Elizabeth Warren
Related: About this forumGuess What Happened When JPMorgan's CEO Visited Elizabeth Warren's Office
WASHINGTON -- A meeting between Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Jamie Dimon deteriorated almost immediately after the JPMorgan Chase & Co. CEO visited the recently elected senator and consumer advocate at her Capitol Hill office in 2013.
In a new afterword for the release of the paperback version of her book A Fighting Chance, Warren recalls that the tenor of the conversation between the two policy adversaries soured when Dimon complained about financial regulations that she has supported:
Our exchange heated up quickly. By the time we got to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, we werent quite shouting, but we were definitely raising our voices. At this point -- early in 2013 -- Rich Cordray was still serving as director of the consumer agency under a recess appointment; he hadnt yet been confirmed by the Senate, which meant that the agency was vulnerable to legal challenges over its work. Dimon told me what he thought it would take to get Congress to confirm a director, terms that included gutting the agencys power to regulate banks like his. By this point I was furious. Dodd-Frank had created default provisions that would automatically go into effect if there was no confirmed director, and his bank was almost certainly not in compliance with the those rules. I told him that if that happened, I think you guys are breaking the law.
Suddenly Dimon got quiet. He leaned back and slowly smiled. So hit me with a fine. We can afford it.
As Warren noted in a 2014 Senate Banking Committee hearing, Dimon was proved correct: Though his bank was forced to pay $20 billion in fines, he still received a significant raise at the end of 2013.
more
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/31/elizabeth-warren-jamie-dimon_n_6972182.html?ncid=txtlnkusaolp00000592
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)There needs to be a corporate 'death penalty', as well as the option to force out executives WITHOUT severance packages or golden parachutes. Not just fines that get swallowed and passed on to consumers.
peacebird
(14,195 posts)calimary
(84,339 posts)He belongs in PRISON.
merrily
(45,251 posts)peacebird
(14,195 posts)Suddenly Dimon got quiet. He leaned back and slowly smiled. So hit me with a fine. We can afford it.
Throw a few top dogs and their minions in jail, things might begin to change.
Lochloosa
(16,402 posts)Hreidar Mar Sigurdsson, the former chief executive, received five and a half years, while Sigurdur Einarsson, former chairman of the board, was sentenced to five years in jail.
These are the heaviest sentences for financial fraud in Iceland's history.
The court gave Olafur Olafsson, one of the majority owners three years and Magnus Gudmundsson the former chief executive of the Luxembourg branch, three and a half years.
You beat me to the same point
peacebird
(14,195 posts)Saviolo
(3,321 posts)And it worked. They jailed the bankers and bailed out the citizens and it worked.
http://rt.com/op-edge/iceland-bank-sentence-model-246/
Until the punishment becomes actually punitive, until it becomes more than a line item on their budget that is just the cost of doing business, those fines will do nothing. Of course they've got maximum fines in order to prevent truly onerous fines being levied against citizens, but when corporations can just say, "Yeah, sue me, we can afford it," then it will not work.
Jail time for high executives might make them hesitate just a little.
Lochloosa
(16,402 posts)Saviolo
(3,321 posts)Go ahead and start an OP as peacebird suggested. It does need to be seen more prominently and now is a good time to be talking about it. Well... always is a good time to be talking about it.
peacebird
(14,195 posts)appalachiablue
(42,908 posts)In 1943 during WWII Sewell Avery, Chairman of Montgomery Ward said, 'to Hell with the government!'. In 1944, FDR ordered the company's property seized and Avery removed for not abiding union labor agreements in wartime. Earlier during the Depression in the 1930s, Avery had been asked by *JP Morgan to take over the retail company.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1207/7557.html
F4lconF16
(3,747 posts)I'm shocked! Shocked, I tell you!
lark
(24,164 posts)Fines are like a tax on wrong doing, nothing more. So they paid $20 billion, you can bet they made a ton more than that, so it didn't hurt. Make them pay back every dollar spent on these illegalities and give them some jail time and the shenanigans would stop. They would be too costly to continue. But changing behavior isn't really what we're doing or really even trying to do.
joshdawg
(2,714 posts)in order to hurt them even more is to take away their money. Freeze their accounts wherever they are: Caymans, etc. to the point where they nor their family can have access to that money.
peacebird
(14,195 posts)L0oniX
(31,493 posts)progressoid
(50,748 posts)He's an asshole.
