The ruthlessness of being BIG
I wrote an article ‘The regulators say Yes’ to expose how dangerous the big funds are when they acted for their selfish good and with impunity. They are untouchable as the regulators believe that they needed the big funds to turn the wheels of fortune, to move the stock markets and lubricate the financial industry with their ingenious products and huge liquidity. The regulators became willing accomplices, appeasing the big funds in all their demands. Goh Eng Yeow wrote an article in the ST about learning from the Asian financial crisis when the speculators raided the markets for a big killing and almost bankrupt several countries. He is advocating that more regulations and safeguards be introduced to limit the irresponsible acts of the speculators. Actually he meant the big funds. Small speculators cannot do much harm on their own. They could only if they gang up and work in unison. Fortunately this is rare. On the other hand, the big funds, a handful of them working together can destroy a whole market of even bankrupt countries. And their untouchable status, like diplomatic immunity, only encourages them to turn wild. The ruthlessness of big financial institutions has manifested itself in all the major and minor financial centres, and Obama in particular is trying to do something to curb their extravagant and irresponsible ways. They need to be cut into smaller bits to be effective. They must be laws and regulations to limit how big they can become before they become too big to fail, and too big and dangerous. Then of course the regulators need to look in the mirror and ask how much of the crimes were part of their own doing, inviting the wolves into the dining room and dining with them. If the regulators continue to sleep with the devils, and probably benefitting from the association, this rewarding relationship will compromise their objectivity and moral responsibility to doing what is necessary for the good of the system and the investors at large.