- ‹ previous
- 1891 of 8827
- next ›
Did Bernie Madoff Bilk Mother Jones? (From the Editors)
Okay, here's the good news: Unlike other nonprofits, Mother Jones did not invest its portfolio with ponzi master Bernie Madoff. But here's the bad news: In recent weeks, we've heard from major donors saying that they've taken such a beating in the market, they have no choice but to pull funding they already promised to us—funding that was paying for our kick-ass reporters in Washington. This is not General Motors-size money we're talking about—about $125,000 so far has evaporated—but for an organization our size, it is a big chunk, especially at a time when we're already slashing the budget to deal with the broader financial crisis and the severe downturn in print advertising. Managers are taking pay cuts, we'll be running somewhat smaller issues, we're subletting office space, but at this point the only way to reduce expenses even further is to lay off reporters and cut back on investigating the powers that be. That's the last thing we want to do: With Washington in transition and billions flying out the door, someone has to dig into where the bailout money is going.
This is where you come in. We're not asking you to pay for private jets or chauffeured Town Cars; every penny of your donation goes to the overworked, underpaid investigative reporters whose work you see here every day. Anything helps, and it's super easy—just follow this link. Think about it: Right now the Wall Street bailout has each and every one of us on the hook for $11,600 and counting. We'll keep track of your money for a lot less than that.
Mary Schapiro, Barack Obama's choice to lead the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), previously appointed one of Bernard Madoff's sons to a regulatory body that oversees American securities firms.
It has emerged that in 2001, Ms Schapiro, currently chief executive of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (Finra), employed Mark Madoff to serve on the board of the National Adjudicatory Council ? the division that reviews disciplinary decisions made by Finra.
Obama is the agent of change or corruption?
Frankly, I don't know quite what to make of Bernard Madoff, the $50bn man. When you hear the term "Ponzi scheme" you think of words like con artist, financial predator, flim flam artist, trickster. I can't see him in these terms. I don't see him as Michael Milken, or Ivan Boesky a bottom-feeder out to help himself to whatever he can get.
Frankly, while it was a convenient foil for Madoff's work to be a wealthy New York Jewish philanthropist, I don't see him as a poseur in this. While he has destroyed lives and done great harm to American Jewish philanthropy, he has also wiped out the fortunes of his own children and other close relatives, and probably guaranteed himself a prison term. His is a family and tribal tragedy.
I couldn't begin to speculate about what drew him into this fraud ? whether it was willful connivance and greed or merely a desire to help friends, family and fellow Jews to improve their investment returns or some combination. It somehow seems more complicated that the typical Wall Street Gekko-like scam.What would cause otherwise prudent people, some with sophisticated understanding of finance, to override these concerns and throw caution to the wind? The Los Angeles Times calls it an "affinity scam". In other words, Madoff relied on the Jewish community, in an almost tribal way, to support his financial scheme. There does seem to be some sort of almost atavistic instinct at work that led many of these individuals to trust Madoff with all their worldly assets. Perhaps they saw Bernie as one of their own, a smart Jewish boy who would take care of them. Some might have felt that in handling their own money, they needed someone who was more than just a distant banker, someone who they could trust as a member of the tribe.
Madoff is a Jew and he cheated other Jews and our charities big time. He went against what the Talmud teaches on treating a brother. He will have a special place in Hell amongst the camp guards.
That's right. Madoff is dispicable, but so have we all been. All of us who invested in the stock market, and though that we (or are charities) could make 10% returns while GDP only rose by 2-4%. We wanted to get money simply by having money, and the stock market has worked, so far. A giant ponzi scheme, working until we pull our money out.
Many tens of years ago, the US government took responsibility for the safety of investments by creating the SEC and regulating the financial industry. The US government must pay because the state misled everybody. On top of being an inept and expensive bureaucracy, the SEC helps crooks look better and make sure that investors stop doing due diligence. Of course, the self-assigned goal of the SEC of offering a safe environment for investors cannot be achieved by the SEC but only by complete deregulation. Regulations serve swindlers.
A a rule, never trust government people and always do the opposite of what the State orders you to do.
Sure, I've donated. I read this blog every morning, and I'm happy to pay to help keep it going. Please keep up the good work.
The stock market bust, and housing bust and etc. are to be expected in a greedy society. Read my book, Das Capital. Soon it will be the time of the great worker upraising. Get prepared.
This is another example of the federal government failing in its responsibilities to manage our economy for the benefit of the American people. The failures of the government are past all acceptable measures of good government. We are now into an expensive, inefficient and often ineffective government model called the United States of America with deliberate minimal oversight and accountability for the benefit of the few against the many.
As a senior editor at MJ, I'd like to add something to this post. Everybody is strapped, so if you can't donate, there are other ways to help, ranging from free to cheap:
FREE: Sign up for our thrice-weekly headlines email, which gives you a heads-up to stories that might interest you. It also helps us to raise money. Signing up takes ten seconds. You can do it right now, while you're thinking about it.
CHEAP: A year's subscription to the print magazine costs the equivalent of a movie ticket! It's absurdly cheap! Plus, a gift subscription is the perfect (perfectly inexpensive!) Xmas or Hanukah (Eid? Kwanza?) present for politically minded pals and relations. C'mon now, don't be a grinch. Just do it.
