Can you lend me $100?

I promise I'll pay you back as soon as I can...

Thanks!
 
Let's fast forward several years.    You bump into me in the street.   I am dressed as a woman, I have a wig on,  I have changed my name and I am affecting a limp.    Yet you still recognise me (dammit)  and ask for the $100 back.  

In my new Jamaican accent, I deny everything because I am weaselly, oily ratbag who cannot be trusted with other people's money - and besides,  I'm called Glenda now.   I also know it will cost you a lot more than $100 to prove that I actually owe you that money.   So you give up.  One-nil to me.

Let's be under no illusions, the finance company collapses have followed this broad narrative arc.  

The good news is that there have been several successful prosecutions, and I think the regulators are winning the battles that they can win.   But when they have to walk away, there is an empty, impotent feeling of disgust that no-one is held personally accountable.

These people rely on the protection afforded by setting up entities/trusts and whatnot to legally separate and de-personalise the financial risks they take, if it all goes wrong.   When it works, it's lollies ahoy for the people involved, personally.    But when it fails, it is the entity that fails, not them personally.

Sorry for the language, but these wankers destroy successful companies, spirit away people's life savings and damage the fragile reputation of the financial services industry, which is actually full of sincere and well-meaning people. 

This feeling is bad enough when it's only about money.   How must the Pike River families feel?   

Things must change.