Here's why Wall Street has a hard time being ethical

Oldgamer

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2013
3,280
1
0
A new report finds 53% of financial services executives say that adhering to ethical standards inhibits career progression at their firm. A former Wall Street trader describes why.

fdc190fc-db8f-487f-b2bf-85731c7d9b5f-460x276.jpeg

My first year on Wall Street, 1993, I was paid 14 times more than I earned the prior year and three times more than my father's best year. For that money, I helped my company create financial products that were disguised to look simple, but which required complex math to properly understand. That first year I was roundly applauded by my bosses, who told me I was clever, and to my surprise they gave me $20,000 bonus beyond my salary.

The products were sold to many investors, many who didn’t fully understand what they were buying, most of them what we called “clueless Japanese.” The profits to my company were huge – hundreds of millions of dollars huge. The main product that made my firm great money for close to five years was was called, in typically dense finance jargon, a YIF, or a Yield Indexed Forward.

Eventually, investors got wise, realizing what they had bought was complex, loaded with hidden leverage, and became most dangerous during moments of distress.

I never did meet the buyers; that was someone else's job. I stayed behind the spreadsheets. My job was to try to extract as much value as possible through math and clever trading. Japan would send us faxes of documents from our competitors. Many were selling far weirder products and doing it in far larger volume than we were. The conversation with our Japanese customers would end with them urging us on: “We can’t fall behind.”

When I did ask, rather naively, if this was all kosher, I would be assured multiple times that multiple lawyers and multiple managers had approved the sales.

One senior trader, consoling me late at night, reminded me, “You are playing in the big leagues now. If a customer wants a red suit, you sell them a red suit. If that customer is Japanese, you charge him twice what it costs.”

I rationalized that our group was careful by Wall Street standards, trying to stay close to the letter of the law. We tried to abide by an unwritten "five-point rule": never intentionally make more than five percentage points of profit from a customer.

Some competitors didn’t care about the rule. They were making 7% or 10% profit per trade from clients, selling exotic products loaded with hidden traps. I assumed they would eventually face legal charges, or at least public embarrassment, for pushing so clearly away from the spirit of the law.

They didn’t. Rather, they got paid better, were lauded as true risk takers, and offered big pay packages to manage similar businesses.

Being paid very well also helped ease any of my concerns. Feeling guilty, kid? Here take a big check. I was, for the first time in my life, feeling valued for my math skills – the ones I had to hide throughout my childhood, so as not be labeled a nerd or egghead. Ego and money are nice salves for any potential feeling of guilt.

After a few years on Wall Street it was clear to me: you could make money by gaming anyone and everything. The more clever you were, the more ingenious your ability to exploit a flaw in a law or regulation, the more lauded and celebrated you became.

Nobody seemed to be getting called out. No move was too audacious. It was like driving past the speed limit at 79 MPH, and watching others pass by at 100, or 110, and never seeing anyone pulled over.

Wall Street did nod and wave politely to regulators’ attempts to slow things down. Every employee had to complete a yearly compliance training, where he was updated on things like money laundering, collusion, insider trading, and selling our customers only financial products that were suitable to them.

By the early 2000s that compliance training had descended into a once-a-year farce, designed to literally just check a box. It became a one-hour lecture held in a massive hall. Everyone had to go once, listen to the rushed presentation, and then sign a form. You could look down at the audience and see row after row of blue buttoned shirts playing on their Blackberries. I reached new highs on Brick Breaker one year during compliance training. My compliance education that year was still complete.

By 2007 the idea of ethics education fell even further. You didn't even need to show up to a lecture hall; you just had to log on to an online course. It was one hour of slides that you worked through, blindly pushing the “forward” button while your attention was somewhere else. Some managers, too busy for such nonsense, even paid younger employees to sit at their computers and do it for them.

As Wall Street grew, fueled by that unchecked culture of risk taking, traders got more and more audacious, and corruption became more and more diffused through the system. By 2006 you could open up almost any major business, look at its inside workings, and find some wrongdoing.

After the crash of 2008, regulators finally did exactly that. What has resulted is a wave of scandals with odd names; LIBOR fixing, FX collusion, ISDA Fix.

