var json_comments = new Array("
\"user-pic\"
vastrightwing
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate | Flag for review

That's nothing. Do a google search on Goldman sachs bubble.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Chris Walters
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Related:
Inside The Great American Bubble Machine
Matt Taibbi on how Goldman Sachs has engineered every major market manipulation since the Great Depression

I do not vouch for the article as I *still* haven't read all of it. I've had it saved to read for months now.

Reply
6 replies
\"user-pic\"
Mecharine
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Chris Walters: I had a colleague who works in the financial industry tell me that the rolling stone article was whitewashed. Much of what was written wasn't actually researched and seems to be based on hearsay and conjecture.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Trai_Dep
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Mecharine: Hearsay speculation. If you have specific points to refute rather than FOAF rumor-mongering, I'd like to hear them.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
u1itn0w2day
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Chris Walters: I read it . A long but outstanding read . Taibbi explains and talks about things like a normal person would talk about the subject . He gives examples you can understand .


Some highlights include Goldman basically had the first mutual fund but repackaged the same one around 3 times - rather Ponziskimish . Helped the 1929 crash along . In recent history they helped manipulate the energy and commodities markets with super high speed software .


It also noted how many ex Goldmansachs executives are in government regulating their industry and products .


And they did indeed play , package & resell bets on the housing bubble .


It's a long but understandable read .

Reply
\"user-pic\"
bmorg003
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@u1itn0w2day: I read it and loved it as well. Taibbi is great, and he got a lot of help for the article from Tyler Durden of Zero Hedge ([www.zerohedge.com]). I had not heard of the website before Taibbi's piece, but I am now a loyal visitor every day. Lots of great information that everyone should know.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Eyebrows McGee (now with more baby!)
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Chris Walters: Me too, I keep getting partway through and then getting distracted.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
holytrainwreck
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

That's why I call them Goldman Sucks.

Reply
1 replies
","
\"user-pic\"
DirectMailFan
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

There are-unfortunately-plenty of people in the GW Bush administration, as well as Obama's, that used to work at Goldman Sachs.


Then, there's the current governor of New Jersey, who led Goldman during the last great bubble in the 90s.


Sigh.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Esquire99
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

This \"investigation\" was done by a newspaper, not any sort of governmental agency.

Reply
5 replies
\"user-pic\"
Nakko
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Esquire99: \"Newspapers\" do \"investigations\" practically \"all the time\" as part of their \"job\".

Reply
\"user-pic\"
rushevents
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Nakko: Oh yeah those same newspapers that ignored Acorn for years, spiked the story about John Edwards and got scooped by the national enquirer for Pete's sake!

Yeah they do really well at those \"investigations\" they do.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
dragonfire81
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Nakko: Yeah like uh...I don't know...Watergate.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Esquire99
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Nakko:
I didn't mean the comment to discredit the investigation, but I feel like it is still an important fact that wasn't clearly disclosed in the article. In hindsight, I can see how my use of quotes around investigation could have given the wrong impression.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Trai_Dep
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Esquire99: Wait. Don't you usually decry government efforts over private ones? Yet here you're doing the opposite?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Esquire99
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Trai_Dep:
I have no problems with government investigations into areas that they legislate. Clearly a Government investigation into Goldman's activities, especially if there is suspicion that they violated the law, would be within the government's power. I have a problem with the govt. telling Goldman how to run its business and how much to pay its employees, but if the Government (SEC, Congress, etc.) wants to look into possible illegal trading practices, more power to them.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
KyleOrton
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Esquire99: I wouldn't blame you even if you thought that being done by a newspaper was the same as by a Minister of Information. News outlets have failed tremendously in this area for far too long to be easily forgiven.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
dragonfire81
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@futuresuperbowlMVPJayCutler: I will certainly agree on this point. Media outlets are profit driven corporations now, more interested in selling blood and sex than doing actual investigative reporting.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Trai_Dep
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@dragonfire81: Good stories drive hits and sell papers as well as sensationalist junk. Seeking profit can be a public good sometimes. :)

Reply
\"user-pic\"
dragonfire81
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Trai_Dep: Now what would grab the average joe's attention more: A story on how Goldman Sachs may have screwed over the economy or yet another story about some exciting new tidbit about the death of Michael Jackson.

