Wednesday, December 31, 2008

Why doesn't the government bail out the charities that lost money investing in Bernard Madoff's apparent Ponzi scheme ["Jewish Charities Scramble to Cover Losses to Trader," news story, Dec. 24]?

Many of the companies that have been bailed out this year clearly are responsible for their own misfortune. Banks, for example, gave mortgages to people who could not afford them. When the banks began to collapse, the government rescued them.

The Madoff scandal is different. The Securities and Exchange Commission investigated Mr. Madoff's company after questions were raised by financial professionals and journalists; staff members concluded, on the basis of documents provided by Mr. Madoff and hedge funds that invested with him, that everything was okay. Had the SEC investigated further, it would have discovered Mr. Madoff's scheme before its toll could become so great.

This lack of oversight makes the government responsible for the charities' monetary losses.

MICHAEL GREENBERG

Rockville

·

It is ironic that there is tremendous outrage over Bernard Madoff's alleged $50 billion Ponzi scheme while every working American is forced to participate in one called Social Security. If a Ponzi scheme is defined as one "in which early investors were paid off with the money from new clients" ["Hedge Fund Executive Sued by NYU Over Madoff Losses," Business, Dec. 25], how is Social Security any different?

For decades, presidents and Congress have paid lip service to Social Security, but now they can't even get some lipstick on this pig. With baby boomers about to drain Social Security, it's time to fix it, eliminate it or hold someone accountable so that Mr. Madoff can have a few new friends in the big house.

BRAD BURNS

Great Falls