Comments for http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2008/12/nils_indictment.shtml http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2008/12/nils_indictment.shtml en-gb 30 Tue 05 May 2015 14:58:02 GMT+1 A feed of user comments from the page found at http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2008/12/nils_indictment.shtml Chris Ghoti http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2008/12/nils_indictment.shtml?page=90#comment9 Goodness me, and DMcN please note!I have just received an explanation from the mods that actually does explain what they didn't like about the post they have now removed at #7. Apparently they disliked my use of the word 'admitted', because it prejudged a court case. So it is ok, it seems, to quote the article directly as I did at post #9, but not to suggest that his describing it as 'a $50 billion fraud' might be an admission.My thanks to the moderators for explaining this (which I ought to have guessed anyway, so it was my fault), and my congratulations to all concerned in arranging things so that such explanation is sent: that is a definite improvement on the uninformative way things have been before now. Mon 15 Dec 2008 13:25:15 GMT+1 Chris Ghoti http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2008/12/nils_indictment.shtml?page=80#comment8 What i did was to say that I particularly liked the New York Times talking (as they do) about 'his suspected con game'when they go on in the following sentence to say 'what Mr. Madoff himself described as a $50 billion fraud'Who referred that, and why? It is a quotation from the paper that the thread pointed me at, for goodness' sake!I like the 'suspected' when the man said it himself both to his employees and to a policeman, as has been reported comprehensively in the media. What is wrong with saying so?Gah. Moderation gone mad... Sat 13 Dec 2008 17:57:36 GMT+1 lordBeddGelert http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2008/12/nils_indictment.shtml?page=70#comment7 baldfacts - I agree. Nicola Horlick has been 'believing her hype' for far too long. Goodbye hubris, hello nemesis - and about time too ! Sat 13 Dec 2008 17:55:24 GMT+1 Chris Ghoti http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2008/12/nils_indictment.shtml?page=60#comment6 This post has been Removed Sat 13 Dec 2008 13:04:21 GMT+1 citizenthompson http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2008/12/nils_indictment.shtml?page=50#comment5 This is all turning into capitalism's 1989 isn't it? Sat 13 Dec 2008 12:59:23 GMT+1 baldfacts http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2008/12/nils_indictment.shtml?page=40#comment4 This has brightened up my day. To find that Nicola Horlick and her ilk are not super being or masters of the universe but are simple casino gamblers who didn't bother to check that Madoff was audited by a one man accountant. Brilliant! Sat 13 Dec 2008 11:32:01 GMT+1 U13717586 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2008/12/nils_indictment.shtml?page=30#comment3 1.The whole system, legal or illegal, is dishonest.Every scheme is a Ponzi scheme unless the fund managers can persuade the markets that their assets should appreciate at 15 percent a year.Calling some defaulters criminal is simply an attempt to normalise the institutional dishonesty that is capitalism. (If some are criminals, then many are not - even though 'criminals', and 'honest losers' are doing exactly the same thing.)The central dishonesty is in the over - evaluation of assets - up to exactly what those crooks think they can get away with****.That is true, whether we are talking of stock in a speculative bubble ('enriching' pension, insurance and 'investment' funds), of paper assets used as reserves by banks for credit creation, of the real estate ultimately backing mortgage derivatives etc.It all comes apart in a falling market, because the core assets crash.Every banker is currently operating a Ponzi scam with the government bail out money.****The reason I like the name 'Upshares, Downshares is 'cos that overevaluation of assets is the way 'Upstairs' (asset owners) keep up there, and Downstairs (those without capital) are kept down.It's that central fact that makes capitalism so wicked.Let us hope that Edgie's choice of satirical epithet for the accounts of short term share price movements, is suffciently subversive for us to realise we must sweep the whole system aside.3. What do you think the dot com boom bust speculative bubble was except a Ponzi scam. (As a fund, you could sell stock you held making zero dividend income, into a rising market, and so maintain your capital and have enough to give your fund's investors a return)PS Oh, boy, what a name, Madoff! As in 'Madoff with it'!!!! Beats even Panic and Close (financial economics theorists of the Barber 'boom' years) Fri 12 Dec 2008 23:58:16 GMT+1 dennisjunior1 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2008/12/nils_indictment.shtml?page=20#comment2 It is sad that a once-successful NASDAQ chairman; is now accused of stealling money. Fri 12 Dec 2008 20:19:56 GMT+1 steelpulse http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2008/12/nils_indictment.shtml?page=10#comment1 Wow, a film role tailor made for a turned professional Nils.On the surface smooth and charming but deep down his whole existence is to dump bad finacial news on us all. And blow me down. The Indictment. The Court stenographers still use electric or manual typewriters over there? I aint seen a font like that since the 1980s and word processors took over the world.Is the USA that skint? Fri 12 Dec 2008 18:17:30 GMT+1 ANMacleod http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2008/12/nils_indictment.shtml?page=0#comment0 Bear markets usually expose this king of fraud, because you cannot run a Ponzi scheme with falling prices. There will be more fund and hedge fund managers exposed in this way. Fri 12 Dec 2008 17:49:50 GMT+1