To outsiders they sound like complex acronyms that occupy the darkest corners of Wall Street, easily dismissed as anomalies. They are not. LIBOR, FX, ISDA Fix are at the very center of finance, part of the daily flow of trillions of dollars. The scandals are scarily close to what some on Wall Street believe is standard business practice, a matter of shades of grey.

I imagine the people who are named in the scandals are genuinely confused as to why they are being singled out. They were just doing what almost everyone else was, maybe just more aggressive, more reckless. They were doing what they had been trained to do: bending the rules, (even breaking rules), pushing as far as they could to beat competitors. They had been applauded in the past for their aggressive risk taking, no doubt. Now they are just whipping boys.

That's the paradox at the core of the settlements we're seeing: where is the real responsibility? Others were doing it, yes. Banks should be fined, yes. But somebody should be charged. Yet the people who really should be held accountable have not. They are the bosses, the managers and CEOs of the businesses. They set the standard, they shaped the culture. The Chuck Princes, Dick Fulds, and Fred Goodwins of the world. They happily shepherded and profited from a Wall Street that spun out of control.

A precedent needs to be set, to slow down Wall Street’s wild behavior. A reminder that rules are there to be followed, not exploited. The managers knew what was going on. Ask anyone who works at a bank and they will tell you that.

The excuse we have long accepted is ignorance: that these leaders couldn't have known what was happening. That doesn't suffice. If they didn't know, it's an even larger sin.

-----------------------------------------

You know it is the congressman who get kick backs, and are given insider trading by these scum bags, and extravagant trips and other perks that are keeping the laws needed to stop all this BS. I really hope Elisabeth Warren can get some of this crap under control. The corruption is astounding, and it has brought are economy many times to the brink of utter collapse. It will take us centuries to get back on track and get the economy rolling again, and get jobs opening up again, and all this was brought to you by these corrupt fuckers.
 
Last edited:

Paul98

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2010
3,732
199
106
Until we start to massively penalize and keep much tighter watch on this it will continue.

Oh we can't raise taxes on them ether because they are the job creators.
 

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,320
3
0
Until we start to massively penalize and keep much tighter watch on this it will continue.

Oh we can't raise taxes on them ether because they are the job creators.

We did raise taxes on them. What did that fix?
 

thraashman

Lifer
Apr 10, 2000
11,112
1,585
126
The heart of libertarian economics people. If we leave them alone, I'm sure they'll self regulate ...
 

Anarchist420

Diamond Member
Feb 13, 2010
8,645
0
76
www.facebook.com
the reason Wall Street can do this shit is because of the State protecting it. in a free society, there would be organizations as wealthy as wall street for a time but they would eventually fail as no institution is perpetual in a free society.
Won't ever change because greed always find a way.
true, but greed can be exacerbated by the State.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
74,132
6,612
126
Shall I make the same mistake as the Japanese, buy these claims in ignorance. How do I really know if I'm not being lured in to buy somebody's new fantasy horror novel available on sale for Kindle and ITunes at bargain price. And if not, what can I do? Nothing will change unless we take our government back from speech is money. Do you see an army of millions marching to Washington banging pitchforks on the pavement and chanting 'Money is not speech'. No, you see a nation of sheep grazing o grass nibs running helter skelter to stay alive.
 

rudder

Lifer
Nov 9, 2000
19,441
86
91
The heart of libertarian economics people. If we leave them alone, I'm sure they'll self regulate ...

How long has the fed been bailing out wall street now? The government is covering the losses... so these people can come up with sketchy products because there is no downside.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
The heart of libertarian economics people. If we leave them alone, I'm sure they'll self regulate ...

All of this happened under an ever growing and intrusive govt. And you want to blame Libertarians for this corporatism? People like you are retarded for lack of a better word.
 

thraashman

Lifer
Apr 10, 2000
11,112
1,585
126
All of this happened under an ever growing and intrusive govt. And you want to blame Libertarians for this corporatism? People like you are retarded for lack of a better word.

