Jump to content

Home

Bernard Madoff Meets 150 Years in Prison


Tysyacha

Recommended Posts

You coulda put him in there for 20 years and it would do the same thing. He's gonna die in prison soon enough anyway...I'm more mad at the fact that his wife gets to keep over 2 million in assets even though she was involved in his scheme as well...their entire family (knowing or not) should be forced to give up any amount of money that is owed b/c of the case...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You coulda put him in there for 20 years and it would do the same thing. He's gonna die in prison soon enough anyway...I'm more mad at the fact that his wife gets to keep over 2 million in assets even though she was involved in his scheme as well...their entire family (knowing or not) should be forced to give up any amount of money that is owed b/c of the case...

 

I suppose you are going to fork over the cash too? He paid taxes on that, and you got government services(roads, police, fire), on those taxes, so, how much should I put you down for? 10 million?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I laughed this afternoon when, watching Fox Newsertainment, the reporter said 'yes, 150 years, that's basically a life sentence'. :lol:

 

I'm more mad at the fact that his wife gets to keep over 2 million in assets even though she was involved in his scheme as well...their entire family (knowing or not) should be forced to give up any amount of money that is owed b/c of the case...

 

Why should they be punished for something they may not have been party to? They may have benefitted from his fraud, but I think it unfair to punish his family for his crimes.

 

They should focus on finding out his accomplices and making them pay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fully agree, Astor!

 

Anyway, if I remember rightly Life in the US is only aboutt 35 years... which makes no sense.

 

So, think of this as five life sentences and we'll be closer to what's happening....

 

Now, maybe if they seized the assets that he stole/swindled/et cetera we might be able to _pay_ for some of what the Government wants to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They have seized nearly all of his assets, and those of his wife's, too, even though she has not been implicated in his crimes in any way. She gave up about 60 million or so to settle the issue quickly. The authorities are giving back this money to the people who've been swindled, but it'll not be nearly enough to cover the losses, of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Poor guy was just a bit confused. When people said they wanted to invest in something with really big returns he didn't think they meant for them.

 

Still you might say he deserves what he gets for being not too bright. He could've put precisely what he was doing in the fineprint and got away with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When it comes down to it his trial wasn't about delivering justice (even though that may have occurred as a side effect), but about making everyone feel good. Is that wrong? I'll leave that to great minds than my own, but it's important to note.

 

What exactly to you mean it wasn't about delivering justice? I suppose that if you consider justice to be that everyone who got swindled gets back what they lost then perhaps you're right.

 

At the same time, the guy was discovered to have committed a crime, he was arrested, tried, convicted, and sentenced. Seems like the justice system at work to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why should they be punished for something they may not have been party to? They may have benefitted from his fraud, but I think it unfair to punish his family for his crimes.

 

They should focus on finding out his accomplices and making them pay.

 

While I understand that the family members all did not know what was going on, but the mere fact that it is still not their money requires them to return it. It's unfortunate, but it's not their money to keep.

 

About his accomplices...his wife is right there and they're letting her keep millions (over 2.5 million) in assets...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suppose you are going to fork over the cash too? He paid taxes on that, and you got government services(roads, police, fire), on those taxes, so, how much should I put you down for? 10 million?

 

I don't understand what this has to do with anything...you're almost telling me to be thankful that he stole millions. It's like saying that we should let a bank robber off the hook if he takes the money he steals and donates it to a worthy cause.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand what this has to do with anything...you're almost telling me to be thankful that he stole millions. It's like saying that we should let a bank robber off the hook if he takes the money he steals and donates it to a worthy cause.

 

No, you were stating that "any of his family that had profited" from this should be punished too by having their money taken away as well, even if they didn't know he was committing a crime. You and I profitted off of him too because of the absurd amounts his family paid in taxes. Therefore, we should have to fork over money too.

 

There's no sense punishing more people for his scam.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did not profit from his scam in any way. Taxes are one thing that benefit society, but I did not receive any money. It's up to the government to return the money to its rightful owners....it's not like the original asset owners don't pay taxes either...so in any case, the money will reach the same destination eventually.

 

Any person, including family member, who received any money from this scam has no right to hold the money. It's like receiving stolen property. I'm sorry if it seems ruthless, but many more people suffer by not having their money returned...the amount of victims is an exponential amount over the amount of benefactors (including his family).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This guy, like his predecessor Ponsi, are the bane of the existence for capitalism.

 

Would not be surprised if he got put into one of those joints that is more like a hotel--for nonviolent offenders and celebs. No doubt paid his way there since he wasn't getting out of this.

 

Good riddance Mr "Made-off-with-your-money". You F*cking ganef*!

*(Ganef is old jewish for basically "conniving thief". Pronounced "Gone-if")

I don't see why we should necessarily punish the wife, unless there is proof that gun moll did actually act as an accomplice to her husband's crimes.

 

When it comes down to it his trial wasn't about delivering justice (even though that may have occurred as a side effect), but about making everyone feel good. Is that wrong? I'll leave that to great minds than my own, but it's important to note.

 

What exactly to you mean it wasn't about delivering justice? I suppose that if you consider justice to be that everyone who got swindled gets back what they lost then perhaps you're right.

 

At the same time, the guy was discovered to have committed a crime, he was arrested, tried, convicted, and sentenced. Seems like the justice system at work to me.

 

Nobody is saying the justice department is perfect--it certainly can't make up for all the screwing-over that Bernie did to all those people.

 

They have seized nearly all of his assets, and those of his wife's, too, even though she has not been implicated in his crimes in any way. She gave up about 60 million or so to settle the issue quickly. The authorities are giving back this money to the people who've been swindled, but it'll not be nearly enough to cover the losses, of course.

 

Yeah, lots of it disappeared to expensive vacations, yachts, cars, parties, and other stuff. We couldn't hope to retrieve all of it. I feel for those poor people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did not profit from his scam in any way. Taxes are one thing that benefit society, but I did not receive any money. It's up to the government to return the money to its rightful owners....it's not like the original asset owners don't pay taxes either...so in any case, the money will reach the same destination eventually.

You got roads, hospitals, police, fire, in some places water, gas and electric. You benefit from taxes just as much as they benefit from taxes. And since they paid more, we benefited a LOT from their taxes.

 

Any person, including family member, who received any money from this scam has no right to hold the money. It's like receiving stolen property. I'm sorry if it seems ruthless, but many more people suffer by not having their money returned...the amount of victims is an exponential amount over the amount of benefactors (including his family).

Causing one person to suffer to make another person not suffer STILL leaves you with people suffering. If you rob the rich to help the poor, the poor may be well off, but now the once rich are poor.

 

The money to pay the debts didn't exist to start with. The amount these people are "owed" isn't there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does it seem wrong that I just don't have the same sense of abhorrence for this man than more violent individuals who receive much lesser sentencing?

 

Economics is politics. Maybe he should've tried a defence of promoting a socialist system...

 

:p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...