Hmmm...

Reply
\"user-pic\"
econobiker
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@dragonfire81: The masses of sheeple want to know what exciting new tidbit about the death of Michael Jackson that you are holding out?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
YOXIM
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@dragonfire81: You wouldn't happen to know where I can get some of this sex the media outlets seem to be selling? I've got a little money saved up and am feeling kinda horny. :D

Reply
\"user-pic\"
dragonfire81
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@YOXIM: Peruse the magazine rack near the checkout of your nearest wal-mart.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
FatLynn
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Well, it's a good thing those responsible will be made to pay for their....oh, wait. Never mind, nothing to see here. Carry on.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
ConsumerPop
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Pete Rose got banned from the baseball hall of fame for betting against his own team...what will Goldman Sahs get?

Reply
6 replies
\"user-pic\"
PencilSharp
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ConsumerPop: $12,000,000,000... wait, repaid... oops, there's the AIG exposure... $12,000,000,000...

And, of cuss, control of the Federal Reserve...

As for the rest of us (all together now):

...another day older,
and deeper in debt...

Reply
\"user-pic\"
segfault
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ConsumerPop:
Banned from the Wall Street Hall of Fame, perhaps?

This is old news, but just like Toyota's recent safety problems, it just hasn't been picked up by most of the mainstream media.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
el_dusto
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ConsumerPop: More money, when their irresponsible practices nearly destroy the global economy... again.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
dragonfire81
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ConsumerPop: A pat on the back from all the wealthy elites that benefited from their actions.

Reply
","","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Skankingmike
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

this isn't news. We all know the big time capitalists are blood sucking scum bags. It isn't until their old and had their fill that some of them become philanthropists. And then magically we all forget how horrible they were.

Andrew Carnegie rings a bell, that guy was a super dick.

Reply
5 replies
\"user-pic\"
bmorg003
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Skankingmike: I agree 100% about Carnegie, and many others. For those that don't know about the Homestead strike of 1892 and only know of Carnegie hall, here a little history for you: [www.bgsu.edu]

Unfortunately, the more things change, the more they stay the same. Goldman probably won't get a slap on the wrist, and the people in power will continue to be the same kind of pimps and whores that many of them have shown themselves to be, and it will be the rest of us that will have to make up for their lack of moral character...

Reply
\"user-pic\"
The Cynical Librarian
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Skankingmike: How do you get to Carnegie Hall? Be a super dick.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Skankingmike
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@The Cynical Librarian: I wouldn't be surprised if in a 100 years we all forget about this mess and there is private school's and public libraries dedicated to Goldman Sachs CEO's who donated billions for funding.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
econobiker
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Skankingmike: Today's CEO's do not donate for public libraries or anything that the \"smaller government\" for which they whine should be doing in the first place.


Today's CEOs ask for tax credits to keep a factory in a certain state or in the US at all...


They don't have to become philanthropists today when there are 200' yachts, and multiple homes globally to buy in their retirements to keep them busy...

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Skankingmike
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@econobiker: [www.gatesfoundation.org]

[money.cnn.com]

two of the world's richest men like those of old who were cut throat and \"evil\" are now super big time philanthropists.

it's the cycle of life and very catholic. (even if they aren't) DO evil things while young and repent on your death bed.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
StanTheManDean
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Skankingmike:


Vanderbilt


Stanford


Mellon


yea, yea the list goes on and on

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
bohemian
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

So will someone in the govt. do something? The media is proclaiming the whole financial mess to be in recovery. With CIT and 9 banks failing today, GM and Chrysler asking for more money and too many people out of work I'm just not seeing it.

