View Full Version : Goldman Sachs sucks...
rickrock305
03-08-10, 22:27
This company is a scourge on our nation.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SFywA_LQuU&feature=player_embedded
I posted this article before...
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/29127316/the_great_american_bubble_machine
VooDoo6Actual
03-08-10, 22:29
+1 agreed.
but if we apply true conservative free market capitalist ideals: So what, they suck, to do anything to change that would be socialism.
rickrock305
03-08-10, 22:34
folks need to wake up and realize the whole republican/democrat thing is nothing more than a distraction.
VooDoo6Actual
03-08-10, 22:49
True free market ideology does NOT have the government to bail them out.
Free market econmomy is without economic intervention and regulation by government except to regulate against force or fraud.
There was another Rolling Stone article a week or two ago that went into this further. I read it through news.google.com on my iPhone. I sent the link to myself to post here but when I tried it on my computer, I kept getting webserver errors past the first page of the article. I figured it must have been a subscription only article or something (?)
but if we apply true conservative free market capitalist ideals: So what, they suck, to do anything to change that would be socialism.
The problem is that they suck because they take advantage of govt regulation and bail outs. We can change they can't we?
There was another Rolling Stone article a week or two ago that went into this further. I read it through news.google.com on my iPhone. I sent the link to myself to post here but when I tried it on my computer, I kept getting webserver errors past the first page of the article. I figured it must have been a subscription only article or something (?)
Actually here it is:
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/32255149/wall_streets_bailout_hustle/1
True free market ideology does NOT have the government to bail them out.
Free market econmomy is without economic intervention and regulation by government except to regulate against force or fraud.
Exactly. Meaning you would be bankrupt right now, as would I, we would all actually literally have no f-ing money, and the owners of Goldmen and Sachs would be rich as sh@t while the workers for their bankrupt company would be standing alongside homeless people in a bread line. Lack of regulation is what got us this far. Bush was forced to bail them out once his lack of oversight resulted in this problem. His embrace of free market ideals came back and forced him to respond with an over extended government response.
Exactly. Meaning you would be bankrupt right now, as would I, we would all actually literally have no f-ing money, and the owners of Goldmen and Sachs would be rich as sh@t while the workers for their bankrupt company would be standing alongside homeless people in a bread line.
uhh, not really. They would not have been able to engineer their scams where they knew the govt would back the failing companies so they could press them for payment. Read the articles.
Lack of regulation is what got us this far. Bush was forced to bail them out once his lack of oversight resulted in this problem. His embrace of free market ideals came back and forced him to respond with an over extended government response.
???????
Goldman Sachs and free market in the same breath?
What a knee slapper!! :p
rickrock305
03-08-10, 23:55
i think regulation or not they've gamed the system so good at this point that it really doesn't matter either way. they're going to find a way to profit. regulate one aspect, for example the credit default swaps, and they'll move on to engineering the next bubble that they will profit on once it collapses.
they're doing it not only to this nation but around the world...profiting from others' misery. and setting it up to do so.
rickrock305
03-08-10, 23:57
Goldman Sachs and free market in the same breath?
What a knee slapper!! :p
it is ironic. they've totally gamed the system to where the regulations actually benefit them. its beyond criminal IMO.
rickrock305
03-08-10, 23:58
Free market econmomy is without economic intervention and regulation by government except to regulate against force or fraud.
i think what Goldman does could definitely be considered fraud.
VooDoo6Actual
03-09-10, 00:06
Goldman Sach's gross mismanagement, over leveraging of assets coupled with AAA+ rating (and not having the resources to properly cover the exposure) along w/ the deliberate criminal debacle of tranches, default/credit swaps etc. is beyond venality.
To add to the intellectual insult, to then attemp by obfuscating simple facts into complicated convoluted explanations such as it's too complicated and the average person would not understand.... reeks of HUBRIS and guilt.
