Shared publicly  - 
Stories like this make me pretty angry at Wall Street. And I think they ought to make more people mad, too.
Mike Neir's profile photoAmit Gupta's profile photoMargaret Nunez's profile photoMike Hamm's profile photo
Bob Cat
You should stop listening to The Rolling Stone...
Ralph H
I think IBM was a big enough company to keep OS/2 going, if it wanted to.  After all, the *BSD crowd was able to extract AT&T source code from their variety of Unix, leading to BSD 4.4, NetBSD, OpenBSD, FreeBSD, and BSD68k. among others
The reason you won't hear about this is because they were from GE, which owned NBC until they sold NBC to Comcast.   Of course all are far left big media types.  The liberal media isn't going to report on liberal Wall Street crooks.  It goes against their talking points that all Wall Street crooks are "republicans".  
Did +Bob Cat actually read the article before dismissing it because it was written for Rolling Stone? Or is he just making a joke.
Now watch Inside Job. The people who were at the heart of the 2008 financial meltdown are now running the US government. Great work if you can get it.
Bob Cat
+Andrew Williams "Only the presence of the mostly nonwhite and elderly jury, which resembled the front pew of a Harlem church, served as a reminder that the case had any connection to the real world."

Yeah, seems like a really journalistic endeavor. Add horse sperm, and stir.
Im the only one who see this when i try to acces the link? "Access Denied"
It's truly amazing that the companies in question are still in charge of the same business, that the practice was so wide spread it was unremarkable and the deals were done over recorded phone lines, and that it was only a few 'underlings' who stood trial, with cautionary 5 year sentences as a consequence. Crazy.
Prosecutor, Wendy Waszmer summed it up well... "Even though some aspects of municipal bond finance are complex, the fraud here was simple," she told the jurors. "It was about lying and cheating cities and towns in a bidding process that was in place to protect them." 
Thank you for sharing this with us +Matt Cutts! I am spreading it as we speak . . . . . 
So, let me get this straight... Matt Taibbi writes about a trial involving the largest financial institutions in the country where there are multiple felony convictions. These were not the first convictions in this scandal and there are more to come. Billions of dollars skimmed from you and I via the municipalities we live in being victims of bid-rigging. To date --  except for this article, and I read a lot -- there has only been the barest of whispers about what happened. And +Bob Cat complains about the description of the jury? Pardon me for thinking differently. This is my money (and yours) that these guys stole. 
It makes me pissed off big-time. Its an incredible story and unfortunately at 15 pages.... Most wont even bother to read the entire story. To top it of,f our liberal minded media doesn't break this down into understandable chunks that the layperson can easily digest! Kudos to Rolling Stone for attempting a near impossible reporting feat! 
It is amazing that this has not reached the front page of major news yet...
Ever since Rolling Stone first came out in the late sixties, they have always done serious journalism even when their core audience only cared about the latest pop star. Kudos to them.
Svein Wisnaes
Really? Are you amazed? You have no idea how the press is controlled by the liberal left?
:-) I have been working in TV broadcast for 20 years, so I know very well how the media in general works. But not so much in the US, as I am Norwegian.
this is so bad in such a big way, its overwhelming. just makes me feel entirely powerless and hopeless to the point where i don't know what "getting mad" could possibly help :-(
Haha, small fish! The real crook got away again by using their own prosecutors and judges. Flogging of the little crook who just used the system that they guys with the judges put in place.
Matt Taibbi is one of the best journalists out there today. 
Well, In the end, it really isn't that complicated at all.

If I think back on the visit to the stock exchange in Frankfurt, Germany, I did in 7th grade and the wish I had after that experience to become a broker and make a lot of money ... and now reading this, I wonder if I would have become such a crooked well suited criminal accepted by society like the individuals this article is about. Would I have the same moral views on all this being one of the gladiators in the arena and being an outsider who gets to learn about this?

The worst on this is that, it can't be stopped just like that without a huge global financial collapse ... and I don't mean something like the 2008 crisis. This schemes, this methods are already in the core financial business, taking that away would do to the global economy the same like taking away drugs from an addict. The damage is done. I could be wrong with this, it's possible that there's a way out of this.
" But the reason no one was whispering isn't that their actions weren't illegal – it's because the bid rigging was so incredibly common the defendants simply forgot to be ashamed of it."

This is making me pretty mad as well, and I'm sure this is common in all big capitalist economies. Finally the EU makes sense..
Indeed. Some years ago i found his article about the great american bubble machine. Read this and you learn more of real economy than in many university courses
You mean that finally the EU debt crisis make sense......
There is a lot more of this going on, but since so many profit from it, nobody will do anything. Nobody wants to rock the boat. Ultimately, it hurts this country though...
It's the same everywhere isn't it ? There's always those who imagine they control the big picture.
+Stefan Prosch I was thinking more in sense of "the bigger the economy, the more you can skim of top without raising suspicion". 
Corruption is naturel among man kind only them self can realize
People are too busy surviving to make a stand. In the past, someone could continue the family's livelihood while another made their voices heard. I am heartened by both the Tea Party (although it's been largely co-opted) and OWS. I may not agree with what they're saying, but at least they're saying it.

