How you live in a mansion on the hill, and drive a flashy car, is entirely dependent on staying in front of the ethical crowd, by dodging obligations to a culture of honesty, and staying out of jail while doing it. Alan Bond, Malcolm Turnbull, Bill Shorten and the majority of the rest.
The world is stuffed on every level.

Rules are written by politicians to protect the guilty, (themselves). This lack of ethics then shakes itself all the way to the bottom, until the ABC protects the rights of ruthless Sudanese gangs ruling the streets of Melbourne.

While technically challenging, this expose is relevant for all those investing with the hope of providing for retirement.

Why indeed? Are some willfully blind? Other's mislead or ill-informed by the rogues who exist in this community and every other?

And should that be so? Is sunlight and full transparency the only option to exclude the aforementioned?
Alan B.

'Why are good people blind to unethical institutions?'

because they want to be. People are certainly not 'good' to begin with. The corrupt heart will always justify behaviour. Just look at those killing the unborn and trying to justify the unjustifable. Peope are people and only God can change man's corrupt nature. Universities generally just teach people lies that they are really good and occasionally do bad things.

The stock market, in its original incarnation. Was simply a place where those with money to invest for a rainy day, shared both risk and reward, the very foundation of capitalism.

And as such, when the company or enterprise hit hard times or a downturn, suffered with all the other shareholding partners, as a contraction of the dividend return.

Conversely, when those fortunes improved, they shared in the bounty as improved dividend returns, the only measure by which to judge how well a company or enterprise is managed. And as such, relied exclusively on organic growth and rationalisation, modernisation for those improved results.

Thus, there were few if any parasitical plunders, buying a company in hard times or somehow mismanaged to the point where servicing the debt burden was greater than the returns, or some such.

As might occur with a financing silent partner who demands a monthly fee that is fixed term and doesn't slide with the fortunes of the enterprise. This then was the way it was until Satan's Servants and companion greed entered the picture and the shonks shams and shady deals replaced ethical trading etc.

And to a point where the former management model of hardwon organic growth was replaced by often illusionary talked up capital gains and virtually worthless derivatives. And as derivatives of derivatives of derivatives and so on and so forth.

And with that phenomena, we saw the advent of quite grossly underfunded enterprise and inventory purchased with massive, interest-bearing debt. All of which if it could be, was transferred to the ultimate consumer, as where the paper shuffling unearnt middleman's profit demands.

There's a lot more wrong in these alleged, financial institutions than willful blindness or unethical wickedness, But the now natural home of the world's shonks shams and tricksters. Not that this applies to all, just a few rotten apples in almost every barrel.
Alan B.

diver dan Quote "Rules are written by politicians to protect the guilty, (themselves)."

I would use the word Laws instead of Rules.

An example of protecting themselves, charities do not have to report if something is under $1 million dollars, Politicians are looking at changing that to $5 million dollars.

A number of politicians have trust accounts registered as charities.

That change if introduced will allow a lot of the rich to hide things because they will not have to report what the charity is using money for.

Philip S

*...A number of politicians have trust accounts registered as charities...*

I've read the ACNC's description of a charity, and can't even imagine how politicians can slip through the cracks with a family trust on this one.
If you are aware of their reasoning behind registering a family trust as a charity, let me know please.

diver dan
*...A number of politicians have trust accounts registered as charities...*

I have admit what I thought to be true is wrong.

Philip S

That is courage to admit error. Ethical.