Clearly, Lady Ruth McMadoff was fully aware that her husband’s business was a sham. But let’s travel for a few moments to an imaginary world in which Mrs. Bernie had no idea her baubles and beach houses and butter-blonde lockes were being financed through ill-gotten gains. According to Randy “The Ethicist” Cohen, Ruth had a moral obligation to stop and ask the husb where the scratch was coming from, the implication being that it was coming from a scam.
Here’s a guideline: around the time you acquire your third house (the one in Palm Beach), you must enquire, How are we paying for this? When selecting your second yacht (Little Bull, recently seized by the courts), you must pose the question: Where is the money coming from? Having benefited from a husband’s activities — for decades, not days — a spouse may not remain willfully ignorant. Adults must have some grasp of their impact upon other people, including financially. The greater your wealth, the greater your impact on others, the greater your responsibility not to be conveniently oblivious.
Really? With all due respect to Cohen, we beg to differ. Since when does marrying someone mean that you should have to take an active interest– prying or otherwise– in their business? Jim Simons made $2.5 billion last year. Is Mrs. Simons demanding a look at Renaissance’s books? Anne Dias Griffin’s Aragon Global Management turned in a considerably better ’08 than the husband’s fund. Is Ken packing the Mrs.’s lunch with love notes that read “Have a great day! PS I know you’re running a Ponzi scheme, you must be. I’m not gonna rat you out, just admit it and teach me your ways.” Ray Dalio took home $780 million. Do you see Barbara making periodic visits to the trading floor just to make sure “there’s no funny business going on here”? And even if she wanted to, who’s to say she’d be granted permission to “come on down”? This isn’t the Price Is Right, RandCo.
Update: After considering the offense that might be taken (you have no idea how many “wives of” read this site), it must be said– RandCo, morals or not, these women aren’t paid to think (let alone ask, “is this a scam?”).
Marrying Bess is the clear choice here. One would know where the money is coming from.
Bess lets hop on over to AC and do it; marry me?
Bess, but she was the queen.
The Griffin’s case is more interesting. How about if each one was running a Ponzi and in some convoluted way stealing from each other? I see a movie coming on that one.
Ruth: Peter! Get into the kitchen!
Mark: yes, Ruthie..
Ruth: Peter, honey, Is your brother running a ponzi scheme?
Mark: A ponzi scheme? No way! we just take the neighbors money and give it to our institutional clients overseas through our split strike trading strategy. why whats up?
Ruth: Uch that’s way to complicated for me.. you silly finance boys..
too true.. the bitches need to put out and shut up…
Bad advice coming from the bankrupted Greydead Lady? The hell you say!
this is bullshit, ruth is guilty of having carnal knowledge of every crevace on bernies bod
Ruth: Peter! Get into the kitchen!
Mark: yes, Ruthie..
Ruth: Peter, honey, Is your brother running a ponzi scheme?
Mark: A ponzi scheme? No way! we just take the neighbors money and give it to our institutional clients overseas through our split strike trading strategy. why whats up?
Ruth: Uch that’s way to complicated for me.. you silly finance boys..
@4,8 That is 2 fails now. She is talking to Peter not Mark.
continuing from @9′s point, @4,8, why woould he call his mother “ruthie” surely it would be “mumsey” or something similar, your posts (both of them) are flawed and have no comedy value whatsoever.
I defer to American Psycho’s Van Patten:
“…a chick with a little hard body, who will satisfy all sexual demands without being too slutty about things, and who essentially will keep her dumb fucking mouth shut.”
You were saying, you douchebag ethicist?
Bernie made plenty from his real business, over a long period. He owned the big Rybovich, two houses, and the apartment since the late 80′s. And he did not charge management fees on the ponzi scam, only the finders did.
What Ruth should have asked is “why are you running a ponzi scheme and not making any money from it?”
She probably did the roudnabout test, like this:
Ruth: Mark, do you know anyone running a Ponzi scheme?
Mark: …No.
Ruth: Good, because you know Bernie.
RIP MH.
Umm RUTH HAD A POSITION WITH THE FUND!!
Being dumb doesnt protect you from prison…remember Ken Lay?