Gift subs here.
Thanks for your support!
Mary Schapiro, Barack Obama's choice to lead the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), previously appointed one of Bernard Madoff's sons to a regulatory body that oversees American securities firms.
It has emerged that in 2001, Ms Schapiro, currently chief executive of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (Finra), employed Mark Madoff to serve on the board of the National Adjudicatory Council the division that reviews disciplinary decisions made by Finra.
Obama is the agent of change or corruption?
I believe Madoff's sons were the ones who turned him in.
The US government must pay because the state misled everybody. On top of being an inept and expensive bureaucracy...
JCR, you've got me LMMFAO!!
The inept and expensive bureaucracy we call "The US Government" never pays!
It's obvious that you see this fact.
WE Pay!
I do!
You do!
Monika Bauerlein does!
My neighbor does, and her neighbor does!
Your Mother does!
"The US Government", or more properly, those we elect to positions of power, NEVER Pay for their blunders, mistakes, oversights, and ineptitudes!
What they DO in case of such glaring failures as this one (which Ron Paul predicted years ago!), is to make YOU pay, and to tell you that the solution is for you to not only turn over more of your earnings in the future, but for them to also seize more power over private markets than they already have, and of course, promise that it'll never happen again.
In essence, they're Rewarding themselves with more power and a bigger pile of taxpayer cash to pass out, because they failed at what they promised they'd do for us. They promised this, initially because, they assured us, we weren't up to the task of looking after our own affairs, but apparently they were!
LMMFAO at the voters who think "The US Government" will ever pay anything and that more "oversight" powers, to "oversee" what they already "oversaw", will be any sort of solution to the problems gov't either causes or exacerbates!
Of course, government must pay so that government people stop committing to the impossible to get elected and spread a false sense of safety. Victims got misled by the SEC and all the US government's regulatory scheme. No moral hazard here.
The greedy capitalist fraud system has come crashing down. The system itself is a fraud. This is not a surprise to those who have studied the system. It was long overdo. Sometimes you have to tear down to build up on a firmer foundation.
Workers of the world unite, you only have the chains that bind you to lose.
A crook is a crook unless you think you are different from everybody else.
Frankly, I don't know quite what to make of Bernard Madoff, the $50bn man. When you hear the term "Ponzi scheme" you think of words like con artist, financial predator, flim flam artist, trickster. I can't see him in these terms. I don't see him as Michael Milken, or Ivan Boesky a bottom-feeder out to help himself to whatever he can get.
Frankly, while it was a convenient foil for Madoff's work to be a wealthy New York Jewish philanthropist, I don't see him as a poseur in this. While he has destroyed lives and done great harm to American Jewish philanthropy, he has also wiped out the fortunes of his own children and other close relatives, and probably guaranteed himself a prison term. His is a family and tribal tragedy.
I couldn't begin to speculate about what drew him into this fraud whether it was willful connivance and greed or merely a desire to help friends, family and fellow Jews to improve their investment returns or some combination. It somehow seems more complicated that the typical Wall Street Gekko-like scam.What would cause otherwise prudent people, some with sophisticated understanding of finance, to override these concerns and throw caution to the wind? The Los Angeles Times calls it an "affinity scam". In other words, Madoff relied on the Jewish community, in an almost tribal way, to support his financial scheme. There does seem to be some sort of almost atavistic instinct at work that led many of these individuals to trust Madoff with all their worldly assets. Perhaps they saw Bernie as one of their own, a smart Jewish boy who would take care of them. Some might have felt that in handling their own money, they needed someone who was more than just a distant banker, someone who they could trust as a member of the tribe.
A scam is a scam. It by definition involves what Jakob (above) calls "willful connivance and greed". Madoff may have had "a desire to help friends, family and fellow Jews to improve their investment returns", but that does not represent an alternative to "willful connivance and greed" in explaining his actions.
Going back to Rabbi Cohen's comment on 12/17/08, I wish it didn't carry the (hopefully unintentional) implication that Madoff's actions were somehow worse because "He went against what the Talmud teaches on treating a brother".
Would Rabbi Cohen be less incensed by Mr Madoff's dishonesty and fraud if his victims had been Gentiles? Would he even have bothered to post his opinion on here?
The Rabbi's comments remind me of a view expressed by a Bangladeshi colleague of mine when we were discussing the Bangladeshi war of liberation of 1971. My colleague's anger at the behaviour of Pakistani troops in Bangladesh (which included the wholesale rape of Bangladeshi women) was heightened because they were fellow Muslims. "How could they rape Muslim women?" is what he said. He seemed to be implying that the crime would have been less serious if the victims had been non-Muslims.
I belong to no religion and I feel both threatened and insulted by the implication that a crime against me would be regarded as less of a crime by some people if perpetrated by someone who shared their religion.
His hell has already begun. Hell is the absence of love and he has lost the love of everyone.
Re: supporting Mother Jones. I would love to, but when I found out some years ago that Mother the magazine DOES NOT use a union printer, I could not support that. Mother Jones, the person, would be aghast. Has anything changed in this regard?