Prosecuting Wall Street - 60 Minutes

[FRED]

Prosecuting Wall Street

December 4, 2011 4:02 PM

Two high-ranking financial whistleblowers say they tried to warn their superiors about defective and even fraudulent mortgages. So why haven't the companies or their executives been prosecuted? Steve Kroft reports.

Transcript here.

Part I

Part II

Hat tip to iTuliper lektrode!

[World Traveler]

Re: Prosecuting Wall Street - 60 Minutes

That 60 Minutes segment is a good example of how an oligarchy (i.e. banana republic) operates.

In that 1990's, I made a strenuous effort to become fluent in Spanish. As part of the process, I spent 2-3 weeks per year (vacation time) attending language schools in Latin Americans and getting to know many Hispanic people both here in the U.S. and in Latin America. I also watched a lot of Spanish language TV programs, including the nightly news on Univision.

What struck me in my travels was that no matter the country (Ecuador, Peru, Mexico, Guatemala, Venezuela), I heard the same story over and over when I talked with the locals. (And I was able to talk to many people who did not speak English, which will give you more of the true flavor of a country.)

No matter the country I heard the same thing over and over in each country...Politicians are corrupt and on the take, at the service of the small super-wealthy elite that really control the country, that no one respected the government, the laws, or the court systems because of selective enforcement - the majority got hammered by the law when they broke it and the rich had impunity. What struck me was that they know the score, how power was really exercised in their countries and were very cynical about it, but that they also felt powerless to change things.

What has given me more hope than anything are the changes in Latin America since 2000 - in several countries (Ecuador, Bolivia, Brazil, Venezuela), the power of the elite has been challenged and governments that are more responsive to the majority of citizens have been elected.

In 2000, I started to notice similarities in the U.S. with what I had seen in Latin America. But when I said as much, people thought I was nuts. By 2011, there are now a lot of people realizing that we are heading in that direction (banana republic) unless we change course.

I don't know what the final outcome in the U.S. will be, but I am guardedly optomistic that ultimately we will be able to curb the power of our oligarchy (that is above the law). If it can happen in Latin America, it can certainly happen here.

[jiimbergin]

Re: Prosecuting Wall Street - 60 Minutes

World Traveler, thanks for that prospective.

[World Traveler]

Re: Prosecuting Wall Street - 60 Minutes

I most closely followed the changes in Bolivia, Brazil, and Venezuela.

What seems to be the key to change is grass roots political organizing, i.e. a bottom up approach focused on building organizations that can challenge the oligarchy in elections.

This is also what happened in the U.S. in the late 1800's, with the progressive and granger movements. They won state elections in parts of the Mid-West (including governorships) and had influence within both major parties (William Jennings Bryan "Cross of Gold" and Teddy Roosevelt's trust-busting). This ultimately did curb the power of the Guilded Age oligarchs.

[astonas]

Re: Prosecuting Wall Street - 60 Minutes

Thank you for your views, World Traveler! Such perspectives, even if personal, are hard to find in an unvarnished form. Your personal experiences add real value here.

I was wondering if you could provide further insight into what you see as the primary mechanism of the positive changes that occurred in the South American nations you visited. How did the change originate, and most especially, what would you describe as the tipping point from resisting change to implementing it?

I would also appreciate any comments you might have on recent shifts in U.S. laws that permit greater military and police intervention into the lives of citizens within the United States. While I would not necessarily characterize us as a full banana republic yet, I am wondering what the tipping point might be in terms of fear of one's own government's forces as well.

Thank you for your contribution.

[lektrode]

Re: Prosecuting Wall Street - 60 Minutes

Thank you for your views, World Traveler! Such perspectives, even if personal, are hard to find in an unvarnished form. Your personal experiences add real value here.

I was wondering if you could provide further insight into what you see as the primary mechanism of the positive changes that occurred in the South American nations you visited. How did the change originate, and most especially, what would you describe as the tipping point from resisting change to implementing it?

I would also appreciate any comments you might have on recent shifts in U.S. laws that permit greater military and police intervention into the lives of citizens within the United States. While I would not necessarily characterize us as a full banana republic yet, I am wondering what the tipping point might be in terms of fear of one's own government's forces as well.

