Who do I believe, the trader or the libertarian?

Well, this is kinda weird.

Sinclair Davidson writes this morning indicating that he's distinctly ambiguous when it comes to the question of what's wrong with Westpac rate rigging.  (OK, he mentions "poor banking behaviour" in one sentence, then in the next he puts "scandal" in inverted commas, and indicates that he thinks no one can really explain why it's a problem.)   This is even when the trader in question has been widely quoted in the media saying:

"I knew it was completely wrong but f--- it I might as well, I thought f--- it. We've just got so much money on it, we just had to do it, right ...", court documents allege Mr Roden said.

I think when it comes to matters of ethics, and their potential to interfere with making money, don't let a libertarian, or anyone associated with the IPA, anywhere near policy influence.

Update:  perhaps Sinclair should read this post at The Conversation for some ethical enlightenment.