Service of Let Bygones be Bygones

October 10th, 2011

Categories: Anger, Banking, Business Decisions, Let Bygones be Bygones


In a discussion about the Wall Street protestors during a radio interview Friday morning, Mayor Bloomberg said, [I am translating what I remember and think I heard, this is not a direct quote], that for the economy to get back on track we should stop looking for blame and quit looking backwards to the cause of the economic downturn and no longer distract these bankers and other corporate types: Let them get back to work.

I disagree with the Mayor. Maybe it’s because I’ve been burned as have countless others. Call me a sore looser.

backon-trackI fully believe in forgiveness, hard as it might be to achieve, and bad as my track record is. This is business, not friendship. It doesn’t set well with me that having weaseled millions out of millions the heads of banks and corporations should sit on their yachts and in their mansions without so much as a knuckle tap to warn others who plan to follow their lead.

Call me Pollyanna, but at the least, they should propose sets of restrictions on themselves. Other industries do it because they don’t want the government telling them what to do. Smart. Guess these folks feel safe, with elections coming up next year. Who dares bother them right now?

And why would we want to leave in charge of the fix the same folks who helped get us where we are with their “Let them eat cake” mentalities?  Should we let them get more bonuses, personally profiting twice from flimflammery?

I think we make a bigger fuss over sports figures who break records by taking steroids.

Is forgiveness the issue here? Should we let Wall Street bankers go about their business as usual, make no restrictions that might help avoid our falling into similar pits now and in future, and take none of them to task?



4 Responses to “Service of Let Bygones be Bygones”

  1. Lucrezia Said:

    The issue of “forgiveness” is an increasingly tiresome one. When it comes to Wall Street, one must be super naive not to realize placing ones bets on stocks is gambling. Does anyone “blame” or “forgive” the casino for swallowing money? So why all this righteous posturing and now, protests, when it comes to “The Street?”

    Banks are another issue; everyone knows they are robbers, but there have been few audible complaints. Unfortunately, today’s protesters, instead of making themselves useful, chose to carry on in downtown NYC, rather than making the effort to confront the Tea Party Congress which is presently responsible for keeping the status quo.

    A historical PS: No one said “let them eat cake” in the context in which it is used. It was a political lie which worked as well over 200 years ago as others do now. That’s unforgivable, or is it just plain sad?

  2. Jeanne Byington Said:


    I interpret the mentality of “Let them eat cake,” not as historical; it’s an attitude that screams, “I don’t care that others suffer from my actions and inactions–tough” and “I have no idea that others have nothing to eat, nor do I care.”

    As for gambling, there are rules. There don’t seem to be any on Wall Street. Stocks were sold based on false information about a company or reports filled with lies. Brokerage sales people lied. Their firms would recommend a stock not because it was a good one, but because a division of the company they worked for handled the investment banking business. Conflict of interest? You bet.

  3. Jeremiah Said:

    From the mid-19th century – about the time that the capital markets became meaningful in size — the people running the country have been of two minds as to how, and to what extent, to regulate our financial and business institutions. Consequently, public policy has veered from too much regulation to too little regulation and back.

    The current trend in the cycle, which I date approximately to when President Ronald Reagan assumed office, has been towards Washington leaving Wall Street to its own devices, and turning a blind eye both toward crass greed and shady dealings. Indeed, the very people in the government supposedly charged with protecting the public interest have often been one and the same as those who previously took advantage of deregulation to make themselves rich.

    Getting rid of government controls over Wall Street is fine and good, but equally well, when the freewheeling went badly wrong a few years ago, the guys responsible did not deserve to be bailed out by the tax payers, so that they could turn around and make themselves even richer. You can’t have it both ways. If you don’t want government messing in your business, you shouldn’t expect it to bail you out when things go wrong.

    The government should have let the banks and GM go broke in 2008 and wiped out the value of both their managements’ and their shareholder’s holdings. The country would have survived and been better for it.

    No. I do not agree with Mayor Bloomberg in this instance. I do not forgive these wicked, evil people.

    Yes, while I wish to have nothing to do with them, I am sympathetic with the points that those demonstrators down on Wall Street are making.

  4. Jeanne Byington Said:


    Thanks for reminding me. These predators have already double-dipped. And now we should let them triple-dip? My blood is boiling. Let them eat gruel.

Leave a Reply

Clicky Web Analytics