Soros Convicted
Forbes.com- Appeals Court Upholds Soros Conviction
A French appeals court on Thursday upheld George Soros' conviction for insider trading, which the billionaire investor says has unfairly damaged his reputation.George Soros has written extensively about his commitment to nurturing 'open societies'. His commitment to liberty is commendable. On the other hand, liberty is best maintained by democracy - free people will tend to vote to remain free (Vichy France notwithstanding). Soros' actions demonstrate little regard for democracy - he spent more than $12 million (mostly in donations to MoveOn.org and America Coming Together) to influence the last US election. Most of us don't have that kind of cash, and campaign finance reform was supposed to eliminate the ability of wealthy individuals and groups to buy a greater share in the democratic process. Soros (and others) exploited a loophole in the law, permitting massive donations to 'unaffiliated' political action committees. Soros would do better to spend his (ill-earned) cash supporting freedom in places where people really want it - Iraq, Lebanon, Egypt - than using it to undermine democracy at home.
The court also upheld a 2002 fine of 2.2 million euros ($2.9 million at current rates) for the Hungarian-born financier. The fine was the same amount he was accused of making from the purchase and the sale of shares in Societe Generale bank 17 years ago, allegedly with insider knowledge.
Soros was not present in court, defense lawyer Ron Soffer said.
At an appeals hearing last month, the billionaire acknowledged hearing about a Paris financier's plans to take over the newly privatized French bank days before he began buying its shares independently.
But Soros, 74, denies that knowledge amounted to insider information or influenced his decision to buy, which he maintains was part of a broader, well-documented investment strategy.
'My reputation is at stake,' Soros told the court on Feb. 10.
- sheikh X at 10:08 AM
2 Comments:
regarding the political donations, what exactly are you suggesting? should all wealthy liberals obstain from making campaign donations to the democratic party, while the more well-endowed republican party tramples them. the democrats are floundering enough without cutting off their capital. until there is meaningful campaign finance reform that adequately addresses this issue, the dems would be naive to cut off their more substantial sources of support.
Sure - MoveOn and Swift Boat Veterans are merely fronts for Democratic and Republican parties respectively. As long as one major parties flouts the spirit of the campaign finance reform laws by funneling money through PACs, obviously the other party is forced to do so too.
Given that Democratic PACs outspent Republican PACs, I'm not sure you can blame the Republicans for this particular undermining of democracy.
I guess my main points are:
(1) that its hypocritical for moveon to portray itself as a grassroots movement when its major funding comes from a couple of hefty donors.
(2) a liberal organization should be embarassed to be financed by someone who made his money fleecing others.
(3) soros commitment to democracy is questionable - if you have the money and don't mind parting with it, there's no great moral question in financing open society movements around the world. but its more difficult to graciously accept that you are merely one well intentioned citizen among many at home. Democracies live and die on the principle of equality ; when political equality is subverted by economic inequality, democracy flounders.
Post a Comment
<< Home