41–50 of 111 posts
They also specifically ask for people who made withdrawals. In a fraud like this, those who lost money often recover from the people who got out in time. Eg almost 90% of the losses from Bernie Madoff were recovered by suing those who innocently withdrew their 'gains' before the ponzi scheme was discovered.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's fascinating. It would seem to set up a situation where your incentive, if you suspect a Ponzi scheme, is to quietly withdraw your money early then keep your mouth shut. Unfortunate if true.
I would imagine the FBI to be able to trace the holders of all the big withdrawals through the blockchain.
They also specifically ask for people who made withdrawals. In a fraud like this, those who lost money often recover from the people who got out in time. Eg almost 90% of the losses from Bernie Madoff were recovered by suing those who innocently withdrew their 'gains' before the ponzi scheme was discovered.
That's fascinating. It would seem to set up a situation where your incentive, if you suspect a Ponzi scheme, is to quietly withdraw your money early then keep your mouth shut. Unfortunate if true.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah! Don’t trust the man! The man is only interested in … something! There must be an ulterior motive in trying to bring scammers to book! Just think for a second. If someone has been scammed out of millions, you think they’re not going to talk to law enforcement about it? They wouldn’t only if they were perpetrating their own scam. At some point privacy nuts on HN have to really stop and think before typing.
I'm not exactly sure what the FBI would gain here, and it may be nothing, but distrusting them by default seems rational given their long history of corruption.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah! Don’t trust the man! The man is only interested in … something! There must be an ulterior motive in trying to bring scammers to book! Just think for a second. If someone has been scammed out of millions, you think they’re not going to talk to law enforcement about it? They wouldn’t only if they were perpetrating their own scam. At some point privacy nuts on HN have to really stop and think before typing.
When considering which corporate bodies to trust, I consider their public statements and policies, their historical behaviors, and reports from other users of their services. The FBI’s official policy is to harasses individuals they place on secret watchlists. Historically, the agency has been one of the most corrupt from the beginning, especially the Hoover era, and has never gone through a period of substantive ref…
What proof do you that the FBI is more corrupt than other government agencies?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's fascinating. It would seem to set up a situation where your incentive, if you suspect a Ponzi scheme, is to quietly withdraw your money early then keep your mouth shut. Unfortunate if true.
> It would seem to set up a situation where your incentive, if you suspect a Ponzi scheme, is to quietly withdraw your money early then keep your mouth shut. How so? Law enforcement can claw it back, and the earlier you withdraw, the less your gains.
And harder to claw back funds after you’re already dead and the estate has been settled. Or you’ve already spent it all.
They also specifically ask for people who made withdrawals. In a fraud like this, those who lost money often recover from the people who got out in time. Eg almost 90% of the losses from Bernie Madoff were recovered by suing those who innocently withdrew their 'gains' before the ponzi scheme was discovered.
Not all the Madoff withdrawals were innocent.
That’s where a lot of the clawbacks/recalls were from.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's fascinating. It would seem to set up a situation where your incentive, if you suspect a Ponzi scheme, is to quietly withdraw your money early then keep your mouth shut. Unfortunate if true.
This is an important aspect of the financial world to understand, because a lot of things work this way. It doesn't have to be a "Ponzi scheme", this happens anywhere where a lot of people pool money together, nominally have an agreement that they can withdraw whenever they like, and that money is used for something illiquid, regardless of the reason for the illiquitity, resulting in a situation where if too many peo…