Jump to content


Bronze Contributor
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

  1. If this is true, the state of NY actually received $2.2 billion under a state forfeiture law and New York was designated a victim of BNP's sanctions violations, allowing $1.05 billion to be designated as restitution and reparations to the state. http://kdal610.com/news/articles/2014/jul/30/exclusive-cuomo-intervened-in-bnp-deal-to-get-1-billion-more-for-ny-state-fund/ EDIT: Better link. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-bnp-cuomo-exclusive/exclusive-cuomo-intervened-in-bnp-deal-to-get-1-billion-more-for-ny-state-fund-idUSKBN0FZ2L720140731 You want me to verify my thoughts? Or you're wondering if anybody else has the same concerns? http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1738&context=ndjlepp
  2. And by preserved I mean that I think criminal charges were avoided, despite the blatant violation of economic sanctions, entirely to protect BNP from from the FDIC, which has a right to revoke insurance for engaging in unsafe or unsound practices. I think there are national security issues here too.
  3. So far, I've only found this: Even more unsettling was a comment somebody made that the actual money for the fine would come from shareholders, most being institutional investors such as pension and retirement funds.
  4. What you are describing is called the helping-hand theory. That bad things happen in unregulated markets and the government can counter these bad things and protect people through regulation. Ex: The government will screen new entrants to weed out low-quality and/or fly-by-night operators and that will result in a better outcome. But research shows that this DOESN'T produce better quality goods AND countries with heavier regulation of entry have higher corruption. Entry regulation benefits politicians and bureaucrats. Regulation that is pursued for the benefit of politicians and bureaucrats is described in the grabbing-hand theory. Politicians use regulation to obtain favors -donations and votes. Permits and regulations exist to give politicians the power to deny them or collect bribes for providing them.
  5. There has been so much written about this I don’t even know where to begin. Search for studies about nations with fewer regulations exhibiting lower levels of corruption. There’s really good one that I read awhile back that I am trying to find right now for you. Give me a sec. (In the meantime, here’s the first thing that popped up during my search: http://blogs.worldbank.org/psd/restrictive-regulation-is-positively-correlated-to-corruption )
  6. I don’t have any questions. You are free to contact Ripple if you have any.
  7. He kept making the threat of revoking licenses. He made a new license with a high barrier which keeps a lot of people from being able to compete.
  8. I’m hanging on to hope that this was a mistake that will be corrected.
  9. He had the power to revoke licenses. He made pretend threats. But in the end he looked the other way and allowed BNP to continue to operate in the state.
  10. There’s nothing for me to do. I don’t plan on bashing Ripple if that’s what you are wondering. The tech is great, I’m not going to sell my XRP, and I’m still very fond of the people who work there.
  11. Apparently I hold a minority opinion that genocide is a far worse consequence than unemployment.
  12. The bare minimum would've been revoking BNP's license, but he preserved it instead.
  13. I'm nobody. I'm not affiliated with Ripple. I'll go be nobody somewhere else. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  14. Here is the Statement of Facts from the DOJ: https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/opa/legacy/2014/06/30/statement-of-facts.pdf