There is way more going on inside these big banks nobody fully knows about yet. We could still see a sudden implosion.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
diasdiem
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Stock tip for today: Invest in companies that manufacture torches and pitchforks.

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
mac-phisto
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@diasdiem: doh! i concentrated my holdings in pine resin & chicken byproducts. i'm screwed, aren't i?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
DrLumen
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@mac-phisto:

I think you're safe. Got to have something to use after the swine are cornered with the pitchforks and torches.

Reminder to self, maybe invest in rails or bond futures for prisons!

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
Unsolicited Advice
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Until they prove that the two-tier treatment was a deliberate attempt to defraud investors, there is no grounds for a fraud investigation. If you can't prove that Goldman had a gap between client-recommendations and legitimate analysis (reference Henry Blodget), it's just a hedge. Hedging large inventory positions is legal, common, necessary, and encouraged.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Ronin-Democrat
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

end of story..... move along nothing to see here.

oh elliot spitzer, had your whoring ways not brought you down you could be campaigning on your past hard work.

Reply
4 replies
\"user-pic\"
Trai_Dep
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Ronin-Democrat: You mean, if the FBI hadn't curiously blown way out of proportion a minor lapse into a major national scandal, hounding Spitzer out of office just as he was beginning to target the subprime sector?
Yeah, wouldn't that have been nice?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Chris Walters
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Ronin-Democrat: Oh everyone else, had you not pinned morality on sex you'd have Spitzer in office.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
rosvicl
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Chris Walters: Sorry, but Spitzer couldn't really do the \"sex is private\" thing here: he made a chunk of his reputation by aggressively prosecuting prostitution cases, and publicizing that. If it's illegal for Joe Schmoe to hire a prostitute, it's illegal for Governor Spitzer.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
MostlyHarmless
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Chris Walters: *instant rimshot*.

I could not agree with that more. However, wasn't what he did kinda sorta illegal?

I dont care about peoples dicking around (Ensign, Clinton) but I find it un-cool when the said dicking around is illegal or adversely affects other people (Sanford, Tyrol).

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Skankingmike
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@MostlyHarmless: Even when NJ thinks it can get away from Corruption they find ways to include us :P It was egg on NY face that smeared down onto NJ for prostitution.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
YOXIM
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@MostlyHarmless: The main reason why what Spitzer did was illegal is because like Chris Walters said, we pin morality to sex. Prostitution in and of itself is a victimless crime.

However, since it is illegal, and there is still a demand for it, it's basically turned into an underground slave trade. We have made ti so that prostitution = evil is a self-fulfilling prophecy.

The women are victims and are subjected to absolutely deplorable things, but if they do, they speak up, they go to jail, so they keep quiet. Once we have gotten over ourselves and our fear of our own sexuality, we can start doing something to help these poor individuals.

Anywaaaaaaay, back no topic. Goldman Sachs sucks. A lot of people like to point the finger at AIG as the main culprit of the economic ass-plosion, but they're really just a scapegoat. Granted, it was stupid of them to insure all the crap they insured. Even a casual investigation would have revealed those assets to be toxic, but Goldman Sachs are the ones that really made out like thieves. They got all their money back.

All the money AIG got from the government pretty much went towards paying for everyone else's losses. Again, not saying AIG isn't at fault here, but I think the lion's share of the fault lies with Goldman. THAT is who should have received the Cousumerist's coveted WCIA award.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
MostlyHarmless
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@YOXIM: My question was not whether or not prostitution should be illegal or whether the current laws made sense or not.

My question was whether or not - under the current laws - did Spitzer do anything illegal.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Trai_Dep
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@MostlyHarmless: My recollection was his crime was to use escort services which tried to list the credit card charges under innocuous terms, which the FBI stumbled upon using statutes designed to catch terrorists engaging in the Global War On Terror™. From these transactions, they charged him with some kind of fraud and/or RICO and/or Conspiracy.
A stretch in every sense of the word, for a victimless crime, by an agency headed by a Republican that benefited by kneecapping a viable Dem officeholder with credible potential for running for the President.
Who also angered well-placed Wall Street executives upset that Spitzer was raining on the Sub-Prime Luau a few years before it combusted to eviscerate the global economy (which, had he done so, would have saved untold trillions of dollars since the worst of the Sub-Prime excesses happened in the last two years).