Maybe "Social Media" will play a role. It definitely was a major component of the "Arab Spring". The difference? They followed-up their tweets and posts with action. Are we lazy? Or, are we just exhausted by "trying to make ends meet"?
Rolling Stone, A great place to get all your news from.
+Curtis Jacob Have you ever considered that, just maybe, the "left" and the "right" are equally corrupt? That they actually don't give a damn about your superficial ideologies and pointless talking points? That your ceaseless, partisan bickering is playing right into their hands? US politics are a puppet theatre, and you're sitting in front row cheering them on, while they're robbing the check room.
Google can do something about like. Engineer a Bitcoin likt shadow monetary system.
"If you're not inside, you're outside!"
Wow thanks for this post.  Will re-share.  Stuff like this really undermines confidence in our government and the concept of the free market.
Thanks for posting Matt. Can't believe how complacent some folks are about this either. This story represents an arrow-slit sized view into what's really going on. 
+Jeremy Hoffman, the only way to attempt taking money out of politics is to take the government out of our money.  Then there is no reason for money to get into politics.  Of course its not practical either way.
Yahoo, Microsoft, Oracle, Wall Street, the Mafia... Who's next?... The Empire?
+Curtis Jacob, you make a good point. That's why, even though I'm politically "liberal" and my inclination is to favor government involvement for the public good, I consider myself more of a "progressive." I'm sympathetic to the position that the government that governs least is the government that can do the least damage once it inevitably gets corrupted. But as you say, I'm not sure either is practical.
Anger only goes so far. Handcuffs definitely help.
It's a travesty of justice that the higher-ups in Wall Street got off scot-free. This and other recent actions by JP Morgan Chase Bank cause me to believe I should move my accounts from Chase Bank to somewhere else -- or perhaps put our money in gold and diamonds!
Sad that such actions don't get the due attention because of they are not "sexy" enough for the media to speak about them.
This is just more yellow journalism. Read the actual indictment and compare it to Taibbi's terrible article.
I get a kick out of reading people's reactions to this stuff.  This article does not prove everyone on Wall Street is a crook as the author suggests over and over.  However, those dismissing the article as rubbish can't even admit that Wall Street has the motive and opportunity for corruption.  Both those positions are so outlandish and sheepish.  

Our country is not broken because of Wall Street.  Our country is broken because liberals and conservatives (maybe 60% of the country) live in fantasy worlds.  

The left would limit Wall Street only to what it understands and can regulate.  It promises stability and more equality - yet is a clear recipe for stagnation and decline.

The right would unleash the full force of "free markets" on the people - without any comprehension of what that even means.  Capitalism works on trust - information is ALWAYS asymmetrical and people and companies have to rely on the information they receive from others.  Regulations exist because people will steal and lie for money - and will do so even more easily if the victim is nameless or faceless (this is fact - not a liberal bias!).  It promises growth and wealth creation - but is a clear recipe for corruption, inequality and eventual instability.  

The obvious answer is a compromise between these two positions.  That is what America used to do.  Rational adults can solve this - but the real problem is our politicians are either 1) not rational adults or 2) don't want to solve it.  Either way, it is a crisis and we are not near solving it.
+David Sass, I appreciate your call for a middle ground. You're certainly taking a more mature and intelligent look at the situation than most. I'm not an expert in this area, so I would be interested to here an explanation of your claim that limiting banking to be simple is a "clear recipe for stagnation and decline." I don't see any evidence that financial innovations like CDOs and high-frequency algorithmic trading have improved our economy. I don't see any evidence that the Glass-Steagall Act's separation of commercial and investment banking, which was in place from 1933 to 1999, caused "stagnation and decline," considering America's incomparable growth and prosperity during those 66 years. So I'm inclined to agree with Elizabeth Warren that "banking should be boring."
Speaking of fantasy worlds it is instructive to re-read what various policitians and newspapers said when the last fork was stuck in Glass-Steagall:

Phil Gramm (who passes for 'conservative'): 'The world changes, and Congress and the laws have to change with it'

Bill Clinton (who passes for 'liberal'): 'This legislation is truly historic, we have done right by the American people.'

Larry Summers (who also passes for 'liberal'): 'With this bill, the American financial system takes a major step forward toward the 21st Century -- one that will benefit American consumers, business and the national economy.'

All of the above from the (presumably approving) 'liberal media' [The New York Times, November 13, 1999 (page A1)]

Meanwhile The Nation Magazine wrote in their editorial of November 15, 1999:

'For their money, the finance industry bought not only the end of the Glass-Steagall Act but also the partial repeal of the Bank Holding Company Act. These landmark pieces of legislation, recognizing the inherent dangers of too great a concentration of financial power, barred common ownership of banks, insurance companies, and securities firms... The misnamed Financial Services Modernization Act will usher in another round of record-breaking mergers... concentrating financial power in trillion-dollar global giants and paving the way for future taxpayer bailouts of too-big-to-fail financial corporations.'

I think we can safely score that one now: The Nation Magazine 1, Everybody Else 0.
+Jeremy Hoffman  - Certainly...I do understand your point about historical prosperity, but I think a large part of that prosperity can explained by the complete destruction of the German, UK, France, Russian and Japanese economies during WW2.  We were left pretty unscathed and without real global competition for 30.  

I agree with your assessment that Glass-Steagall would add stability back into the financial sector.  But, without similar rules for other multinational banks, US banks will be at a disadvantage globally.  Banking profits and bonuses (and eventually talent) would move overseas and with it - most real financial innovation.  So of that innovation is destabilizing and would not be missed, but other innovations have been very good for banks and society overall (think VC).  Shipping both the good and bad overseas might be more stable, but US banking would stagnate and decline.  IMHO, we need to cut with a scalpel and not an axe.  
+David Sass -- a very good point about the role of multinational and foreign banks! I honestly hadn't really been thinking about the complexities of international law and finance, and talent drain. Still, if other countries want to foster the talent and innovation that produces these financial weapons of mass destruction, then I say, "Have at it, Hoss."
Add a comment...