If the govt can make it seem its likely she should have known…I think the jury of Ruth’s peers will figure out the rest. I may show up to jury duty that day.
@12, there were times the “real business” needed to borrow money from the fraudulent one. It wasn’t worth anything near what he had claimed.
Bess, FTW!
spot on bess. i was just saying earlier today that it’s a terrible idea to state that there is some marital duty to audit your spouse’s business affairs. and the extent of wealth doesn’t change that one iota. begging Randy’s pardon, i’ll kindly let my wife do her job without getting PWC to check up on her, and i’ll thank her to do the same.
Ruth was the Bookkeeper of the Ponzi scheme. Obviously, someone in that position would have no knowledge of any sources or uses of funds. It just wouldn’t make any sense. None at all.
The Guy from Delaware
The ethicist is a douche. Just last night he was yammering about how it’s not parents’ responsibility what their children ate – the fatness is all advertisers’ and big food companies’ fault. After all, adults couldn’t possibly be held responsible for raising their offspring.
But, if you’re an adult woman married to some Wall Street guy, it’s without a question your responsibility to educate yourself enough to know know exactly what’s going on. If you feed your kids twinkies for lunch every day, though, it’s totally not your fault because you’re not to know that’s bad for the kid.
The guy has no credibility. Just another libtard.
“Umm RUTH HAD A POSITION WITH THE FUND!!
Being dumb doesnt protect you from prison…remember Ken Lay?”
Well, so do secretaries and they aren’t usually held responsible for the for their bosses’ actions. Remember Ken Lay’s secretary or the marketing staff at Enron? Yeah, neither do I or anyone else.
If she was in a higher position and it’s part of her job to know such things, then you make a fair point. Ken Lay was the CEO.
However, that’s not the point the “ethicist” is making. He thinks she’s responsible by merely being his spouse. Very different from your point.
I have a friend who made a small fortune distributing rogaine
@19 has it…that douche was on Real Time with Bill Maher on Friday and even Bill was calling him out for not advocating personal responsibility when it comes to a child’s health. I guess “the ethicist” bases his views on his political leanings
@22
Is it me or has Maher’s show been chock full of “writers,” “journalists,” “authors,” and other generally clueless faux-thorities this entire season?
@23, you’re right, but I would have to throw in clueless “actors” as well
C’mon Bess, didnt you see the Untouchables?
THE BOOKKEEPER KNOWS EVERYTHING.
C’mon Bess, didnt you see the Untouchables?
THE BOOKKEEPER KNOWS EVERYTHING.
@18- yeah, but Cohen was making a larger point about spousely duties, regardless of whether or not you’re an employee of the firm.
Cohen’s a tool. His comments above have nothing to do with ‘ethics.’ They may have to do with judgement, but not ethics. Lots of lefties like to dress up their arguments with titles like “Ethicist” to give some moral weight to their bull$h!+. But it’s just spin. It’s still just bull$h!+.
@26- reread cohen’s article, see what his point was (about marriage, not bookkeeping) and comment again.
@28- while your point may be true (“His comments above have nothing to do with ‘ethics.’ They may have to do with judgement, but not ethics”), for future reference you should know that use of terms like “lefties” makes you sound like a right-wing nut job whose opinions are to be discarded in the same bin as Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh’s.
Yes just think if too many spouses did ask that too often it might cause the whole banking system to colapse ! and then the end of the world would be upon us because without bankers stealing from those dimmer then themselves(and of course getting the government in to steal from the rest of us) we would all be dead ! apparently
@31- go sell crazy somewhere else, we’re all stocked up here.
Do you like fishsticks?
Those tags were pure poetry.
Pure, baby.
This guy isn’t an ethicist, he’s an idiot. If a doctor is sued for malpractice the spouse of the doctor should have known? Vicarious liability because you’re meant to know the intimate details of your spouses profession? No wonder this country is going to shite as fast as the lawyers can file lawsuits.
@33 I love fishsticks.
Go one better. Nathan Simons’s wife Laura Baxter Simons is listed as the chief compliance officer of rentec’s Meritage fund which he runs. 5 bill usd fund.