Goldman Sachs- Our congress just doesnt get it

You need to get out of theoretical land and start looking at the hard cold facts of that case, Jar.

Goldman set out to fuck its own clients, sport.

That's obvious.

That is strictly your opinon and the opinion of many.

Now logic: They screw their clients, they lose their clients.

Without clients they go out of business......sport.

Uh this whole thread is based on only YOUR opinion that "our law makers are so clueless as to how business works" when they seem to understand it quite well. However, that is only my opinion. LOL

Your "logic" has no bearing on whether or not they screwed their clients or not. You seem to be wishing to attack congress while not debating the underlying argument about what goldmann did. Is attacking congress all that you are interested in doing?

Nooo.....The Democratic leadership wants us to believe that they were unaware of all of this up to this point...this week....the week they're trying to pass their shit legislation that supposedly deals with the situation. Personally they're wasting everyone's time with this dog and pony show.
 
After reading several pages of this thread it appears that it is nothing mroe than a tool for trolling.

An opinion based argument is presented

Little to no proof of said argument is presented

then in response to anyone who doubts the opinions presented in this thread the author and a few others gang up and engage in avoidance of questions asked and personal attacks in lieu of a real argument.
 
That is strictly your opinon and the opinion of many.

Now logic: They screw their clients, they lose their clients.

Without clients they go out of business......sport.

Uh this whole thread is based on only YOUR opinion that "our law makers are so clueless as to how business works" when they seem to understand it quite well. However, that is only my opinion. LOL

Your "logic" has no bearing on whether or not they screwed their clients or not. You seem to be wishing to attack congress while not debating the underlying argument about what goldmann did. Is attacking congress all that you are interested in doing?

Nooo.....The Democratic leadership wants us to believe that they were unaware of all of this up to this point...this week....the week they're trying to pass their shit legislation that supposedly deals with the situation. Personally they're wasting everyone's time with this dog and pony show.

Really.. The "democratic congress" burried a lot of bad debt in a little responsible mortgage product, sliced it up into derivatives, got the bonds rated AAA, Sold these new financial instruments constructed so they could never be traced as to thier origins. Knew they would fail and hedged in that direction AND sold so much of the crap that they knew the government would have to step in even as they were winning bets to that effect?

How fucking dumb do you think I and my fellow countrymen are? You and your fucking slimy sabatours should be dragged out of your offices and beaten to bloody puddles and taken to your homes and dropped on your front porches in clear garbage bags so your families can see what happens to scum lke you and what you did to pay for thier nice houses and fancy toys.
 
Congress is bent out of shape over the "conflict in interest" as it pertains to Goldman Sachs and its service to it's client base. "You make money even if your client loses money" was the premise many used during their "15 minutes of fame" speeches. "That is a conflict of interest and must put you in a position to decide to poorly advise if your profit is larger than if you properly advise" was the unfounded conclusion many of them wanted us, the people to deduce from their premise.

There is a basic fundamental philosophy used in a free market economy; and nearly all businesses follow it. The ones that dont, usually go out of business in a short period of time. And this philosophy is why a conflict of interest is a faulty premise. To summarize this philosophy:

"whereas I may be able to make more money by offering less quality, my goal is to retain and increase my customer base over a period of time so I should do my best to ensure customer satisfaction"

For example, Burger King can maximize profits by using some additive in place of 25% of the beef. They dont becuase they would lose their client base.

I dont know what is more disturbing. The fact that our law makers are so clueless as to how business works or the fact that over half the country votes them in.


You need to get out of theoretical land and start looking at the hard cold facts of that case, Jar.

Goldman set out to fuck its own clients, sport.

That's obvious.


Democrats fuck their clients (the taxpayers) and deem it a virtue ! ....:eusa_whistle:
 
Something else that is being missed is that controlling risk in their business is critical to survival. Taking positions opposite to your primary position is an effective way of doing this. To oversimplify, you may own a substantial amount of securities in some sector of a market. But since you have no way of really knowing where the market is going, you do some short selling to reduce risk. Then it the market goes against you, you lose money on what you own but make money on your short. It's perfectly reasonable that if a trader made money on a short he would celebrate his trade and send out emails such as we have seen. If Goldman's was convinced that the market was in trouble and they sold the market short and did not disclose their position to customers, their action is unethical and possibly illegal.


Congress and in general the American public have always taken a dim view of shorting the market. Take for example the quote, "Don't sell American Short." Taking positions where you make money when the market falls is a usefully way to reduce risk and buffer a falling market.

Regulation is badly needed. We should require that derivatives be publicly traded. But the dog and pony show that the Senate is putting on is all show for folks back home.
 
Last edited:
After reading several pages of this thread it appears that it is nothing mroe than a tool for trolling.

An opinion based argument is presented

Little to no proof of said argument is presented

then in response to anyone who doubts the opinions presented in this thread the author and a few others gang up and engage in avoidance of questions asked and personal attacks in lieu of a real argument.


Case in point:


Democrats fuck their clients (the taxpayers) and deem it a virtue ! ....:eusa_whistle:
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top