Charlie Rose

millican  07/01/2009 06:35 PM Report

I agree with Mr. Peterson but it does not go nearly far enough to, 'urge [other investors] to make some restitution." Everyone who invested in Mr. Madoff's scheme should share commensurately in the losses. To simply accept the fact that a minority of investors lose everything because they didn't get a seat when the music stopped while the rest remain unaffected would be a gross miscarriage of justice. Surely the legal system has the power to impose and enforce such an obvious and reasonable solution.

Chris_Peterson  07/01/2009 11:46 AM Report

I thought the most illuminating part of this segment was the revelation that of $170 billion that passed through Madoff's "fund", about $13 billion, or about 8% of the total, was lost by the investors remaining at the end. Most of this money was paid out as fictional earnings to early investors. While these people have no legal obligation to those who lost money, they should be urged to make some restitution to them. Much of what Madoff stole will be recovered from the sale of his confiscated assets. Most of the losses were paid out as "profits" to others. If these numbers are accurate, it seems that Madoff must have been investing the money and making a good return, just not the amazing rate he claimed. If the "winners" would reduce their gain to a reasonable level, the "losers" would recover much of their losses.

Investors who caught on to the scam and lured others into the game for their own profit are almost as guilty as Madoff and should forfeit their gains to the losers.

NoPardonforMichaelMilken  06/30/2009 02:49 PM Report

Mr. and Mrs. Ambrosino,

To you I extend my sincere condolences. I wish things like this did not happen.

But they do. And they will continue to occur. Greed and avarice, combined with lethargy and ignorance, will always make Bernie Madoffs, James Coynes, Dick Fulds, John Thains, Christopher Coxes, Milton Friedmans, Robert Rubins, Alan Greenspans, Bill Clintons, George W. Bushes, Ayn Rands, Suze Ormans, Charlie Schumers, Larry Kudlows, Rick Santellis, Hank Paulsons, Chris Dodds, Antonin Scalias, Clarence Thomases, John Robertses, Sam Alitos, Roger Aileses, Lou Dobbses, and their ilk an endless occurrence. Each is no less guilty than the other.

The Ambrosinos unfortunately serve as prime examples of the NECESSITY of DIVERSIFICATION in one's investments and the practice of the principles of value-added investment introduced by the late-Benjamin Graham and furthered, albeit with derivatives in limited scope of late, by his pupil, Warren Buffett.

With all due respect, I wouldn't put more than 20 percent of my assets with God at prime plus-one. Spread your investments around, favor conservative (VERY, VERY, VERY SMALL C) financial outlays and products, and realize that the big boys and girls will rob you blind and destroy your life merely for giggles on a Friday afternoon.

Be a turtle, a slow, steady, extremely cautious financial turtle. If it sounds too good to be true, let the hare have it. Better to be a cocktail party schmuck than to lose the savings of a lifetime.

Whether Bernie Madoff, Michael Milken, or the latest hedge fund hotshot, it doesn't matter. They're not worthy of your trust. Or your money.

sh200kr  06/30/2009 02:45 PM Report

Madoff should get death penalty in live NY city.

NoPardonforMichaelMilken  06/30/2009 02:26 PM Report

Bernie committed the ultimate sin.

He conned his own people.

Had Bernie pulled off this scam in Northern Ireland, Paris, Hong Kong, or Newark, he'd be hailed as a financial wiz and free-market capitalist and heralded on the covers of Forbes, The Economist, The Financial Times, and The Wall Street Journal.

But Bernie scammed his own. That's not allowed. After all, one does not see Bibi What A Yahoo coming down on Avigdor Lieberman and the Settlers.

tartufe  06/30/2009 02:05 PM Report

There's something to the catechism, "it takes one to snare one." Madoff's egregious greed snared the egregiously greedy in many instances.

The FDIC, SEC et al other Feds are the primary enabling accomplices that should be incarcerated en masse along with "Makeoff." Fat chance.

REMant  06/30/2009 01:01 PM Report

Surely there are accomplices, and perhaps some in the scheme who knew or sensed what was going on and did nothing about it. Just how big the latter group should be considered to be is the question I would ask, because I think that many of them are really no better than he, and for them he is guilty mainly of fratricide. I have little more sympathy for them than for the man, himself. Security notwithstanding, this couple strikes me as a good example. They borrowed on their home to put more money in the fund. They need to look at themselves in the mirror.