Ken Lewis is Like Moses. Read More>

Could the SEC have caught Madoff's Ponzi Scheme if only they executed well?

My short answer is that the SEC definitely had the legal power to examined Madoff Investments, but that it is unlikely for the SEC to have discovered the Ponzi scheme. The primary reason is that the fraud occurred at an unregistered investment fund, which is not protected by SIPC. Only the Modoff Securities, the broker-dealer unit, is covered by SIPC. SEC's clout is severely limited when it comes to an unregistered investment fund, although they technically have full legal authority to examine any company suspected of securities fraud. Nothing less than a full audit of customer positions would have revealed a ponzi scheme. It is highly unlikely that Madoff would have stood by while SEC conducted such an audit. SEC's primary source of information on fraud is customer complaints. In Madoff Investments' case, no customers complained. Only potential competitors filed a complaint with the SEC. Without numerous customer complaints, SEC would not have felt it had the clout to go in and conduct a thorough audit.
To be continued... >

"Spending is Spending!" was famous words expressed on the floor of Congress. Where does this term come from? Does it justify a stimulus package that is packed with pork?

A quick answer is that the Congressman was quoting Keynes, who thought that even wasteful spending, such as a war, would positively stimulate the economy during the Great Depression. However, the appearance of an active economy from wasteful public works and later on WWII, was later proven to have been false. Wasteful or destructive spending did not in fact help the economy during the Great Depression. U.S. standard of living did not improve until a few years after WWII when factories could again be used for productive ends.
To be continued... >