Sorry, this one is on a nerve & we collectively got played on this one.
but that's just me...;)
Ridge_Runner_5
03-09-10, 02:01
http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b100/89Sunbird/stupid/9d539e26.gif
http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b100/89Sunbird/stupid/rage.jpg
I think some of the Greedy bastards at G.S. should have went to jail, but did not because they made large politcal contributions. :eek:
ForTehNguyen
03-09-10, 09:38
I think some of the Greedy bastards at G.S. should have went to jail, but did not because they made large politcal contributions. :eek:
not only that former GS alumni and execs are in high influential govt positions
uhh, not really. They would not have been able to engineer their scams where they knew the govt would back the failing companies so they could press them for payment. Read the articles.
???????
Believe it or not I do understand what went on in this situation and a complete lack of regulation would in NO WAY be the solution to prevent future Goldmam Sachs problems from happening.
A good friend of mine, and an immigrant from Uruguay was talking with me when this all went down, and before the bail out happened. He explained to me exactly what GS was doing, and related it to similar situations in the history of South America (for example the 2001 financial collapse of Argentina). It is not a new scheme, but to think that an un-regulated system is the solution is as naive as thinking that a simple bail out will help these assholes see the light and bring them back into the fold.
folks need to wake up and realize the whole republican/democrat thing is nothing more than a distraction.
I knew if you stuck around long enough you'd say something not dumb. :p
Marx said "Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people."
Ironically it should have been "politics" not "religion".
Outlander Systems
03-09-10, 10:07
I knew if you stuck around long enough you'd say something not dumb. :p
Marx said "Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people."
Ironically it should have been "politics" not "religion".
This. I die a little inside when I see these political pep rallies with people crying and swooning over some shill.
Republican, Democrat...the more things change, the more they stay the same.
In my lifetime, I've seen no demonstrable difference between the two.
Hamburger/Cheeseburger. Same thing, just dressed up a little different.
Believe it or not I do understand what went on in this situation and a complete lack of regulation would in NO WAY be the solution to prevent future Goldmam Sachs problems from happening.
A good friend of mine, and an immigrant from Uruguay was talking with me when this all went down, and before the bail out happened. He explained to me exactly what GS was doing, and related it to similar situations in the history of South America (for example the 2001 financial collapse of Argentina). It is not a new scheme, but to think that an un-regulated system is the solution is as naive as thinking that a simple bail out will help these assholes see the light and bring them back into the fold.
Lets make sure we aren't arguing over two different things.
There's a difference between regulations and oversight.
Regulations are government control over the free market, oversight is the prevention of illegal and malicious behavior.
Outlander Systems
03-09-10, 10:10
Lets make sure we aren't arguing over two different things.
There's a difference between regulations and oversight.
Regulations are government control over the free market, oversight is the prevention of illegal and malicious behavior.
Oversight is a nice way of saying, we'll turn a blind eye, since we're in your back pocket.
Not trying to be a dick, just playing Devil's Advovate...
;)
To add insult to injury, the free-market system, in regards to the grand scheme of Economics, officially died in 1913.
thopkins22
03-09-10, 10:22
A good friend of mine, and an immigrant from Uruguay was talking with me when this all went down, and before the bail out happened. He explained to me exactly what GS was doing, and related it to similar situations in the history of South America (for example the 2001 financial collapse of Argentina). It is not a new scheme, but to think that an un-regulated system is the solution is as naive as thinking that a simple bail out will help these assholes see the light and bring them back into the fold.
If every company that was heavily involved in "what was going down" was allowed to go bankrupt, how long do you think it would have been before another board of directors would have allowed that crap to happen again?
Furthermore, without massive cash injections from the federal government(particularly since 2001,) how would they have been able to blow it up that big at all?
You understand the crisis as the media has explained it...that doesn't mean you understand it.
Ironically it should have been "politics" not "religion".
or both.
If every company that was heavily involved in "what was going down" was allowed to go bankrupt, how long do you think it would have been before another board of directors would have allowed that crap to happen again?
Furthermore, without massive cash injections from the federal government(particularly since 2001,) how would they have been able to blow it up that big at all?
You understand the crisis as the media has explained it...that doesn't mean you understand it.
