Shalom, Friends!This week's Torah portion, Acharei Mot - Kedoshim, seems improbably apt given this week's headlines. In eerie synchronicity with the SEC's allegations of a kind of fraud perpetrated by Goldman Sachs, we come to a constellation of the Torah's teachings about fraud, all contained within the parasha (Kedoshim) known in some academic circles as the Torah's "Holiness Code." A predominant concern of this portion is ethics, and ethics governing the conduct of business are given special prominence.
I would love for you to consider three teachings from this week's portion and then, using the "Comments" space on our blog, evaluate them and interpret them in light of the Goldman Sachs case.
I am eager to see what you have to say.
A lively conversation may also ensue at Torah study this coming Saturday... so come one, come all.
TEXT #1: LEVITICUS 19:13
"You shall not defraud your fellow, nor commit robbery...."
TEXT #2: LEVITICUS 19:14
"You shall not insult the deaf, nor place a stumbling block before the blind...."
TEXT #3: LEVITICUS 19:35-36
"You shall not falsify measure of length, weight, or capacity. You shall have an honest balance, honest weights, an honest ephah [solid measure], and an honest hin [liquid measure]...."
Happy Studying!
Rabbi Jonathan Blake
Very apt. And it's also amazing how far the Hebrews were ahead of their time. We need better public relations; to show that our system of morality beats other available ones hands down.
ReplyDeleteI should have identified myself above since I am a somewhat regular participant at Rabbi Blake's Torah Study. My name is Jim Glucksman and JBG is of course my initials. There are some blogs on which I choose not to publicly identify myself. Westchester Reform does not lend itself to covert participation.
ReplyDeleteTurning to the Goldman Sachs fiasco, I do not believe that GS's behavior constituted fraud. The elements of fraud, as I understand them, involve false statement (or misleading omission), intent to be misleading, reliance by the recipient of the information on the misleading statement or omission, and reasonableness of that reliance. I do not believe that the "injured" parties' reliance was typically reasonable. Here's why.
Certain investments are straightforward. A bond, for example, pays a fixed return and the principal investment is repaid at the end. In the case of stock one owns equity in the company and the fortunes of the investment rise and fall with that companies' fortunes. Most educated people understand these investments at some level.
The GS vehicles were barely comprehensible even to their creators. I for one cannot believe that people would readily invest in a security they can't possibly understand unless they want a return exceeding investments in "safe" vehicles. Put more simply, millionaires and financially sophisticated companies don't need babysitters. There should not be a "mama" or teacher to whine to. The investments were complex and people should have known they were dangerous.
I do fault GS for pressing for the bailout of AIG since the only way that it profited from these toxic investment vehicles was if AIG didn't collapse. I do wish some highly critical investigations, litigation or prosecution to occur based upon GS's abuse of its hightened influence and access to the levers of power.
Thanks for taking the time to discuss this, I feel strongly about it and love learning more on this topic. If possible, as you gain expertise, would you mind updating your blog with extra information? It is extremely helpful for me. jewish cards
ReplyDelete