In Ponzi We Trust
Borrowing from Peter to pay Paul is a scheme made famous by Charles Ponzi. Who was this crook whose name graces this scam?
- By Mary Darby
- Smithsonian magazine, December 1998, Subscribe
(Page 5 of 5)
Why does anyone fall for such scams? "It's human nature," says Susan Grant of the National Consumers League. "The crooks know that there are basic human factors that they can appeal to—the desire to do what you think you see other people doing around you, making money and getting rich."
In other words, wishful thinking. In 1920, people saw Ponzi as a man who could make the impossible possible. Today, many people in search of lucrative investment opportunities "see the Internet as a place where all things are possible," observes Paul H. Luehr, who chairs the FTC's Internet Coordinating Committee. Sometimes, they simply can't tell the difference between a legitimate business enterprise and a hoax. But other times it's clear that they don't really want to know. Grant and Luehr tell of inquiries they've received from consumers in search of reassurance that an attractive scheme is legitimate. But when cautioned against it, they become angry. "Many times people are mad at the government for spoiling a ‘good' investment opportunity," says Luehr.
Today's operators often use high-tech bells and whistles to lure their prey. Ponzi's approach was more charismatic. But the bait is always the same and the outcome is inevitable. Up to 95 percent of the people who buy into Ponzi schemes eventually lose all their investments, says Luehr. Generally, it is only the con man who gets the easy money. For Ponzi, there undoubtedly were other rewards as well: excitement and power. Richard Ault, a retired special agent and criminal profiler for the FBI, speculates that, more than anything, Ponzi wanted to be "something special." A poor immigrant, he sought to become part of the Boston establishment that had excluded him, Ault believes. "It was an impossible goal, but he managed to achieve a little bit of it for a short period of time."
To Ponzi, it was all a grand, desperate game that he was determined to play to its conclusion. At the end, he had this to say about the mad caper on which he had led the people of Boston: "Even if they never got anything for it, it was cheap at that price. Without malice aforethought I had given them the best show that was ever staged in their territory since the landing of the Pilgrims!... It was easily worth fifteen million bucks to watch me put the thing over!"
To Charles Ponzi, who began with nothing, ended up the same way but enjoyed a brief interlude of power and fame, it undoubtedly was.
Mary Darby, a freelance writer in Washington, D.C., invests in mutual funds, and hopes not to lose her shirt.
Single Page « Previous 1 2 3 4 5
Subscribe now for more of Smithsonian's coverage on history, science and nature.









Comments (2)
Sounds like he was the inspiration for Social Security, Hmmmm
Posted by Dan on August 5,2010 | 01:03 PM
WHile it is unethical and imoral to give credit to such unothodox means of earning a leaving, C Ponzi, no doubt had the most persuasive and sweet toung ever. His ettequette afforded him to outwit gumblers and potential investors of disproprtiate risk levels. He pervately conveted riches to rags through his cunning behaviour.
But he who leaves by sword dies by sword, he died a poor man who derseved a pouper berial. For such a once celebrity during his years of deciet, its a shame.
Investors and pyramid organisers need not be remainded that all pyramid are doomed to co colapse.
Posted by Phibeon Mutibura on October 24,2009 | 04:14 PM