Why isn’t the government getting tough with banks?

當長期支持你的好友觸犯了一些所謂 "有解釋空間的規範" 時，而你是主審的官員時，你會如何處理，從輕還是抱持著"正義"心態去處理?

在美國，銀行和政府之間的曖昧關係是眾所皆知。新新的金融法有許多需要解釋的地方，再加上英美法體系所謂的"彈性" 解釋。雖然自今年年初起，歐巴馬政府不斷的開始修改金融法規並且開始回頭檢討那些出事的銀行。華爾街的金童、金女被迫要出庭解釋究竟是發生了什麼事，告訴官員、法官及社會大眾....究竟是哪個環節出了問題。看似嚴肅的聽審過程，900多面的陳述資料中，最後我們只看到了: misleading the investor, lack of informing material information, negligent.... 然後!! 因為風暴賺進一億多(123 million)的銀行被政府 "重重的"罰了 7千多萬 (75 million)....這就是所謂的重罰嗎?

還是回到標題所寫的 "Why isn’t the government getting tough with banks?" the answer is obvious....because they CAN'T and they WON't

就是因為這樣，才會有些法官只能在私底下發發嘮騷的說:“If other banks saw that the government was being rough and tough with banks and requiring banking officials to stand before federal judges and enter pleas of guilty, that might be a powerful deterrent to this type of conduct.”(如果其他的銀行看到被叫去法庭聽證的銀行受到嚴厲的指責和懲罰時，將會產生有效的嚇阻效力)

U.S. Judges Sound Off on Bank Settlements





The agency described their conduct as negligent but not fraudulent.