http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/08/busin ... adoff.html
The laws covering bail seem mostly concerned with violent criminals and the physical threat they might pose to society. A white collar crime of this magnitude just seems incomprehensible. Financial columnist Scott Burns had an interesting comparision, though:
http://assetbuilder.com/blogs/scott_bur ... adoff.aspx
The loss is mind-boggling. But the figure does nothing to convey the damage this man has done.
One way to measure the extent of the damage is to compare the $50 billion to measures of loss in the FBI's Uniform Crime Reports. In 2007 there were 9.8 million crimes against property in the United States. This included about 2.2 million burglaries, 6.6 million larceny-thefts and 1.1 million car thefts.
I think you'll agree that 9.8 million crimes represent a veritable army of miscreants. In spite of that, our total losses to property crimes in 2007 were a mere $17.6 billion. To be sure, it didn't feel "mere" if you suffered a burglary. The average loss was $1,991. Nor was it "mere" if you were one of the 6.6 million people who suffered a larceny-theft. In those, the average loss was $886.
But when you add all the losses in 9.8 million common property crimes, it's just a fraction of the estimated $50 billion loss attributed to Bernard Madoff.