I understand the crisis as it was explained to me your right, but why do you automatically assume that it is from the media. Did you read what I wrote, or just jump to conclusions because we have disagreed in the past?
thopkins22
03-09-10, 10:45
I understand the crisis as it was explained to me your right, but why do you automatically assume that it is from the media. Did you read what I wrote, or just jump to conclusions because we have disagreed in the past?
I read what you wrote, in fact I quoted you. I understand what you said, and most Americans probably agree with you. But I also believe it to be wrong.
ETA: I read where your explanation came from...I'm just saying that it's pretty much the same explanation we hear on CNN.
or both.
I think he was right in his time, but I don't think it's both today, and frankly religion is largely just a way of playing politics today anyway. it's not about the big bad monster in the sky judging you, it's about all the little monsters in the pews next to you on Sunday judging you when you vote for a pro-choice candidate or otherwise break ranks.
Religion, in the context of the quote, has become a subset of politics.
rickrock305
03-09-10, 11:16
I knew if you stuck around long enough you'd say something not dumb. :p
Marx said "Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people."
Ironically it should have been "politics" not "religion".
hey, i've been saying it for a while. both parties are the problem.
Believe it or not I do understand what went on in this situation and a complete lack of regulation would in NO WAY be the solution to prevent future Goldmam Sachs problems from happening.
A good friend of mine, and an immigrant from Uruguay was talking with me when this all went down, and before the bail out happened. He explained to me exactly what GS was doing, and related it to similar situations in the history of South America (for example the 2001 financial collapse of Argentina). It is not a new scheme, but to think that an un-regulated system is the solution is as naive as thinking that a simple bail out will help these assholes see the light and bring them back into the fold.
Well, they might behave differently if they knew the counter parties they were screwing would not be backed up by the govt and that they would get paid anyway. Risk of major losses and bankruptcy might help calm down their scheming...
FromMyColdDeadHand
03-09-10, 12:48
hey, i've been saying it for a while. both parties are the problem.
I really don't care about this party or that party, the real problem is that we let them write trillion dollar ($1,000,000,000,000.00) checks. We let them bribe each other with our money, and tell us what we can do with what we have left. Add in a Federal juducial system that is kept semi-sane by 4 guys and a flip-flopper. I'd elect Karl Marx President and have the PRC's National People's Congress fill in for our Congress if we gave them a Visa card with a $20 limit and SCOTUS made up of eight cloned Scalias and one Ginsburg (I love to see her get all hacked off when the constitution gets upheld).
As for GS, and Wall Street in general, I'd take the top 20% of wage earners and ban them from working in the financial industry for life. Someone has to dig ditches. Even if they didn't have direct knowledge of what was going on, they should have kept their firms out of it or quit. I bet if we did that, the next time companies would reign themselves in better. If Bob in goofy-trades-of-the-month is going to get me booted, I sure as heck am going to make sure he is square up on stuff.
thopkins22
03-09-10, 14:21
As for GS, and Wall Street in general, I'd take the top 20% of wage earners and ban them from working in the financial industry for life. Someone has to dig ditches. Even if they didn't have direct knowledge of what was going on, they should have kept their firms out of it or quit. I bet if we did that, the next time companies would reign themselves in better. If Bob in goofy-trades-of-the-month is going to get me booted, I sure as heck am going to make sure he is square up on stuff.
This is essentially what would have happened if we had let them go bankrupt. "Oh you were XYZ that destroyed your company? Yeah I'm not sure if we have a position for you...."
Regulations will not do diddly squat. They will serve to further enlarge the current batch of "too big to fail" companies, while squashing their competition. Never mind it requires me to believe that people in the government are smart enough to catch(or care about) the ways some of the smartest people in the world can massage numbers. Remember, everything about what Enron was doing was illegal at the time, not one law that has passed since then was required to prosecute them.
FromMyColdDeadHand
03-09-10, 14:36
When did falling on your sword go out of favor. Eviscerate yourself with your Mont Blanc pen or poison yourself with Hemlock Starbucks, I don't care.
"But we need the bonuses for our 'talent'!" Talent? Porn stars have talent, you wing-tipped ass-monkeys couldn't quant your way in a real business.
