The fallout from the JP Morgan loss continues and it's raising serious questions about Wall Street. On Thursday, JP Morgan announced it had lost $2 billion on bad bets on credit derivatives, made by a London trading desk, run by a man other traders call "The London Whale" and "Voldemort." The office is intended to hedge the giant bank's credit risk, not increase it.

The big trading loss shows that at least some big banks are engaged in the same sort of behaviour that rocked the financial system in 2008. "This is a crucial moment in the debate," Frank Partnoy, a professor of law and finance at the University of San Diego, told the New York Times. "It couldn't have come at a worse time for JPMorgan Chase. After everything we went through in the financial crisis, the fact that something of this magnitude could happen shows that the reform didn't do the job."

Robert Reich says the loss tells us we have to regulate Wall Street. The rules brought in to pull Wall Street into line are not working and need to be made even tougher. "Word on the Street is that J.P. Morgan's exposure is so large that it can't dump these bad bets without affecting the market and losing even more money. And given its mammoth size and interlinked connections with every other financial institution, anything that shakes JP Morgan is likely to rock the rest of the Street … Let's hope Morgan's losses don't turn into another crisis of confidence and they don't spread to the rest of the financial sector. But let's also stop hoping Wall Street will mend itself. What just happened at J.P. Morgan – along with its leader's cavalier dismissal followed by lame reassurance – reveals how fragile and opaque the banking system continues to be, why Glass-Steagall must be resurrected, and why the Dallas Fed's recent recommendation that Wall Street's giant banks be broken up should be heeded."

The AFL-CIO has made a smilar demand, warning that bankslike JP Morgan wlll lead the US economy, and with that the global economy, off a cliff.

One of Facebook's co-founders has found a way to dodge US taxes – he's renounced his US citizenship.

Billionaire Facebook cofounder Eduardo Saverin is getting rid of his citizenship ahead of the company's IPO at the end of next week. Saverin is the cofounder who got booted from the company back in 2005.

His four per cent stake is worth about $4 billion which means he's going to save a lot of taxes with the move. That's because Facebook is expected to be worth $100 billion after its IPO this month with the company claiming it's already over-subscribed. That's a lot of tax that he avoids.

Singapore, where Saverin lives, does not have a capital gains tax on profits from Facebook's float.

"Eduardo recently found it more practical to become a resident of Singapore since he plans to live there for an indefinite period of time," said Tom Goodman, a spokesman for Saverin, in an e-mailed statement to Bloomberg.

Saverin doesn't get out of paying tax completely. He will have to pay an exit tax on his holdings, but it will be at Facebook's valuation now, not after the IPO.

Savein is actually one of the most important people's in Facebook's history. In 2003, he agreed to give Mark Zuckerberg $10,000 to fund some sort of project for Harvard students who wanted to put their names, course lists, and pictures online. You know the rest of the story.

The big debate about income inequality has been around fairness and justice. Now we discover it can be a health hazard.

UPI reports that a study out of Oho State University has found that income inequality leads to more deaths long-term. The study found that for every 0.01 increase in the Gini coefficient, which measures a country's economic disparity where 0 represents perfect societal equality and 1 represents maximum inequality — an average person's cumulative risk of death increased by 112 per cent in the next dozen years. The Gini coefficient has been steadily rising in the United States in recent decades.

There are good reasons for the link between income inequality and health outcomes. Research shows that high levels of income inequality negatively affect the health of even the affluent. That's because inequality reduces social cohesion, which leads to more stress, fear, and insecurity for everyone. Income inequality also creates a culture of upward comparison. Many people would see the lifestyles of the rich and feel they couldn't live up to expectations. That could lead to negative views of themselves, frustration and depression, which have been linked to sickness and mortality.

One could also hypothesize that income inequality may lead to higher death rates because of cuts in social services and healthcare.

This follows on from a 2008 Congressional Budget Office report which found that the life expectancy gap between the rich and poor has grown along with growing income inequality.