Is it just me, or has the government all of a sudden developed a rager for JPM? Well, clearly it's not just me because here's Maria and Kayla discussing this very thing. But how did this happen so fast? Wasn't Jamie the fair-haired son being whispered about as the next Treasury Secretary or Fed Chairman? And now they're in trouble for what essentially boils down to hiring target kids in Hong Kong? Somebody help me make sense of this. Who did Jamie piss off?
Trending Content - Off Topic Forum
| +72 | Bathroom War Crimes | 20 | 1h |
| +56 | for you youngins (under 40, ideally under 30), what do you want out of life? | 33 | 18h |
| +21 | Stealth-Listening Devices | 4 | 1h |
| +12 | Companies with products that track terminal/analytics desktop usage | 1 | 2d |
| +10 | Totally random question | 4 | 1h |
| +9 | Ordering Valium Online: Key Considerations | 0 | 2d |
| +9 | Pickleball Manhattan | 2 | 2h |
| +7 | my advisor looks a little too good | 7 | 1d |
| +7 | LinkedIn Shitposts | 3 | 1d |
| +4 | My Plan For Generational Wealth | 4 | 1h |
Career Resources
The true irony of this is just about every power player in government got their job the same way. Presidents get elected by promising the most goodies, congress gets elected the same way. Bureaucrats do things for politicians and get rewarded with powerful appointments that carry zero accountability. Yet the government moans and wails when someone dare make a financial transaction for the benefit of two parties. Government insanity is at an all time high, however the accountability is at an all time low. Yet they have the audacity to go after anyone who dare do what they do. Sickening.
JPM is the most profitable bank in the US now. That must attract regulatory attention. And maybe there are good reasons for its profitability, even relative to its peers.
That plus it's initial hubris over the london whale incident and Dimon's outspoken brashness over capital reqs probably didn't go over well in washington. I remember a NYT piece earlier this year about JPM hiring new lobbyists and changing its tone to conciliatory in washington, guess it didn't work.
I'd say its a combination of deserving and piling-on.
Also- the Chinese hiring isn't about nepotism being illegal. It's doing it to foreign government officials that bring the problems. Corrupt Foreign Practices Act - pretty plainspoken law. One thing about the law is that it isn't a perfect synonym for fairness. Why else do tax attorneys make so much.
The entire idea behind that law is totally bogus. That is America sitting on its high horse and telling the world that you cant make bribes to get things done. When every day the government does the same thing. Think the corn-husker kickback. If America wants to outlaw bribes and kickbacks then the government needs to lead by example. Right now its do what I say not what I do. If China wants to do business in morally questionable ways with in its own country then who are we to tell them no? I would love it if America still had the walk with a big stick mentality, but the fact of the matter is we don't. We have leaders that don't have the personal will to stand behind what they said 5 min ago. Until we as a nation grow a pair and back up what we say with action at home, we don't have any right telling another sovereign nation how to handle its internal business practices. I realize that this is an American company they are going after over this and not China itself, but the message they are conveying to China is. Stop these practices or else American companies will not be able to do business with you.
The corn-husker kick-back was removed from the Healthcare Law before it was passed. Scalia didn't even know this during the Supreme Court arguments on Obamacare, which was embarrassing.
JPM is getting a ton of attention because they do a ton of shit that ends in them dropping literally hundreds of millions of dollars on legal fees and settlements every single year. Obviously, they aren't alone in this, but let's not all act like they've done nothing wrong.
Lastly - two wrongs don't make a right, bruh.
Two wrongs may not make a right, but doing wrong sure as hell doesn't give you the right to point out everyone else's wrongs and sue them for it.
Also, the corn-husker kickback was removed from the final legislation not because the congress decided to do something right but because it got a ton of media coverage and wasn't necessary any more because it had put the senate over the necessary 60 votes to move the discussion to the floor where only 50 votes were needed to pass. Regardless of the fact that the kickback was not in the final bill is beside the point. The fact that it was a kickback to achieve a necessary hurdle.
So, what's your point? We should allow companies to break laws and leave them alone because the government does things that are questionable?
You missed the point. The Act is not aimed at telling foreign governments how to act. By the 1950s BLATANT corporate bribery over government contracts were pretty much wiped out. But after Nixon opened Chinese trade there was a lot of hoopla between american companies engaging a Chinese government that was all too willing to play corruptly. The idea of the Act is ensuring fair competition between American companies abroad.
And you have to make a major distinction between types of bribery. You've implied many different apples and oranges in this thread. You can' t just lump it together. For one thing- bribery within the private sector is perfectly legal. But if infrastructure business belonging to millions (or billions) of citizens is essentially co-opted for such a trivial favor like an enty-level job offer to someone's kid then that's certainly quite different, no?
That said- I agree bribery loopholes exist within the U.S. Which is why I said earlier that the law is not a synonym for fairness. It's a crude proxy at best. But that doesn't mean we should wipe it out and openly allow crooked practices.
Dimon - "Why is the government picking on us, why they gotta mess with us???"
Gov't - "Because it's your turn!!!!!!"
True story.
What heister said.
Also, without getting too partisan, our govt is led by a guy from my lovely city of Chicago. I'd consider Chi-town no better than China in the wink/nod world of favors and hiring of friends/family. As a guy outside looking in, I can complain about it, but as heister said this is nothing new.
There are plenty of things the banks have done in the past 5-6 years that bother me, this doesn't make the cut.
I've been thinking the same exact thing in recent weeks, and this shit is ongoing.
All I can say is that there is clearly no hope now for Dimon 2016.
i sometimes wonder why there re so many jewish people in high finance
Because some networks are stronger than Harvard.
Fair Haired Child is the ninth episode of the first season of Masters of Horror. It originally aired in North America on January 6, 2006. A 15 year-old outcast named Tara is kidnapped by a strange couple and locked in a basement with their son who has a dark secret.
-Wikipedia
Odio laboriosam quaerat est facere numquam ullam dolores. Autem et id adipisci est doloremque. Quia laborum impedit dolores culpa sunt. Vero atque beatae ullam omnis consectetur illum. Repudiandae magni minima tempora dolorem consequatur architecto.
Quibusdam quibusdam soluta voluptas facilis sapiente. At maiores voluptas cum. Sunt earum sed est et. Blanditiis sed explicabo numquam natus.
Eaque rerum dolorum odio est. Rerum corrupti qui consectetur harum voluptas. Quos debitis quasi sunt.
Inventore consequatur dolorem ullam saepe omnis. Laborum rerum non odio omnis et nihil. Corrupti rem praesentium at itaque beatae ut. Dolor ut praesentium error voluptatem.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...