Not that I've thought about it, or have strong feelings one way or the other.
CharlieKilo
03-09-10, 14:53
Here is a ton of info on Goldman Sachs.
GS happens to be a very out in the open example of how corrupt the system is.
Goldman Sachs profits by trading ahead of and against its own clients (http://freedomforthepeople.wordpress.com/2010/01/13/goldman-sachs-profits-by-trading-ahead-of-and-against-its-own-clients/)
The secret history of TARP: How Goldman bailed out Goldman… (http://freedomforthepeople.wordpress.com/2009/08/27/the-secret-history-of-tarp-how-goldman-bailed-out-goldman%E2%80%A6/)
How Goldman Sachs Scammed The United States, And Made Billions (http://freedomforthepeople.wordpress.com/2009/11/04/how-goldman-sachs-scammed-the-united-states-and-made-billions/)
Everyone of these guys should have been out on their a$$e$ when their company failed. Then they should have been audited by the IRS. Instead, both Republican and Democratic administrations bailed out, aka rewarded, them for robbing US (and U.S.) I think the whole bunch of them should be lined up and shot as traitors and thieves.....not that I have strong feelings or anything
I think he was right in his time, but I don't think it's both today, and frankly religion is largely just a way of playing politics today anyway. it's not about the big bad monster in the sky judging you, it's about all the little monsters in the pews next to you on Sunday judging you when you vote for a pro-choice candidate or otherwise break ranks.
Religion, in the context of the quote, has become a subset of politics.
That is an awesome way of looking at it, and I agree with you 100%. This is the best statement I have read on this board in weeks. Thanks Rob.
Everyone of these guys should have been out on their a$$e$ when their company failed. Then they should have been audited by the IRS. Instead, both Republican and Democratic administrations bailed out, aka rewarded, them for robbing US (and U.S.) I think the whole bunch of them should be lined up and shot as traitors and thieves.....not that I have strong feelings or anything
Lots of good comments, especially agree with Rider.
It seems that the more regulation there is the more corruption that occurs. Look at countries with exceedingly corrupt police or customs and you will usually find tons of strict regulations with heavy fines. More regulation is likely to result in even more corruption.
No business, city or state should be bailed out with taxpayer money or Federal Reserve "quantitative easing" (electronic printing press = hidden tax on everyone).
rickrock305
03-09-10, 17:23
It seems that the more regulation there is the more corruption that occurs. Look at countries with exceedingly corrupt police or customs and you will usually find tons of strict regulations with heavy fines. More regulation is likely to result in even more corruption.
This is true, and I think a great deal of the blame lies with lobbyists and politicians, not with the actual act of regulation. The problem is they game the system for their cronies through regulation that includes loopholes. If the regulation was actually fair we wouldn't have a great deal of these problems.
We do need regulation, the only problem is the people in charge of it are either idiots or intentionally creating loopholes for their cronies.
Bush was forced to bail them out once his lack of oversight resulted in this problem. His embrace of free market ideals came back and forced him to respond with an over extended government response.
You'll have to eventually find a different boogey man. The genesis for the 'mess' predates Bush by most of a decade, and in fact is directly related to government 'meddling'.
Belmont31R
03-09-10, 18:16
Lots of ex-GS execs in the gov, and GS is basically backed by OUR government to keep doing what they are.
Recipe for failure but it makes a few people rich I guess. When you are dealing with the type of cash they do they have bought lots of influence over the years, and greased a lot of palms.
Bottom line is these people do not get the positions they do without a lot of sleazy shit. Its a BAD BAD BAD combo when our gov is in bed with them, and vice versa. Paulson, Geither, and all these types.
Better regulation is sorely needed - and this comes from a die-hard free marketer here.
Glass-Stegel prevented this kind of systemic collapse for 65 years, and then within 10 years of its repeal, look what happened.
All they have to do is mandate reserve requirements like commercial banks. No more than 10:1 leverage, and you MUST invest in your own "innovations" so that you have the same exposure as your customers. Proprietary trading is a problem, but this would probably take care of that as well - at least reduce the risk to manageable levels.
