It strikes me that one New Yorker who has reason to be grateful to Bernie Madoff as the year concludes – and there are not many – is Dick Fuld.

Until Mr Madoff came along, Mr Fuld was set to be the face of the 2008 financial crisis, and to attract the lion’s share of the opprobrium that came with it. He had even been pictured on the cover of New York Magazine in devil’s horns.

But Mr Madoff’s alleged fraud makes Mr Fuld look angelic by comparison. He suffered from hubris, miscalculated Lehman’s strength and pushed it to the brink, but it was an honest mistake.

The people who suffered from his error were Lehman’s shareholders (including Mr Fuld himself) rather than individuals who placed their entire trust, and life savings, with Mr Madoff.

Mr Fuld’s conduct may have seemed devilish at the time but that was then, and this is now. Mr Madoff is now under 24-hour house arrest, partly for his own protection, so badly is he regarded.

The retirement of Robert Scully from the office of the chairman at Morgan Stanley makes me wonder more broadly about how many bankers who have not been forced out by their banks may decide to hang up their hats anyway.

Look at it this way: if you have been with an investment bank for a long time, and have accumulated some wealth, it must be tempting now to step out of the door. Few people think the industry will recover quickly, and there is a decent chance that its best days – certainly in terms of bonuses – are in the past.

The other straw in the wind is that Goldman Sachs is thinking of changing its retirement policy from a “rule of 55″ to a “rule of 60″. That means that, from next year, Goldman’s employees will have to wait until their combined age and years of service add up to 60 before being able to cash in their restricted shares on leaving.

Until now, Goldman has positively encouraged many senior employees who reach 50 or so to leave so as to clear space for people coming up from more junior ranks. The move looks like a signal that it now wants to retain more of its senior layer.

In a sense, that is not surprising. Goldman faced internal doubts and partner retirements after it lost money in the 1994 bond market rout. Some people then thought it might be better to take their money out rather than keep risking it with the bank.

Of course, Goldman employees who stuck with the bank did very well out of that decision over the ensuing dozen years. But Wall Street compensation is so rich in the good times that many people may be tempted to walk when trouble strikes.