My mostly whale-free reading list:

• Dallas Fed Cap Seen Shrinking U.S. Banking Units by Half (Bloomberg)
• Inflation is *Not* What We Should Be Worried About (Economist’s View) see also A new era for gold? (FT Alphaville)
• Small Print, Big Problem (The Nation)
• How Monsanto outfoxed the Obama administration (Salon)
• Fidelity’s ETF Fee Spurs a Backlash (WSJ) see also Fidelity faces more complaints about “float income” (Reuters)
• Iraq war costs U.S. more than $2 trillion (Reuters)
• Why RSS still matters (The Verge)
• Why I Stopped Pirating and Started Paying for Media (Lifehacker)
• If You Wear Google’s New Glasses You Are An Asshole (Gawker)
• Here’s the Invitation to the Secret Floating Strip Club Made Just For Wall Streeters (Business Insider)

What are you reading?

 

J.P. Morgan Misled Regulators and Investors, Ignored Risks in Big Trades

Source: WSJ

Category: Financial Press

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

22 Responses to “10 Friday AM Reads”

  1. What?

    You want some JPM/Whale coverage?

    Okay:

    • Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan Hit (WSJ)
    • Hidden Numbers Make Banks Even Bigger (NYT)
    • JPMorgan Faulted on Controls and Disclosure in Trading Loss (DealBook)
    • JPMorgan Report Piles Pressure on Dimon in Too-Big Debate (WSJ)
    • JPMorgan Hid Trades Banned by Volcker Rule, Senate Probe Finds (Bloomberg)
    • Senate Slams Bank on ‘Whale’ (WSJ)
    • JPMorgan Faulted on Controls and Disclosure in Trading Loss (DealBook)
    • Excerpts from the Senate’s Whale report (FT Alphaville)
    • Are Banks Bluffing About the Danger of Banking Regulation? (TIME)
    • Is Goldman Sachs riskier than it says? (Fortune)
    • An Unlikely Hero Takes a Stand Against Big Banks (Bloomberg)
    • Fed Rebukes Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan Chase Over Capital Plans (DealBook)

  2. PeterR says:

    Following up on Gawker article about Google Glass —

    Can the company, which admitted its “Drive-by Prying” with the Google Maps cars was wrong, be trusted with the passel of privacy concerns with these new glasses?

    http://www.policymic.com/articles/29585/3-new-ways-google-glass-invades-your-privacy

  3. hue says:

    for the minnows

    Urban Institute study: Gen Y lagging parents in wealth building http://nyti.ms/XNOBnb

    who knew? winning strategies for Rock Paper Scissors http://slate.me/ZngbW6

  4. Mike in Nola says:

    All the Whale coverage is for show. No one is going to jail. No heads on pikes. Disappointing. And what is more aggravating is that the banks can only engage in this crap because of the implicit unlimited backing of the US taxpayers.

  5. Mike in Nola says:

    Do you think the whole problem with stances against gay marriage is that those against it don’t know they know anyone who’s gay?
    http://www.chron.com/news/politics/article/GOP-Sen-Portman-of-Ohio-now-supports-gay-marriage-4356742.php

    I remember that Ronald Reagan used to make ridiculous generalizations about whole classes, e.g. welfare queens, but actually acted a thought (as much as he thought) and acted differently towards those with whom he had personal contact.

  6. AHodge says:

    re dallas fed and narrow banking
    i heard roseblum give an absolutely passsionate for a regulator call for this last week at NABE
    its like Volcker rule on steroids
    an obvious good idea
    withdraw the govt guarnatee from crazy derivatives etc
    their version is what i like
    gurarntee and back commercial bank loans only.
    you can hold that bank within holding co
    , but most fed aid
    discount window depo guarantees only for the real bank
    one more pleasing sign of reform traction and Dallas fed pres fisher backs
    while this has been around well more than a year i think
    publicity is good.

  7. louiswi says:

    What are we reading: Hubris: The Inside Story of Spin, Scandal, and the Selling of the Iraq War or why Bush Cheney Rice and Rumfeld should be rotting in jail!

  8. DeDude says:

    So we have a sensible congressional budget proposal that will actually work and that does not use any silly “to be named” revenues or cuts, nor rely on unproven “magic” theory of economics that have failed in every single real world test.

    Just a full fledged realistic plan that will work and does not shy away from telling exactly where it will place the pain of cuts and revenue increases needed to get our long-term debt and budget issues solved.

    Ahh – that is just to damn boring for the main street media so if you want to see it you have to dig deep.

    http://www.epi.org/publication/back-to-work-budget-analysis-congressional-progressive/

  9. Slash says:

    That strip club story is hilarious. One of the patrons doesn’t like regular strip clubs because the girls are there to make money.