The reality is that all of Wall Street has been playing this game since the S&L bailout 20 years ago. They knew that one way or another the Government would bail out anyone that was going to stiff depositors and to a lesser extent bond-holders. Since so many public retirement funds own so much bond debt, there is an even stronger incentive for bailouts.
They knew this so they over-leveraged and placed bigger and bigger bets on higher and higher risk and reaped the benefits with lavish "performance bonuses". When the government didn't bail out Lehman Brothers, everyone panicked because their assumption was no longer valid. This was the right thing for the government to do, but it started such an avalanche that the rest of the bailouts became necessary. Or at least the risk of not bailing them out was greater than the risk of unintended consequences from the bailouts.
One of the most significantly overlooked crimes here has been perpetrated against the shareholders of GS. They own the company, not the managers or board of directors. The profits belong to THEM, not to the bankers.
Yet the shareholders allowed a complicit (read: incompetent) board to let the bankers run the place like an old partnership. In a true partnership the profits are divided among the partners. That's how Wall Street used to be before the deregulation of the late 90's. But then GS and other investment banks went public and insiders made great fortunes from the IPO's. The massive influx of capital allowed them to make much bigger bets and reap much bigger profits than they could as a partnership.
But all the while, the managers kept rewarding themselves instead of re-investing the capital in the business, or paying the shareholders the dividends they deserved. All of their "innovations" provided a decade of lavish compensation, yet the end result was that they had created nothing. An entire decade of market appreciation is gone - it was all a house of cards. But in the end, they still got their bonuses even after failing miserably at their jobs. The taxpayers bail the system out, but the bankers get to keep all that money they "earned" by committing a fraud unlike any ever seen.
Free market capitalism only works when you don't have an oligarchy running the show in partnership with a complicit corrupt government.
This is Enron-level stuff. Yet no one is being investigated, no one is being indicted, and no perps are being walked into Federal Court. For all the criticisms of Bush's ties to Ken Lay, he didn't get in the way of the prosecution. Can't say that about Obama and his lackeys.
rickrock305
03-09-10, 22:39
Better regulation is sorely needed - and this comes from a die-hard free marketer here.
yes, but the right kind of regulation. and its obvious our incompetent and/or complicit government is not capable of doing so.
yes, but the right kind of regulation. and its obvious our incompetent and/or complicit government is not capable of doing so.
All they have to do is listen to Paul Volcker. He rescued us from Carter's mess and would do it again if they let him. His whole position is that the "too big to fail" concept must end. Obama's other stooges have marginalized him and he's being thrown under the bus because Wall Street doesn't like what he's saying. And the other stooges are also Wall Street stooges.
Make no mistake, Obama would not have been elected without the support of big money on Wall Street. They took a gamble on him because he looked better to them than McCain. After getting caught in the S&L scandal years ago, McCain wasn't likely to make the same mistake again and he would have proven too difficult to control, and too unpredictable.
But now they realize the mistake and will pull their support and funding if Obama doesn't fall in. Notice how he is diverting attention with a year of health care BS. And the justice department is spending it's time arguing about detainees and 9/11 trials and not investigating Wall Street.
It's all a big diversion. But it's also pretty "transparent" if you are paying attention. He said his administration would be transparent, and I can see right through them.
Government regulation just lets the crooks know who they need to bribe.
"Regulation" gives the industry a thin veneer of fairness, just enough to sucker in the rubes.
I would like to throw the CEO, CFO, Pres and about 3-4 Sr. VP's in jail for about 18 mths to make an example out of them. Then maybe next time the guys a little further down Wall St. want to do something similar to what G.S. did, they may think twice.
Bear in mind that many of these guys on Wall Street and on the Regulatory side went to College together, same fraternity, same Country club, etc. Many of these guys live in Greenwich. This according to a relative who was a top level Exec at Bear Sterns, who only just recently found another job. And yes, he too lives in Greenwhich.
not only that former GS alumni and execs are in high influential govt positions
Yes and the fish in the pond all know each other. :eek:
VooDoo6Actual
03-10-10, 12:20
Hence the term "Thick as thieves"...;)
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.