GeorgeGist
(25,430 posts)So hit me with a fine. We can afford it.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)That should make some purity heads explode around here!!!
Regards,
TWM
Ichingcarpenter
(36,988 posts)for talking with the chief of JP morgan?
Scuba
(53,475 posts)pa28
(6,145 posts)Even the few remaining rational conservatives out there agree. The American Enterprise Institute and David Stockman among others.
This guy knows he is running the place and he acts like it, telling Warren what she can or can't do or what can be passed by congress. No wonder she was furious.
When banks get powerful enough to undermine democracy and their risk so large they can tank the economy they MUST be broken up.
He seems to feel he runs this place too.
In Washington, One Bank Chief Still Holds Sway
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/19/business/19dimon.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
Wounded Bear
(60,691 posts)through the tax code. For any company/coporation that receives a fine or judgement of some sort for malfeasance, all pay and commissions, equity awards, etc over, say, $100,000 be taxed at 90%.
Work out the details, maybe, but we need to hit the individuals in the pocketbook.
SoLeftIAmRight
(4,883 posts)I like the Idea of charging business a unemployment tax. They would pay an extra tax that would be one-half of the past years unemployment rate.
Volaris
(10,599 posts)Hekate
(94,691 posts)lemondropkid
(2 posts)she should be the next minority leader, not schumer.
Wounded Bear
(60,691 posts)bvar22
(39,909 posts)He even pees a little when a Wall Street Banker does it.
It is sooooo cute.
flobee1
(870 posts)Is steal enough so that, even with the fines, they still make a profit
Vincardog
(20,234 posts)fasttense
(17,301 posts)Jamie Dimon sounds like a gangster's name. And he acts like a gangster too.
Vincardog
(20,234 posts)mountain grammy
(27,277 posts)I'm not running for president she said. Well we'll see. We need you Senator.
tclambert
(11,136 posts)"Them" being the big banks.
project_bluebook
(411 posts)Yet the average American keeps feeding this evil.
gregcrawford
(2,382 posts)... His Infinitely Beloved Eminence, Lloyd Blankfein of Goldman Sachs, told a Senate subcommittee that they were "... doing God's work!"
Though I think the god was Mammon.
Carve 'em a new one, Liz!
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)How about jail time, you arrogant ass?
Angel Martin
(942 posts)Prof Perry Mehrling at Columbia has proposed a regulatory structure where, during a financial crisis, the Federal Reserve would maintain continuity of markets (he calls it 'dealer of last resort" , rather than bailing out individual financial institutions.
http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2010/04/the-central-bank-as-deal-of-the-last-resort.html
a major benefit of this is: if the Fed guarantees continuity of markets, there is no TBTF institution whose collapse will cause markets to lock up and cease to function.
which means, there is no such thing as TBTF any more, and you can let JPM et al. go bankrupt
also, this potentially has support across the political spectrum, so it could actually be passed
note: the Fed actually ended up being the "dealer of last resort" in 2008, but several months into the crisis, when a lot of economic damage had already been done.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)Angel Martin
(942 posts)also, i only have 4 posts and i haven't figured out all the functions of this site
i'm not a liberal or progressive so i will only be commenting on the very occasional "non-political" topic
so please go ahead and post the article if you think folks here would find it worthwhile
SleeplessinSoCal
(9,675 posts)Of Warren. Amazing how many knives are out.
druidity33
(6,556 posts)SleeplessinSoCal
(9,675 posts). . . which I consider a healthy sign. Trying to slime Warren means she has power and is feared by the "right" people.
Ichingcarpenter
(36,988 posts)Did JPMorgan Try to Bribe Dem Power-Brokers? (Depends What Your Definition of 'Bribe' Is)
They've got a problem with Elizabeth Warren. And they want party leaders to do something about it.
A widely published Reuters story reported that four major U.S. banks have threatened to withhold expected campaign contributions from the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee unless Democrats, including Warren and Ohio Senator Sherrod Brown ... soften their party's tone toward Wall Street.
