsible for the mess. Government officials, Corporate and finally, the Consumers who bought-in to the caper.

My strong reaction to OWS is they have no message and no end game, there is evidence of corruption within the ranks of what has been alleged to be a flat org, they are destructive and are harming small businesses and property owners. I believe they (the fulltime protesters) need to be looking for jobs instead of bitching for hand outs. I speculate that most of the protesters are not people who are underwater with their mortgage or people who have lost their homes, I speculate it's mostly a bunch of spoiled white kids who have no clue as to how hard their families worked to get them as far as they did.

Fair enough. It just doesn't seem like you to let something get you so riled up, but somehow this seems to strike a nerve with you.

johno wrote:To illustrate my point, the face of economic and historic ignorance:

High Velocity Lie-Nap! wrote:

Grandpa's Spells wrote:

High Velocity Lie-Nap! wrote:It is not your fault that those at the bottom 'don't understand'. Are you being 'rewarded for no reason'? Or do you think OWS'ers would give you (or me) a pass?

Of course they would. You and and IN actually provide products and services. This is why OWS doesn't hate Steve Jobs.

Apple uses bank loans. How granular are we getting here?