Yup. Sleeping with call girls: EVIL!

Reply
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
uncle_fluffy
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

This plays into my personal financial philosophy: \"Never give your money to people who play games with money for a living.\"

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Trai_Dep
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

In the name of all that's holy, break these financial holding companies into smaller pieces, and restore Glass-Steagall. Before they get even more back on their feet.
At this point in the game, we should no longer be surprised by their venal, corrupt practices: it's like the scorpion and the frog - it's simply their nature.

Reply
","","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
johnfrombrooklyn
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Enjoy these breaking stories while they last. When newspapers die, so might these type of stories. Perez Hilton and The Drudge Report certainly won't be out there doing investigative journalism.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
morlo
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@johnfrombrooklyn: What does this story matter? It's almost better to be ignorant, since Goldman will go on controlling the government; and being aware of yet another layer of hypocrisy and corruption will just make your head explode.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
twophrasebark
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Every person I know that works for Goldman Sachs makes a ton of money and yet seems incredibly angry and bitter at the world.

No matter how much stuff you buy or how much you make, it will never fill that cosmically huge void of working for a company that contributes nothing to the world.

Money isn't everything.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Corporate_guy
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Of course banks knew the loans were trash. The fact that they could be packaged and and resold was the reason why banks freely made bad loans. Basically banks and brokerage firms were earning money off the fee associated with granting a loan and the fees associated with selling the securities.

This way banks could make any loan they wanted and both the bank and investment firm could rack up large profit in fees by making and moving a large volume of crappy loans.

The losses were sold off to dumb investors and to large pension and retirement funds. And after the crap was sold away the banks insured the loans for failure so they could profit again when the loans failed.

The banks and investment houses earned tons while individual investors and insurance firms went bankrupt.

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
econobiker
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Best story quote that links to another current Consumerist story:


\"The Securities and Exchange Commission should be very interested in any financial company that secretly decides a financial product is a loser and then goes out and actively markets that product or very similar products to unsuspecting customers without disclosing its true opinion,\" said Laurence Kotlikoff, a Boston University economics professor who's proposed a massive overhaul of the nation's banks. \"This is fraud and should be prosecuted.\"


Didn't anyone give Kotlikoff the memo on the S.E.C.?


[consumerist.com]

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Mr.Duke
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

It seems the only thing Goldman Sachs failed to do was put a gun to your head and force you to buy their junk.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
twophrasebark
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Mr.Duke:

Someone sells you a car they know is a lemon and you say \"they didn't put a gun to your head?\" IDGI. Is this a blame the victim post?

Or maybe I am misunderstanding. Yes, there is always some reasonable responsibility on the part of the buyer, but the bigger issue is a company that sells assets it knew were junk in the tune of billions of dollars. Let's focus on those guys before focusing on Joe Blow who may or may not have understand what he was buying.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
flipnut
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Living in Charlotte I think the real story should be \"Where were the McClatchy Newspapers?\" The Charlotte Observer pimped \"affordable access to housing\" for years at the urging of our banks. People have known about Goldman for years, the real story is how everyone looked the other way and those in the media that had a position to question were either shut down or didn't have a clue about finance.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
mythago
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Esquire99: Telling a company that it's engaging in illegal practices kinda is telling it how to run its business, yes? And what's the point of the SEC doing a report if (as you would seem to prefer) the government has no power to do anything but wag its finger and say \"Bad company! Bad!\"

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
JGKojak
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Fuck 'em - you know how Obama can be really popular? Go after these clowns, prosecute 'em, and send 'em to Gitmo to share cells with other people who want to destroy America.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
hi
November 13, 2009 4:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

wake up... Obama works for them... 2nd highest contributions to his campaign were made by goldman sachs.

Reply
","");