Hello, I do not disagree with you in what you are saying. Here is probably where so much of the confusion, and IMHO where a hornets nest of conflicts arise: Goldman Sachs simply has its paws in too many businesses under one roof leading to confusion on the clients part and abuse on the GS employees part. People still think of GS as the GS of the late 90s, where their job was mostly IB and to aid their clients. It has since then become a multitude of things, but we still believe this is the same old GS. Hence there is a disconnect with the name and the perception of what we think this firm stands for. And there is the rub. "GS" (the people that work in different capacity there) abused GS good name [that was made during the 100 years or so this firm has been in business before it also became the firm it is now after Glass-Steagal], with the clandestine intent to deceive customers that still thought they were dealing with the old GS - the one that had it's clients interest at heart. While this is not a crime because the legalese was probably spelled out very clearly, it is extremely unethical, and the reputation of the entire firm has suffered, rightly or wrongly. What GS should to do is to spin off the different parts of it's businesses imo, either voluntarily or by force. The name Goldman Sachs should never mean, "I am trading against you my client, you fool". It should stand for, "I will help you bring your ideas to the capital markets", the way it did Ford 100 years ago. Corporations have gotten waaay too big, and are closer to psychopathic thugs now than friends of service, employment and needs.
I strongly recommend people watch this documentary/movie: http://www.thecorporation.com/index.cfm?page_id=312
"Goldman Accused of Thwarting Financial Crisis Panel" http://www.cnbc.com/id/37553237 "Goldman Sachs Stung by Backlash in China" http://www.cnbc.com/id/37548164 They must be scratching their heads wondering "You know, I think the US government may not be for sale anymore." I read the New Yorker magazine religiously for the witty cartoons. Why don't I see any GS cartoons?
"UPDATE 2-BofA's Countrywide settles with FTC for $108 mln" http://www.cnbc.com/id/37556820 And this is just the cream. It is not even close to being the coffee. Americans want the good life. Nothing wrong with that, but when hard work means, "let's see how hard we can work our citizens out of their money by lying cheating and stealing..." Total and complete collapse of an ethical society on a mass scale.
There are so many pieces to Gs unethical behavior it is daunting! Lets not forget, they had to turn all their finacial records over to the government to begin with back when they became a Bank right? Did the fed just look the other way and not ask for all these security firms records in 2008 when they desperatly needed money and the only way to get fed money was to become a bank? The federal government is holding records and not sharing them which is common but what is wild is that people are still defending GS.
"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Wall Street is making a last stand against regulatory reform in behind-the-scenes meetings in Congress, where lobbyists hope to use high-stakes horse trading to blunt provisions that could cost the industry billions of dollars...." http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Wall-...l?x=0&.v=1&sec=topStories&pos=6&asset=&ccode= Is Washington still for sale? Please, let it be no.
You are joking, no? You know, as well as I, they'll never quit. Someone told me once one of "them" were passing out money. Not lobbying, but "passing out money". they know it, I know it, no one cares.