We Need To Talk About JPMorgan

It's too facile and self-serving to call things that we simply disagree with "evil," but Eskrow makes a deliberate and compelling case why JPMorgan Chase is indeed an evil bank.  Sociopathic may be a better term. (You may also check out "JPMorgan Chase: Out of Control" by Joshua Rosner, an investment analyst at GrahamFisher.)

What else do you call a bank that pats itself on the back while paying over the past 4 years 20 percent of its net profit for fines and litigation? Name me another kind of firm that can tolerate -- and even brag about -- that kind of business model. 

How does JPMorgan tolerate it? At least three ways: 1) they get nearly free money from the Fed; 2) being Too Big To Fail lets them enjoy lower borrowing costs and higher stock price; and 3) their shareholders pay the fines and litigation fees, not the bank's directors like Jamie Dimon. As long as the managers get their fat paychecks, what do they care?

(Full disclosure: I actually have a Chase account. I don't have much choice, for now. However, most people's beef with Chase is not about how well it serves its retail clients, but how irresponsibly it gambles in risky securities and then tries to cover up its losses. Besides, Chase complained that it loses money on nearly half its retail banking clients. I hope I'm one of them.)

The Price of Evil at JPMorgan Chase

By Richard (RJ) Eskrow

March 20, 2013 | Huffington Post

URL: http://huff.to/148EMUa