FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Investing with Madoff

by LAWRENCE R. VELVEL

Click here to read Part One.

Click here to read Part Two.

Click here to read Part Three.

The amount of money stolen by Bernie Madoff is currently impossible to know. When arrested, Madoff said $50 billion was lost. It is widely surmised that, in saying 50 billion, he was claiming the amounts shown on the latest monthly statements to investors, which were dated November 30, 2008. It’s also possible that 50 billion is the total amount of principal actually invested over the years, not all of which was lost to investors because lots of them must have fully redeemed their investments over the 20 to 45 years or so of his Ponzi scheme. And recently, one reads, the government is estimating the loss at about 37 billion, but whether this is the amount shown on the latest statements or the amount actually invested is uncertain.

One thing all the estimates of loss have in common, though, is that they are all big numbers. Even when they are based on the most recent statements, it is clear that many, many billions of invested principal was lost. So where did the money go?

Just for kicks, assume that, over the years, 60 billion dollars of principal was invested with Madoff, that a third of it, or $20 billion, was redeemed, and that another third, or another $20 billion, was taken out by investors who thought they were getting income. What happened to the remaining $20 billion, to the earnings that this $20 billion were making when Madoff invested it, and to the earnings of the other, redeemed and withdrawn $40 billion while it remained with Madoff? You can change the assumed numbers I’ve used, but the question of what happened to the money will remain unless one supposes that every dollar of the enormous sums Madoff took in over the years, plus the money he earned investing those sums, was withdrawn over the years as a redemption of principal or as withdrawal of (falsely supposed?) earnings. And personally, I won’t believe such a supposition until it is shown to be true; the sums are too large and my suspicion is that too many people put in huge sums and let the money ride rather than withdrawing it.

So, if I am right, where are the many billions that are liable to be left? Where did they go? Has Madoff stashed them in Swiss banks? Are they in real estate or stocks and bonds all over the world? Was Madoff the king of bad investors, so that he lost tens or scores of billions in the market over the years so that there truly is nothing left? Was this, as at least a few suspect, a Mafia operation in which billions upon billions were siphoned off by the mob? Who knows? All I can say is that one hopes the government finds out the answers and that, as said, until shown the contrary, it is hard to believe that every nickel Madoff took in and every nickel he made by investing was lost.

Indeed, it has been written that Madoff got into trouble this autumn because he was having difficulty coming up with enough money to meet a $7 billion dollar request for redemption by one of his feeder funds, Fairfield Sentry. Doesn’t this seem to imply that he had several billions? — Was he really trying to raise fully seven billion in just a few weeks?

Now for the question of what can be done.

Before discussing specific courses of action, though, I want to make three preliminary but vital points. As you will see, the current law is seriously ill equipped to remedy this horrible situation. Such a disaster as a $50 billion dollar Ponzi scheme that wiped out thousands, left old people destitute by the many hundreds or thousands, destroyed or injured charities, injured pension funds, and demolished confidence in the market was simply never foreseen by the law and never prepared for in the law.

As well, many of the investors in Madoff were people who did exactly what is supposed to be done in a capitalist system. They worked like dogs all their lives, they saved up a million or two million dollars for their old age, and then invested it with someone whose eminent positions, leadership in the financial world, and decades of putative success made him seem eminently trustworthy; and they depended upon government — upon the SEC — to protect them against a fraud, particularly because their own ability to ferret out Madoff’s scheme was very limited or nonexistent.

Protecting against fraud has been the SEC’s duty to citizens, its duty to them, since its creation in the 1930s, and small people, as said, had no ability to ferret out Madoff’s scheme on their own. These are not the billionaires, or the huge institutions, that could hire expensive experts in due diligence. Nor did they even know that such due diligence experts-for-hire existed. These are the plain people who worked hard and saved all their lives, as capitalism says they should, and who, as so many legislators and witnesses said at the hearing of January 5th, depended on their government to protect them and had every right to do so, but were failed by their government, were horribly failed by it, because of one of the most willfully negligent, incompetent, and perhaps even complicitous courses of action any agency has ever engaged in.