Actually all of this happened under decreasing regulation and decreasing enforcement of said regulation. The article even mentions how over the years the compliance regulation got lazy and that this is what happened. This is the result of the epitome of the "greed is good" libertarian mentality. I'm sorry that you feel the need to lash out at people smarter than you, but simply put you're just fucking wrong.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Actually all of this happened under decreasing regulation and decreasing enforcement of said regulation. The article even mentions how over the years the compliance regulation got lazy and that this is what happened. This is the result of the epitome of the "greed is good" libertarian mentality. I'm sorry that you feel the need to lash out at people smarter than you, but simply put you're just fucking wrong.

This is the epitome of corporatism. Govt regulators look the other way as corporate lobbyists grease the wheels. Relaxing of regulations not found as we saw introduction of more regulations in the last decade. In the end, which is the biggest clue, the govt bailed them out. Libertarians would let wall street burn from their own doing.

Anybody blaming libertarians for this example of corporatism and claiming to be intellectually superior are as I said before retarded. They just dont know it. Which is great for them, bad for the rest of us.
 

Blackjack200

Lifer
May 28, 2007
15,995
1,688
126
By 2007 the idea of ethics education fell even further. You didn't even need to show up to a lecture hall; you just had to log on to an online course. It was one hour of slides that you worked through, blindly pushing the “forward” button while your attention was somewhere else. Some managers, too busy for such nonsense, even paid younger employees to sit at their computers and do it for them.

We still do this. There are even warnings when you log on that you can be fired if you have someone else do the course for you. lol.
 

Anarchist420

Diamond Member
Feb 13, 2010
8,645
0
76
www.facebook.com
i just got an email about lew rockwell's newest book called capitalism vs corporatism (or maybe it was capitalism vs fascism, i dont remember)... im probably not going to read it, but i hope it reduces socialist thought and increases the number of people who are pro-market.

This is the epitome of corporatism. Govt regulators look the other way as corporate lobbyists grease the wheels. Relaxing of regulations not found as we saw introduction of more regulations in the last decade. In the end, which is the biggest clue, the govt bailed them out. Libertarians would let wall street burn from their own doing. Anybody blaming libertarians for this example of corporatism and claiming to be intellectually superior are as I said before retarded. They just dont know it. Which is great for them, bad for the rest of us.
+1. :)
 

Oldgamer

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2013
3,280
1
0
The banks were heavily deregulated, this is why all of this has come about. We need to re-implement the regulations that we had on the banks that had them held accountable.
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,562
9
81
The heart of libertarian economics people. If we leave them alone, I'm sure they'll self regulate ...

LOL, you consider bailouts to be leaving them alone? If bad actors and the greedy clients that want huge immediate profits were left to burn, the problem would sort itself out.

How is Goldman Sachs doing these days? Richer than ever? Oh yeah, you sure showed them.
 

thraashman

Lifer
Apr 10, 2000
11,112
1,585
126
LOL, you consider bailouts to be leaving them alone? If bad actors and the greedy clients that want huge immediate profits were left to burn, the problem would sort itself out.

How is Goldman Sachs doing these days? Richer than ever? Oh yeah, you sure showed them.

Yet more proof the libertarian version doesn't work actually. You leave them to their own devices, they destroy the system out of greed, and then your options are let em fail and take the world economy with em, or bail em out.
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,562
9
81
Yet more proof the libertarian version doesn't work actually. You leave them to their own devices, they destroy the system out of greed, and then your options are let em fail and take the world economy with em, or bail em out.

404 Proof Not Found

Are you claiming that the regulation in effect RIGHT NOW is libertarian in nature? You believe QE to be a libertarian concept?
 
Last edited:

Texashiker

Lifer
Dec 18, 2010
18,811
198
106
Regardless of what fines are imposed on wall street, as long as the federal reserve can print money out of thin air, fines will have no effect.
 

thraashman

Lifer
Apr 10, 2000
11,112
1,585
126
404 Proof Not Found

Are you claiming that the regulation in effect RIGHT NOW is libertarian in nature? You believe QE to be a libertarian concept?

No, I'm saying what we had with limited regulation and almost no enforcement of existing regulation was very libertarian. It failed mightily. As a result, to prevent the worst economic disaster in the history of the world, we had to completely ignore libertarian principles. And if we'd never tried in the first place then we wouldn't be in this mess and have to do this QE shit.