Are Handcuffs Needed for the Libor Scandal to be Taken Seriously? (VIDEO)

Are handcuffs needed for the Libor scandal to be taken seriously?

Dennis Kelleher, president and CEO of Better Markets Inc., and Felix Salmon, Reuters finance blogger, join “Viewpoint” host Eliot Spitzer to assess the latest developments in the Libor scandal, including news that banks are spreading the blame for rate manipulation by implicating rival banks.

“One of the most shocking things about the Barclays scandal is — and the Libor scandal, larger — is if you read the emails, listen to the voice mails, the instant messages, there isn’t even a whiff of any of these people thinking for a moment that they would be caught or held accountable. The level of brazen lawlessness is actually a reflection of the fact that law is not applied to them,” Kelleher remarks. “I think when the handcuffs come out, you’ll actually start to see maybe some real changes in both the business model and this whole concept of no supervision ’cause ‘we don’t have to follow the law.’”

~

4closureFraud.org

Comments
2 Responses to “Are Handcuffs Needed for the Libor Scandal to be Taken Seriously? (VIDEO)”
  1. 1ofthemany says:

    YES handcuff, leg Irons, Yessss duct tape the mouths of the idiots and stuff one nostril full of money and lets see how they feel when begin $lowly $uffocated!!! Justice …yes restitution to the people!!! How long will this go on.

  2. Richard F. Kessler says:

    The recent Libor scandal is a watershed event. The financial manipulation and bid-rigging uncovered demonstrated, for the first time, that the too large to fail banks engage in monopolistic behavior. The on-going investigations continue to uncover damaging evidence of misconduct . This has driven individual banks to attempt to save their skins by informing on others.
    It began when evidence led to the disclosure that Barclay’s bank had manipulated the Libor (London Interbank Offered Rate) index which is used to adjust interest in trillions of dollars in financial operations daily. The rate is set using the daily reports by Libor member banks of the interest they pay for interbank loans. Barclays could raise or lower the Libor rate by falsifying its reports of what it paid to minimize investment losses and increase earnings.
    Barclay’s has paid the largest fine ever to British banking authorities and many of its highest officers, including Robert Diamond, C.E.O., have resigned. However this was just the beginning. Since then, further investigations have provided evidence that many of the other largest banks were similarly involved in rate rigging. These banks include, UBS, HSBC, Deutsche Bank, JP Morgan, Citigroup, Society General and Credit Agricola. These banks, often acting in concert, manipulated credit setting indices other than Libor, including Euribor (the European Interbank offered Rate and the Tokyo interbank offered rate.
    Up till now, the conversation regarding the banking crisis has centered upon concern that the banks are too big to fail. Critics have noted that the banks have become impervious to moral hazard, operate without accountability for outcomes and banking practices and grown beyond control by regulatory authorities. Defenders have argued that their size is precisely what enables huge banks successfully and profitably to navigate the dangerous shoals of international finance.
    Here is the first evidence that not only have the banks grown too large but that their size enables them to function as an oligopoly engaged in monopolistic practices such as rate rigging. When a few large banks can rig rates, this is not efficient banking but a conspiracy to monopolize. Here is the first evidence to support the policy that banks which have become too large must be broken into smaller pieces.
    That is what happened to Ma Bell whose enormous size made it predatory but too large to be efficient. The Baby Bells not only survived and prospered but America became a world leader in the information age by providing new telecommunications technology. The handwriting has been written on the wall. Is there anyone left in high public office with the courage to read it out loud?

Leave a Reply