Finally, there is this. Several have indicated to me that there is a current of prejudice running through the position of those who say the government should do little or nothing to alleviate what Madoff did to people and that it is politically unpalatable to help the victims. The idea underlying these comments is that people think that those who suffered are just a bunch of rich Jews, so the hell with them. This is sheer anti-Semitism. It’s also wrong on crucial facts. Yes, there were very wealthy Jews who lost fortunes, the kinds of people who, along with large institutions, the mainstream media has so extensively focused on. But there were lots of small people in their 60s and 70s and 80s who now don’t know how they are going to live. There were lots of people who aren’t Jewish. There were small charities that sponsored vital medical research that has and will benefit billions of people of all races and religions. There are pension plans for firemen. And the refusal, the claimed unpalatability, of helping the victims of Madoff contrasts badly, does it not, with the fact that huge banks, investment houses, huge insurance companies, and giant auto companies, each of which was itself worth scores or hundreds of billions of dollars, are each receiving scores and even hundreds of billions of dollars in bailout monies, are receiving it although these companies and their executives, who make tens and scores of millions each year, were not victims of any fraud or illegality, much less criminal fraud or illegality that the government had a duty to stop, but instead made stupid, greedy decisions that ran the companies into the ground — decisions, moreover, perpetrated by the very executives whose multimillion dollar salaries will be saved by the bailouts, whose salaries of ten and twenty million dollars and more will be saved by the bailouts.

Lawrence Velvel, dean of the Massachusetts School of Law, is the author of Thine Alabaster Cities Gleam and An Enemy of the People. He can be reached at: Velvel@VelvelOnNationalAffairs.com

 

Lawrence Velvel, dean of the Massachusetts School of Law, is the author of Thine Alabaster Cities Gleam and An Enemy of the People. He can be reached at: Velvel@VelvelOnNationalAffairs.com

More articles by:

CounterPunch Magazine

minimag-edit

Weekend Edition
August 26, 2016
Friday - Sunday
Louisa Willcox
The Unbearable Killing of Yellowstone’s Grizzlies: 2015 Shatters Records for Bear Deaths
Paul Buhle
In the Shadow of the CIA: Liberalism’s Big Embarrassing Moment
Rob Urie
Crisis and Opportunity
Charles Pierson
Wedding Crashers Who Kill
Richard Moser
What is the Inside/Outside Strategy?
Dirk Bezemer – Michael Hudson
Finance is Not the Economy
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Bernie’s Used Cars
Margaret Kimberley
Hillary and Colin: the War Criminal Charade
Patrick Cockburn
Turkey’s Foray into Syria: a Gamble in a Very Dangerous Game
Ishmael Reed
Birther Tries to Flim Flam Blacks  
Brian Terrell
What Makes a Hate Group?
Andrew Levine
How Donald Trump Can Still be a Hero: Force the Guardians of the Duopoly to Open Up the Debates
Howard Lisnoff
Trouble in Political Paradise
Terry Tempest Williams
Will Our National Parks Survive the Next 100 Years?
Ben Debney
The Swimsuit that Overthrew the State
Ashley Smith
Anti-imperialism and the Syrian Revolution
Andrew Stewart
Did Gore Throw the 2000 Election?
Vincent Navarro
Is the Nation State and Its Welfare State Dead? a Critique of Varoufakis
John Wight
Syria’s Kurds and the Wages of Treachery
Lawrence Davidson
The New Anti-Semitism: the Case of Joy Karega
Mateo Pimentel
The Affordable Care Act: A Litmus Test for American Capitalism?
Roger Annis
In Northern Syria, Turkey Opens New Front in its War Against the Kurds
David Swanson
ABC Shifts Blame from US Wars to Doctors Without Borders
Norman Pollack
American Exceptionalism: A Pernicious Doctrine
Ralph Nader
Readers Think, Thinkers Read
Julia Morris
The Mythologies of the Nauruan Refugee Nation
George Wuerthner
Caving to Ranchers: the Misguided Decision to Kill the Profanity Wolf Pack
Ann Garrison
Unworthy Victims: Houthis and Hutus
Julian Vigo
Britain’s Slavery Legacy
John Stanton
Brzezinski Vision for a Power Sharing World Stymied by Ignorant Americans Leaders, Citizens
Philip Doe
Colorado: 300 Days of Sunshine Annually, Yet There’s No Sunny Side of the Street
Joseph White
Homage to EP Thompson
Dan Bacher
The Big Corporate Money Behind Jerry Brown
Kollibri terre Sonnenblume
DNC Playing Dirty Tricks on WikiLeaks
Ron Jacobs
Education for Liberation
Jim Smith
Socialism Revived: In Spite of Bernie, Donald and Hillary
David Macaray
Organized Labor’s Inferiority Complex
David Cortright
Alternatives to Military Intervention in Syria
Binoy Kampmark
The Terrors of Free Speech: Australia’s Racial Discrimination Act
Cesar Chelala
Guantánamo’s Quagmire
Nyla Ali Khan
Hoping Against Hope in Kashmir
William Hughes
From Sam Spade to the Red Scare: Dashiell Hammett’s War Against Rightwing Creeps
Raouf Halaby
Dear Barack Obama, Please Keep it at 3 for 3
Charles R. Larson
Review: Paulina Chiziane’s “The First Wife: a Tale of Polygamy”
David Yearsley
The Widow Bach: Anna Magdalena Rediscovered
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail