Why the S.E.C. didn't hit Goldman Sachs harder

Re:Why the S.E.C. didn't hit Goldman Sachs harder by stegosaurus on Thursday April 21, 2016 @08:19PM (#11546259)

I understand the principle here, but the specific examples given here are a bit odd.

>>> shareholders or innocent executives may lose their jobs

Shareholders are unlikely to be affected to a large extent because their holdings in Enron would probably make up a small portion of their net worth.

Executives are paid large salaries and so can deal with the effects anyway.

I'd be much more concerned with the rank and file.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why the S.E.C. didn't hit Goldman Sachs harder by HeyLaughingBoy on Thursday April 21, 2016 @08:26PM (#11546277)

Many Enron "shareholders" were retirees whose retirement plans were heavy on Enron and they were basically wiped out.

[ Parent | on HN ]