Thank you for your contribution.

+1
esp noteworthy when its coming from south america.

am also wondering just how long its going to take for somebody, ANYBODY in or OUT of the beltway to start making some noise about just how blatant the fraud on wall st has become - particularly whats occurred since 2008 - or is it because they all in too deep to say anything?

whats it going to take before OUR political class does something?

for starters: prosecution and clawback of the billions in bailouts - even bernie madoff's victims are getting some kind of justice!

[World Traveler]

Re: Prosecuting Wall Street - 60 Minutes

Astonas and Lektrode,

Glad to fill in more details, from my perspective. Thanks for your interest.

I honestly believe that the election of Hugo Chavez as president of Venesuela in 1998 was a major tipping point in South America.

When I was in Venezuela in 2003, I was told it had a population of 20 million, 4 million of whom were illegal Columbians. With its huge oil reserves, there really shouldn't have been desperate poverty in Venezuela, but there was, especially in the 1980's and 1990's. Partly because oil prices were in a slump, and mainly because the super-elite and their upper class allies controlled the economy and oil wealth and did not share it with the poor majority. In 1989, President Carlos Andrés Pérez implemented an IMF "reform" program that dramatically increased the cost of living for the poor majority. Riots broke out and government forces massacred hundreds of demonstrators and generally repressed dissent. In 1992 Andres-Perez was forced to leave office amidst charges of corruption and cronyism.

Chavez, an army officer who had attempted a coup against Andres-Perez in 1992, founded a political party, the Fifth Republic Movement, and was elected president of Venezuela in 1998. He subsequently introduced a new constitution which increased rights, economic benefits, and opportunity for the marginalized poor majority and was re-elected in 2000. What is striking is that Chavez has managed to govern via winning open, monitored elections, time and time again.

I believe these early Chavez successes taught a lesson to other South American politicians wanting to provide greater opportunity and a fair share in the economics fruits of the nation to their poor majorities. The lesson was that by organizing at the grass roots level and winning elections, it was possible to gain power peacefully. That meeting the needs of the majority was a winning electoral formula . Similar changes subsequently happened in Bolivia, Ecuador, and Brazil.

The second reason I believe this all happened in the 2000's was that the U.S. was so focused on Iraq, Afghanistan, terrorism, and the Middle east in general, that it had far less energy than normal to devote to attempts to influence South American politics.

In the U.S., Hugo Chavez has always been controversial, and media coverage of him has always been very unflattering. I myself admire his early work to improve the lives of Venezuela's poor majority, but I think he has been president for too long.

I do not approve of presidents-for-too-long and I think Chavez now needs to step down and hand the reins over to a successor in his reform movement.

In 2003 when I was in Venezuela, I talked to people (in Spanish) at all societal levels. The rich and the upper class absolutely hated him and the poor absolutely loved him - many lower class/ poor told me "he is the first president of Venezuela that I remember who has has done anything to improve our standard of living". I think today's new breed of South American politicians hear echos of those words when they run for re-election.

Re: the U.S., I think change will come (i.e. defeating oligarchic political/ economic control), but that it will be a long time coming, at least longer than most of us hope. Because:

1. the average U.S. citizen is nowhere near hitting bottom, it will take more suffering to open their eyes and make them realize where the real problems lie. By that I mean a lower standard of living ehan we have now.

2. American society has become too atomized to facilitate an easy coming-together of indignant citizens demanding change. Fraternal orders, unions, civic and political associations have far lower membership and influence than in the past. It will take a while to rebuild those connections.

I do see Occupy Wall Street and the Tea Party as beacons of hope, in that they have identified the key problems in our economy today (altho they have different solutions).

The role the police will play during the "change process" in the U.S. is something of a wild card. Based on what we've seen recently in the U.S., in the 1900's in South America, and in the history of the U.S. during the prgressive period of the 1890's thru the 1910's, my guess is that they will be used today and in the future as a tool of repression by the oligarachy, to try to hold back changes they view as unfavorable to their interests.

These are my opnions. I'm not looking to start any controversy, just describing the world as I see it.