Goldman will earn 700 bln $ next year?

Discussion in 'Economics' started by kashirin, Sep 20, 2008.

  1. So the biggest corruption in the history

    Goldman exclusively buying toxic debt from ineligible foreign companies and sell to the government 10 times higher

    million times better than creating those CDOs

    And I bet in the next years Goldman will make more than US gets in taxes

  2. The Bush govt. has perpetuated the biggest banking heist in history of man-kind.
  3. He followed his agenda to a "tee".

    This is what the American public voted for ... this is what they wanted.

    Don't believe me?

    Just start a poll on this website ... the participants will tell you the tale.
  4. Sec. 8. Review.

    Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.

    Does that scare anyone here?
  5. not sure if it can be legal
    court can review anything - that's why we have court

    although those crooks did enough to be executed and not a single court reviewd anything

    is it possible to start class action against government for market manipulation, for example

    clearly a lot of shorts lost a lot of money and clearly it was manipulation which is against laws
    or government excluded?
    or manipulation toincrease prices is legal?
  6. Folks.. We all have claims under RICO.

    You can file suit in State or Federal Court and name each person individually. There is no immunity or indemnity for government officials that step outside or act beyond their actual scope of authority.

    Count I
    Bankruptcy or securities fraud;

    Count II
    Money laundering and related offenses;

    Count III
    Theft and Robbery.....

    Count MLXCIII .... Bribery, Manipulation Etc..

    Under RICO, a person who is a member of an enterprise that has committed any two of 35 crimes—27 federal crimes and 8 state crimes—within a 10-year period can be charged with racketeering. Those found guilty of racketeering can be fined up to $25,000 and/or sentenced to 20 years in prison per racketeering count. In addition, the racketeer must forfeit all ill-gotten gains and interest in any business gained through a pattern of "racketeering activity." RICO also permits a private individual harmed by the actions of such an enterprise to file a civil suit; if successful, the individual can collect treble damages.

    There is also a provision for private parties to sue. A "person damaged in his business or property" can sue one or more "racketeers." The plaintiff must prove the existence of a "criminal enterprise." The defendant(s) are not the enterprise; in other words, the defendant(s) and the enterprise are not one and the same. There must be one of four specified relationships between the defendant(s) and the enterprise. A civil RICO action, like many lawsuits based on federal law, can be filed in state or federal court. [1]

    Both the federal and civil components allow for the recovery of treble damages (damages in triple the amount of actual/compensatory damages).

    RICO offenses
    Under the law, racketeering activity means:

    Any violation of state statutes against gambling, murder, kidnapping, arson, robbery, bribery, extortion, dealing in obscene matter, or dealing in a controlled substance or listed chemical (as defined in the Controlled Substances Act);
    Any act of bribery, counterfeiting, theft, embezzlement, fraud, dealing in obscene matter, obstruction of justice, slavery, racketeering, gambling, money laundering, commission of murder-for-hire, and several other offenses covered under the Federal criminal code (Title 18);
    Embezzlement of union funds;
    Bankruptcy or securities fraud;
    Drug trafficking;
    Money laundering and related offenses;
    Bringing in, aiding or assisting aliens in illegally entering the country (if the action was for financial gain);
    Acts of terrorism.

    Pattern of racketeering activity requires at least two acts of racketeering activity, one of which occurred after the effective date of this chapter and the last of which occurred within ten years (excluding any period of imprisonment) after the commission of a prior act of racketeering activity. The U.S. Supreme Court has instructed federal courts to follow the continuity plus relationship test in order to determine whether the facts of a specific case give rise to an established pattern. Predicate acts are related if they "have the same or similar purposes, results, participants, victims, or methods of commission, or otherwise are interrelated by distinguishing characteristics and are not isolated events." H.J. Inc. v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. Continuity is both a closed and open ended concept, referring to either a closed period of conduct, or to past conduct that by its nature projects into the future with a threat of repetition

    Michael Milken
    On March 29, 1989, financier Michael Milken was indicted on 98 counts of racketeering and fraud relating to an investigation into insider trading and other offenses. Milken was accused of using a wide-ranging network of contacts to manipulate stock and bond prices. It was one of the first occasions that a RICO indictment was brought against an individual with no ties to organized crime. Milken pled guilty to six lesser offenses rather than face spending the rest of his life in prison.

    On September 7, 1988, Milken's employer, Drexel Burnham Lambert, was also threatened with a RICO indictment under the legal doctrine that corporations are responsible for their employees' crimes. Drexel avoided RICO charges by pleading guilty to lesser felonies; a RICO indictment would have almost certainly put Drexel out of business since its capital would have been tied up in its defense,[2] and banks will not extend credit to securities firms under RICO indictments.

    Worse case scenario if enough people sue these pinheads will be bankrupted defending themselves...
  7. Privatize gains, socialize losses. It's the American-way.
  8. Hah!

    Look at Spitzer and AIG's Greenberg. It will never happen. You can't hold them responsible, because you can't prove anything to the technicalities of today's judicial system and laws... they will drag out forever.

    You gotta get them on something that is easier to prove - that is always the case for financial court cases.

    And the Neoconservative and associated "elites" way of "shaping the flow of profits" is by systemic non-transparent markets where the bias is AGAINST the numerous smaller participants... a big RIP-OFF machine.
  9. they are experts at creating/printing money.

    they know how to do that better than anyone

    Im long the stock, looking for $200.
  10. It's basically financial dictatorship. Would this pass the Supreme Court?

    In the UK several hedge funds are suing the regulator for banning short sales.
    #10     Sep 21, 2008