It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Goldman Sachs boss says banks do "God's work"

page: 2
9
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 9 2009 @ 02:26 AM
link   
Oh please! How can this idiot live with himself and his obscene profits and then say something so ridiculous.

I would say banks are closer to doing the devil's work.

Do bankers actually believe this drivel? Surely his own staff think he is nuts.

He is.




posted on Nov, 9 2009 @ 02:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by spellbound
Oh please! How can this idiot live with himself and his obscene profits and then say something so ridiculous.



Because wankers like this pay lots of money to be surrounded by 'yes' men that feed their delusions. For the right price, anyone can weave their own brand of reality around themselves. He probably wipes his arse on $100 dollar bills too.

IRM


[edit on 9/11/09 by InfaRedMan]



posted on Nov, 9 2009 @ 02:53 AM
link   
reply to post by GradyPhilpott
 


It is a dubious assertion at best to claim that banks provide a necessary service to anybody other than those who actually possess enough wealth to store in a secure facility. The argument that banks loan "us" money when we need it is almost laughable. The best and surest way to secure a loan from a bank is to have the amount of money one needs to borrow in a savings account in that bank or have enough equity to offer as collateral. There is nothing wrong with loaning money for a profit, however the idea that banks will loan anyone who needs its money is simply not true.

Banks have so rigged the political and legal system that they have made banking a necessary product in today's market place. However, does the average minimum wage employee actually need a bank? They only need a bank in order to cash their checks given them by their employers in lieu of payment for the labor they have contracted to do in exchange for pay. Does a minimum wage employee or even someone making anywhere from 30 to 50 thousand dollars a year truly prefer to be paid by check rather than cash? Even better wouldn't any person of sound mind prefer to be paid in gold or silver for their services rather than worthless paper money that functions as a fake promissory note?

People are not paid in cash because if they were it would make the task of taxing income at the source more difficult for governments. This is why if a person asked his or her employer to be paid in cash the employer will often insist that by law they can not do so. Banks themselves will claim that they are bound by law to require such documentation as Social Security Numbers, (In the U.S.), in order for any person to open a bank account. There is, however, no statute or piece of legislation that any bank could turn to in order to back up that claim. Social Security numbers are intended for one purpose and one purpose only and that is for Social Security. What do banks have to do with Social Security? Absolutely nothing! These banks insist they must have the number so they can ensure that a persons personal bank account is made available to government.

If a minimum wage employee has no bank account and attempts to cash the pay check he or she has been paid with at the bank that check was issued from the banks have become so ruthless in their endeavors to ensure that all people procure a bank account that they will actually charge that minimum wage employee or any other employee who does not have a bank account with that bank a "service fee" in order to make good on the check that was issued from that bank. That form of extortion is a common day practice by banks today and it is criminal.

Banks have no business having the sort of economic control they wield over nations, and many of the worlds problems can be traced back to the questionable actions of banks. Many banking institutions are heavily invested in armories and weapons manufacturers. Banks will loan billions of dollars to unstable nations and then forgive those debts and turn to governments for bailouts paid by tax dollars while simultaneously foreclosing on the very private individuals who paid the taxes that bailed that bank out!

Banks are not a necessity and people would be just fine with out them. Indeed, given the current banking practices of a vast majority of banks people would be better off without them.



posted on Nov, 9 2009 @ 02:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


Yes to that. And banks are only interested in helping the wealthiest people, who don't actually need help.

Forget the poor, which comprises most of the world.



posted on Nov, 9 2009 @ 03:40 AM
link   
reply to post by ddacunha
 


The guy in the media article is telling the truth slightly.

The God on the dollar is in capitals (GOD).

They are doing "GOD's" work but not the God's work you immediately link this too.

Another example of using the truth to tell a lie.



Just a snippet of information, if you read all the information you can find about this you will understand what "GOD" actually is because its not the God of the bible.



[edit on 9-11-2009 by XXXN3O]



posted on Nov, 9 2009 @ 04:59 AM
link   
Does this mean that our taxes are propping up a religious group??
Kind of serious here.
the last president was doing "God's work" also.
and our military has been infused with a bunch that are doing "God's work".
I was once told by "God" that if you want to become rich that one of the ways to get there is to make every attempt to assure you money only goes to those that are doing "God's work". This was way back in the early 80's...
seems that the idea has taken off in at least some of the christian groups and they've managed to gather together alot of money, along with the power that goes with it....
only, something has pulled a switch on them, and the God that they are now working for is no long God.
either that or...oh, ya, God wanted these chumps to use fraud and predatory lending practices to bring the entire world into economic chaos!!
which seems unlikely I think.
the end justifies the means.....or does it?



posted on Nov, 9 2009 @ 05:48 AM
link   
reply to post by ddacunha
 



The chief executive of Goldman Sachs, (Lloyd Blankfein),... believes banks serve a social purpose and are doing "God's work."

In an interview with London's Sunday Times newspaper, Lloyd Blankfein also said he believed big profits and bonuses at banks were a sign that the world economy was recovering.

"We help companies to grow by helping them to raise capital.
Companies that grow create wealth.
This, in turn, allows people to have jobs that create more growth and more wealth.
We have a social purpose," he told the paper.



