CBC Radio had an interview with one of the people who were left broke after Madoff's Ponzi scheme collapsed. She said that, beyond their (not paid off) house, they're ten years from retirement and now have nothing. I think she said they lost around $1 million.
So here's the crux of my question: some of Madoff's investors are flat broke due to his scam. Others have taken a large monetary hit, but it's small as a percentage of their wealth. It's by no means broken them.
If you were given the job of redistributing whatever funds they eventually recover from Madoff (say it's ten cents on the dollar), would you refund it fairly and equitably based on amount invested and lost? Or, if given the option, would you distribute more to those who'd lost more as a percentage of their estate (woman above) and nothing to, say, Tom Cruise or Donald Trump (who'll be fine, regardless).
So here's the crux of my question: some of Madoff's investors are flat broke due to his scam. Others have taken a large monetary hit, but it's small as a percentage of their wealth. It's by no means broken them.
If you were given the job of redistributing whatever funds they eventually recover from Madoff (say it's ten cents on the dollar), would you refund it fairly and equitably based on amount invested and lost? Or, if given the option, would you distribute more to those who'd lost more as a percentage of their estate (woman above) and nothing to, say, Tom Cruise or Donald Trump (who'll be fine, regardless).
Comment