Part of the

Who here was not moved by the flowing crocodile tears in North Korea for the death Kim Jong II? How upset were you when hearing of the S.E.C. charges against Fannie’s Richard Mudd and Freddie’s Richard Syron, otherwise known as the Dukes of Hazzard?  As I thought, not a dry eye in the room.

While Mudd and Syron are ruthlessly fed to the lions to appease the angry mob, we can rest easy knowing they each drained tens of millions of dollars out of their employers. Syron paid himself $19 million in 2007 as Freddie foundered.

Yet, it is doubtful that these Dukes are convicted of any securities related crimes. Rather, their crimes are against humanity for being “stupidly good,” for acting like sophisticated CEOs and consummate Wall Street titans while not having a clue as to the dangers confronting their industry.

Moral hazard refers to investments where one party makes the decision about how much risk can be incurred while the other party ends up holding the bag. While Mudd, Syron, and Mark Walsh (who famously sunk the good ship Lehman Brothers) may be nincompoops for not recognizing the obvious risks, they made oodles of money at other people’s expense.

If the leaders of Wall Street are not all tossed into the coliseum alongside the Dukes of Hazzard, which seems wholly unlikely, then it should have been the shareholders.

Of course it made 100% sense to save “too big to fail” banks like Citigroup from sinking beneath the waves, but why were the shareholders saved? Saving select financial entities is often necessary, but shareholders at certain risk of being wiped out might have the proper influence on management.