Lloyd forgot to preface his statement with "Our Bankers Used to""...
help companies grow >> raise capital >> create good paying jobs >> raise standard of living >> grow the GDP... etcetera


All those forces are non-existant with the Banks since TARP was created...


the new function of the handful of PrimaryDealer Banks is self-preservation !!
in the same manner that viruses and disease bacterium course through an infected body....



posted on Nov, 9 2009 @ 08:39 AM
link   
It's interesting....

The Church 'does God's work', and it's rich beyond imagination.

The banks, according to this man 'do God's work', and are rich beyond imagining. Chee- sounds... awful similar, doesn't it?

I read the PBS link about the Medicis. I see a few connections, to be honest- I think they are alive and well and STILL running stuff with the Church in tow. I also noted how certain banks back then were shut out, and made to fail, while certain ones were allowed to continue.

As for him slitting his wrists- he doesn't need to. The line for doing it TO him I am sure goes around the block and down the street!

[edit on 9-11-2009 by wylekat]



posted on Nov, 9 2009 @ 09:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


It is true that banks want some collateral when you borrow money from them. Please note that banks are not giving money away. They are businesses like the gas station that charges for their products or the grocery store.

One of the reasons some banks and lending institutions got into trouble was for loaning money to people who had no realistic chance to pay that money back. Congress was in on this, too, if you might recall.

Maybe in your world banks are unnecessary. There was a time in my life when I didn't need banks to get along.

Now I do need banks and I use them wisely. I have no credit cards and I only borrow money to boost my credit score with small loans or for big purchases like a car.

It's easy to get mad at banks as institutions now because some of the people who run them are scoundrels or because of some of the fees they charge for things like over-drafts on debit cards.

The truth is though that the banking industry is necessary and properly regulated, an asset to the community.

[edit on 2009/11/9 by GradyPhilpott]



posted on Nov, 9 2009 @ 09:23 AM
link   
Banking is parasitism. They produce nothing of value, but consume much.

Never forget that the money they loan you comes out of thin air, but you must work hard in the real world to pay it back.



Google Video Link


[edit on 9-11-2009 by 30_seconds]



posted on Nov, 9 2009 @ 09:24 AM
link   
I would encourage anyone that wants to investigate this further to read the entire original Times Online article, which is actually a bloody good read.

For your convenience, the article is here.



posted on Nov, 9 2009 @ 09:57 AM
link   
reply to post by GradyPhilpott
 


It is not a truth of the matter that banks are necessary in terms of being a necessarily "too big to fail" type of institution and it is interesting that you ignored my examples of minimum wage employees with no bank account who are charged a fee for attempting to cash their pay check at the bank that check was issued from. That is not anything at all like a fee for an overdraft which is just bad money management by the account holder and it is disingenuous to attempt to make it seem that overdraft fees is the issue.

I am a capitalist and an ardent believer in freedom and in no way advocate eliminating the banking system but this nonsense that banks are necessary is only true today because of bad legislation that has created an economic system that virtually forces people to do business with banks. That is not freedom and certainly not capitalism. There are too many poor people who shouldn't have to deal with banks at all but have to because of this bad legislation that works in favor of banks and against the poor.

Bully for you if you find banks necessary, use the banks then, but please understand that the vast majority of people who don't have enough wealth to justify using a bank are forced to do so because of this arrogant view that they are necessary and many of those people are the very people you refer to in terms of bad loans being made by banks. Not just in the housing market but in a credit card system that increasingly places more and more people in a debt they have no real hope of ever getting out of. The banking institutions are many of those institutions that have been deemed "too big to fail" in a country where anti-trust laws were passed expressly to prevent any company from becoming "too big to fail".

It is the Federal Reserve that in many ways has created this problem and that "quasi public" institution is run by a handful of private bankers who have profited greatly over the "bad loans" other banks have made. The banking institution is in fact holding the entire world hostage and certainly keeping The U.S. held hostage rigging the credit rates and creating inflation in order to purposely depreciate the dollar. A dollar that has no real value as it is nothing more than fiat money. The Federal Reserve led the U.S. down the road of fiat money and the U.S. is paying dearly for it today. This is what the so called "necessity" of banks has done in my world and that is the truth of the matter.



posted on Nov, 9 2009 @ 09:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Neo_Serf
I'm sure hes totally sincere in his statement, he just forgot to tell us that his god is lucifer~


same thing I thought about when I read this nonsense.

[edit on 9-11-2009 by illuminatislave]



posted on Nov, 9 2009 @ 10:03 AM
link   
Jesus would give this guy the biggest beating of his life if he was still here, and when he was done, would throw this guy down the stairs and and kick over a table or two for good measure.



posted on Nov, 9 2009 @ 10:32 AM
link   
They are doing "god's work", their "god". This life is but a blink of an eye, their punishment will be eternal. Let 'em have their fun while they can.

These people don't think in a normal way.

Peace



posted on Nov, 9 2009 @ 02:24 PM
link   
reply to post by InfaRedMan
 
That guy has other people to wipe his ass with 100 dollar bills.So does this clown have a hotline that connects to God? if so I am sure he wants a word with this egomaniac!



posted on Nov, 9 2009 @ 02:49 PM
link   
this sounds like how the pharoahs would tell the public that they were descended from gods to prevent a violent uprising.

looks like the people on wall street are a little scared of an uprising themselves



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1   >>

log in

join