But the article specifically notes: JPMorgan representatives have met Democratic Party officials to emphasize the connection between its annual contribution and the need for a friendlier attitude toward the banks, a source familiar with JPMorgan's donations said. In past years, the bank has given its donation in one lump sum but this year has so far donated only a third of the amount, the source said.
A person familiar with JPMorgan's donationswho may or may not be a JPMorgan representativetold a Reuters reporter that JPM told party officials: Be more friendly to banks if you want us to give you the remaining two-thirds of the contributions you were expecting from us.
Even shorter: We are offering you a specific sum of money for specific actionwhich may simply amount to mouth-shutting and smilingfrom members of the Senate.
18 U.S.C. § 201 is extremely clear on the legal definition of bribery:
(b Whoever
(1) directly or indirectly, corruptly gives, offers or promises anything of value to any public official or person who has been selected to be a public official, or offers or promises any public official or any person who has been selected to be a public official to give anything of value to any other person or entity, with intent
(A) to influence any official act;
Specifically an official act includes:
(3) the term official act means any decision or action on any question, matter, cause, suit, proceeding or controversy, which may at any time be pending, or which may by law be brought before any public official, in such officials official capacity, or in such officials place of trust or profit.
Will JPMorgan face any investigation, let alone penalty, for their attempted bribe?
http://prospect.org/article/did-jpmorgan-try-bribe-dem-power-brokers-depends-what-your-definition-bribe
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026441274
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Citizens' United legalized bribery.
We need publicly funded elections, but I have no idea how we would enforce such a system.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)...before another FDR will be effective.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)It is taking me quite a while to finish it. But what a great book. I highly recommend it to those who want to understand how Roosevelt accomplished what he did.
The amazing thing is that he was raised in great wealth and, as a young man, was, according to the Bully Pulpit, quite a snob. Yet he came to have great compassion for working people.
He certainly had his faults, but he did fight to enforce reform.
Ikonoklast
(23,973 posts)TR was a bit of a conundrum, but the positives he espoused outweighed any faults he had.
appalachiablue
(42,908 posts)During the 2008 Financial Crash Sweden nationalized the banks- smart people! Monopolies are dangerous and undemocratic, TR knew-
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)Jail time, Jamie. You deserve jail time.
Elizabeth Warren for President!
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)She needs to be president. She and Bernie Sanders are the only politicians who have the courage to speak truth to power -- the only ones. But Warren would be most likely to win because of her temperament and her ability to communicate in an exciting way. Bernie has the most experience and that is his advantage. Bernie also knows all the issues across the board.
Let the people decide.
But Elizabeth Warren owes it to the American people to run. She needs to be front and center in the debates and in the campaign.
pansypoo53219
(21,724 posts)eat ramen dude.
zentrum
(9,866 posts)
..article about him and the rest of The Wrecking Crew in April's issue. Dimon smugly asserts that his work is the best way he can help people and he believes that by "saving the system" he did a great thing. He feels misunderstood, is all.
He's revolting and dangerous and Warren should run for President.
Badass Liberal
(57 posts)The cult of a Warren-worship is getting old. She's a freshman senator who's very vocal. That's a nice start, but now she needs to being some substance.
Did you ever notice how Jesus loved everybody, but he whipped bankers???
demwing
(16,916 posts)In India, the monkeys raid the temples, stealing food from the altars, and generally just being little poop throwing monkeys. They keep the monkeys out by killing one, and impaling the body on as stick outside the temple door. Once the other monkeys see their ravaged friend, they stay the hell out of the temple.
Cruel, but effective.
turbinetree
(25,288 posts)How a complete ass who is so arrogant thinks that to do business is to rip off people so that he can get a raise, knowing that the very money he gets is from the people that own the central bank called the U.S. Treasury, and he and others on the Wall Street Ponzi scheme get our money almost free to operate under just maybe its time "we the people" of this country quit financing banks like his and others and nationalized the system---I mean really.
Since the U.S. Supreme Court thinks that banks and other oligarchies are people we can then kill two birds with one stone---regulate the money and over turn Citizens United, both and most of all of these organizations and the court would be besides themselves and they then can take a big
father founding
(619 posts)The Takers are all victims.