Discussion in 'Wall St. News' started by OnClose, Nov 3, 2012.
SG is full of @#$@$!!! They know he can't pay it back and that they won't get that money back. Just trying to make an example of him.
When the fiat money system collapses zimbabwe style, he should have no problem paying it back.
Imagine how that guy felt every morning when he woke up! He had to go to work, act like things were all good, continue the cover up, and try to win the money back! He probably is suffering a lot less now, in jail, than he did before he got caught...
Why is it a problem for them to "try to make an example of him" when he conned them out of billions?
Humans are humans. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that.
Societe Generale lacked risk management and internal control, which put employees in risky situations and put the bankâs money at great risk. The Executive Committee of SG has complete oversight and responsibility in managing the risk of the bank. Hence the Executive Committee should be responsible for the company's and shareholders' loss.
The court's ruling basically just gave licences to banks' CEOs to shift their blame elsewhere (in this case, to a junior trader). The implication is that SG will continue to have sloppy risk management practices, and will continue to have major losses as a result.
I don't think a junior trader had the ability to con a multibillion dollar bank. Also, the motive of his action is not personal, but is simply to make money for the bank and keep his job.
He was not "made an example". He was a scapegoat.
If this kind of thing happened in the US, you can count on the whole Executive Committee to be penalized by the court.
Separate names with a comma.