Goldman Sach s are criminals and theives.

Discussion in 'Wall St. News' started by brokenmarkets, Jan 16, 2011.

  1. A lot of people that wax poetic on this topic claim "unfair advantage" yet fail to realize that's what capitalism is: competitive advantage. A bank with a trillion dollar balance sheet should be able to get money at a different rate compared to a single tax payer; I'm sorry for anyone that feels different as they are ignorant.

    Want to get cheap money? Buy a bank charter. It's not hard and I know of several businessmen I've worked with over the years that have acquired them to create financing entities.
     
    #11     Jan 16, 2011
  2. "wrong" was the wrong word - i should have said "off base". Either way I think the premise of the post was mis-informed.
     
    #12     Jan 16, 2011
  3. Something we can agree on: Bernanke is absolutely the right man, at the right time, for this job. Bernanke is a finance geek that's mildly anti-social and comes from a small town, more so, as mild-manered as he is, he doesn't have a tolerance for bullshit. One of the best things I've seen in the past few years is when Bernanke is called to testify in front of those meat-bags on the hill. It's comedy gold.
     
    #13     Jan 16, 2011
  4. I'm absolutely thrilled, but what happened? It used to be me and stock 777. All of the sudden, everyone is awake. I was crucified for years here, and I'm sure it was from guys raking in the pot.

    I don't post much anymore on OSTK, but Byrne never quit. He got to Gradient, Rocker, and now:

    http://www.benzinga.com/life/politi...claim-to-goldman-sachsmerrill-lynch-suit-ostk

    Redacted docs are there. It looks like TASR made a score in discovery, and when discovery is won, it is public. So OSTK could subpoena TASR and get the info. There's another company involved, but it's redacted out.

    Of course, if they win civil RICO, criminal has to come in. You get a RICO conviction, you're done. No charter. Nada. A high gov official told me no way anyone lets that happen. Other guys I respect say it's so bad, they have to prosecute. It's going to be interesting as hell. But the change of attitude here is remarkable.

    I do believe the powers that be are rather flustered. It 's pretty obvious, as we struggle for jobs, that Wall st. had no problem destroying thousands of them if it suited them. They'll be a big price for that. And it's not all money.
     
    #14     Jan 16, 2011
  5. Correct... Only question is whether there's a point at which this striving for competitive advantage actually becomes detrimental to the interests of society at large. A good traditional example of this is the monopoly deadweight loss, a subject that's been beaten to death by economists.
     
    #15     Jan 17, 2011
  6. Visaria

    Visaria

    You're wrong about this (not that means you're right about anything else!). Both my trader friends at GS (one in NY and other other in London) are quitting this year precisely because of the implementation of the Volcker rule. They don't want to, but they have no choice. Traders I know at other banks have either already quit or will quit this year.
     
    #16     Jan 17, 2011
  7. I've been thinking about some related topics a lot lately and am coming to the conclusion that CA is important and is where a lot of our economy's jobs come from. Only because there is a tiered system - multiple hands - can the economy support population growth and fluidity the way it does. Only because, for example, a large entity gets better pricing power compared to a small one can all the "middlemen" jobs and arb opportunities be created. Occasionally you'll see companies taking too much of that equity ladder, instead of it being spread to multiple entities, which is when regulation comes in and forces capital spread.(separate entities, 3rd-parties, independent auditing, etc.)
     
    #17     Jan 17, 2011