    “. . . if you try to talk to them and not get a dance, they’ll say, ‘This guy is a waste of my time,’ in some weird foreign accent and walk away.”

    Oh no, they don’t want to talk to some douchebag for an hour when they could be making money by actually working? Why does he hate the free enterprise system?

  10. bear_in_mind says:

    @Hue: That Gen Y / Urban Institute study in the NY Times is a sobering read and helps explain the steadily rising incidence of elder financial abuse.

    While today’s youth doesn’t deserve to be hobbled with massive debt, it sure-as-shootin’ doesn’t excuse taking advantage of our frail and elderly citizens.

    Spring may be around the corner on the calendar, but signs point to an economic Winter descending upon many, many Americans…

  11. Herman Frank says:

    Reuters has the latest on an old story of yours: “Two New Jersey troopers lose jobs in “joyride” scandal“.
    Indeed, a very regrettable act of poor judgement of the troopers. In hindsight everyone should have done their racing on the nearby oval.

    The story doesn’t mention whether or not the rest of the group of drivers got themselves a nice juicy ticket for speeding. No other witnesses, no mobile phones, in-dash cameras or overhead drones recording the other cars?

    At the same time, please remind me, who is it exactly who lost his/her career and pension fund and received a conviction-note next to their name for driving the whole economy off a cliff? Ah yes! You say “The law doesn’t work that way!” OK, I see!

  12. hue says:

    bear_in_mind : that study falls under things we pretty much know, and now we have data, proof.

    you should watch Jeremy Grantham’s interview with Charlie Rose. BR has a link. There is much more sobering analysis regarding economic & population growth, and climate & energy. Grantham says low interest rate policy is flat out stealing from the elderly to give to the rich.

  13. rekesk says:

    I was about to post that live-blog from naked capitalism.

    Anyhoo, Barry a while ago I had made a comment about how it didnt make any sense to me that the major stock markets were still trending upwards in the wake of substantial cuts to federal spending in the sequester. I guess now I am seeing the other side of the coin, as per your post on this topic and the op-ed that you wrote.

    Anyways, at Abnormal Returns, there’s a summary of such observations about how the economy does not equal the stock market. Insightful stuff, even if I remained puzzled.

    http://abnormalreturns.com/the-stock-market-and-economy-are-two-very-different-animals/

  14. willid3 says:

    those saying the government should act like families and cut their budgets to match incomes. dont do that them selves
    http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2013/03/14/1717901/14-gop-congressmen-who-think-government-shouldnt-borrow-have-big-debts-of-their-own/?mobile=nc

  15. Bob A says:

    Dear Doctor. We tried letting doctors and insurance companies run the healthcare system and the result was a healthcare system that costs double that of any other country in the world. You had your chance and you blew it…

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323628804578346614033833092.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

  16. Mike in Nola says:

    Bob A:

    The WSJ article is misleading in some respects depending upon the type of practice involved. First off, how many doctors have gone to see patients in the ER in the past decade? Very few who aren’t ER doctors. It has been the practice of several decades fo ER doctors to work their shifts and go home. They refer the patients to specialists or GP’s for followup and don’t have to worry about anything once they leave the hospital. Not having office hours is an attraction for many ER doctors.

    From what I’ve seen in Houston, most doctors I know and have dealt with don’t work directly for hospitals. They work for groups who handle various aspects of care. Those who have to make rounds in the hospital or do inpatient operations have hospital privileges without being employees of the hospital. Things are gravitating towards having bigger groups of doctors.

    Payments go to the medical group employing the doctors. Additionally, much of the care that people assume is being provided by the hospital is actually being contracted out. For example, here and in New Orleans, emergency rooms are being staffed by doctors working for contractors who provide the doctors. Same for hospitialists here in Houston: there is one group providing coverage to several hospitals.

    Most doctors in big groups don’t see people outside normal hours anyway. They work their shift which may include some weekend work. From what I’ve seen, they are plenty busy during those working hours. If it’s an emergency, you see one of the generalists who gets you through until you see a specialist. If it’s really serious, you go to the ER as has been happening for awhile.

    This is not to say that costs aren’t going to go up. But, it is because the Affordable Care Act was a sellout to insurance companies with no effective cost controls. All that extra money ain’t going to the doctors and hospitals. It’s going to insurance company CEO’s and stockholders instead of patient care. I remember reading a study from early in the 2000′s sponsored by health insurers. It found that 18% of health insurance premiums were absorbed by the health insurance bureaucracy. The number is probably higher. But the WSJ isn’t likely to put the hat on it’s fellow big businesses.