The Cranky Socialist The criminal nature of the financial crisis

Author: Adam Clayton

"Down in the valley there were three farms. The owners of these farms had done well. They were rich men. They were also nasty men. Their names were Farmer Boggis, Farmer Bunce and Farmer Bean." If this sounds familiar, it's because you probably read or heard it as a child in the Fantastic Mr. Fox. Not wishing to delve into the story too much, the story involves several farmers whose grotesque eating habits are only bested by their insatiable greed, leading them to stake out the hill in the hope of catching fox, with no regard for badgers or any other peaceful inhabitants of the woods. What makes this story so shocking to me is how natural it is for us to view greed as a trait worst seen in and applied by ourselves. Today, it would be all too appropriate to use the farmer's names as Monikers for the ex-CEOs of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, as well as countless other criminals. Most people I meet point first and foremost to the greed of these CEOs as the number one cause for their anger, which is why Obama and McCain both spout politically convenient drivel about finally standing up and holding people accountable.

The background to this is as shameful as the events of today. Down on Wall Street there were two major mortgage companies. The CEOs of these mortgage companies had done well. They were rich men. They were also nasty men. Their names were James Johnson, Daniel Mudd and Franklin Raines, among others. Without discussion of their eating habits, the criminal charges and fines levied against them over the past eight years are testimony to a small percentage of their quest for wealth, at the expense of everyone else. Federal Investigations have shown these companies of having essentially bribed federal officials through illegal lobbying, and of hiding the dire situation of their company for the benefit of performance-based bonuses. And that is merely what our government has made us aware of. Since George W. Bush got reelected, the number of investigations for corporate fraud has fallen 90 percent. As remarkable as that is, the lenient treatment these companies get after being caught is even worse.

The minimum sentence for armed robbery in many states is five years. By contrast, most people or companies convicted of corporate fraud are let off with very little jail time and pathetic fines. Yet the motivating factor in both crimes is most likely greed (immensely more so in the case of the luxury-ridden CEO), the sole difference being the means to commit the crime. Urban dropouts have access to guns; Yale graduates have access to complex financial transactions. If all men were indeed born equal in the eyes of the government, such a playing field is quickly torn up and disfigured as the years progress. The effects of CEO crimes have more impact than robbing a liquor store, and seeing as CEOs took business ethics in business school, are an even worse indication of their greed. And now we have to bail them out?!?! Indeed, Mr. Fox, who merely took what he needed to feed the family, was fortunate to have been faced by farmers and not Fortune 500 CEOs. At least the farmers tried to solve their problems without government intervention.

Solving the crisis of greed that is inherent in any market system requires more of a heavy-handed system of law, one that treats all criminals with appropriate severity. It's a misconception to think that these people aren't a threat to society; they don't need to commit violent acts to cheat others. Illegal campaign contributions are similar to espionage against the United States of America, and ought to be punished with life in prison. Only then will people avoid subverting our government to peddle their own interests. Unfortunately, which government or elected official is going to support a resolution that, while protecting the country, threatens the very people that helped get them elected in the first place?