A ponzi scheme must first be able to dominate it's image through media outlets who exchange influential positions as experts for ad revenue. Generally, the print, radio or tv organization will quote and or interview from organization/bank (x) while carrying ads for them. It seems reasonable that recently it dawned on everyone that these "experts" would have to disclose if they had a vested interest in the success of the investments that they recommended to reveal their conflict of interest. It would be better if the media outlet would end the segment with how much financing they receive from bank (X), ad revenue and how much investment the organization has in that outlet or any of it's subsidiaries.
A ponzi scheme must wield uncanny clout in the corridors of power. In a situation where there is increasing outrage about using public depositors funds for personal bonuses to keep up exotic lifestyles while failing (at their job to make money), it's nice to know that you will be receiving MORE public funds with no whisper of indicting, raiding, closing, prosecuting or convicting anyone.
According to our blood money recipients (media and government), the economic downturn exposes lack of expertise, fraud and ponzi's like madoff and standford. This economic downturn somehow failed to expose and cause media derision & government assault on scotia/caisse or jpmorgan/bank of america. They hear the public outcry for punishment about the inequity in them going unpunished and spend day and night arresting and running stories about relative small timers whom you've never heard of and don't affect the public at large.
Maybe charles ponzi would be proud of madoff but he definitely would be more proud of the g-8 governments and media outlets, that are still attempting to talk past the crimes by these organizations that brought civilization to it's knee's.
No wonder all the media outlets are going bankrupt.