Goldman executives cheered housing market's decline, newly released e-mails show

I came back to say that I do not believe any new regulations are necessary.

I have a question, GS blatantly created worthless or near worthless funds, they then sold them stating they had actual value. Then they bet against the very people they sold them to.

Now, we have the SEC filing civil cases only?

Why the hell have these people not been arrested for fraud amongst other charges?

Now, we keep hearing from all the MSM we need more regs and more transparency. I would like to ask why. Why if the very regulations and controls we have now did not work, do they think making more regulations.

Oh, that is right, it is not regulations for companies like Goldman Sachs, these new regs are to not allow others to compete or infringe upon TPTB to be able to control everything.

These people committed fraud, they committed treason; destroying the US economy, these people are involved in the very make up of our government and our government; including a majority of the Congress, were complicit in this treason and corruption.

They all deserve to be in prison and ALL of their assets seized. Just like Madoff.

reply to post by endisnighe


I agree with you on most of what you said, but we need the right regulations. Bankers have been screwing people since the beginning of time. Back in the 50's and 60's regs were set up right the stock market ran like a well oiled machine prices were stable and was a viable long term investment for retirement. It wasn't until they started messing around with the regulations that were in place did things start going hay-wire. And regulations were tougher back then too, there was no market for speculation that is why we had the gas crisis because it was the only way they could artificially raise gas prices.

Now they just get the speculators to buy millions of barrels of oil and make things go out of wack.

Also regulations don't do any good unless they are enforced. And I believe that should be the first step actually enforce what we have on the books first.

reply to post by Light of Night


Well see, this is the whole problem.

There are criminal charges that would keep these people from doing this.

Why are they not being charged? It is because they are above the law. The new regs have nothing to do with stopping this from happening again. This has to do with taking more control causing more of the market to be controlled by the current power brokers.

Only civil charges filed. Why not criminal? When the SEC files civil charges this will end with fines only, nothing else. It will not stop anything.

We do not need more regs to stop this crap. Dodd, Obama, Frank or any Dem or Repub that pushed these criminal and corrupt housing loans, need to be thrown out of government at the least or brought up on charges.

Here is what we have, the government created the bubble creating these worthless debt funds. We have financiers and banks create these worthless mortgage derivatives that brings the world economy to it's knees.

So what do we do? Give the very CRIMINALS BIGGER GUNS?

reply to post by endisnighe


As I said I agree with you. I was simply making the point that the regulation we had at one time were freaking awesome, and we need to go back to those regs.

We don't need more regulations on top of what we already have, as I said I agree. I agree with what you said about the SEC and everything. I'm just making the point that we need to go back to the things were before 70's regulation wise. That's when regulations actually worked and the Stock Market was a safe long term investment.

But it doesn't do any good if we have lackys running the show and won't do their jobs.

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
Obama says that more regulation is needed

We don't need more regulation. We need enforcement of the actual laws and regulations that we already have.

Great to know that our Federal Treasury appointees for Clinton and Bush were people "betting" on crushing We the People.

Great to know that Obama was financed by these thugs.

Great to see how # really works in America.

Starred and flagged.

reply to post by Light of Night


Your first two statements are completely false, and so are many others.

Most 401k plan owners don't control the money in their 401k plans, they are relying on investment managers that are supposed to have the best interest of their clients.

If a stock you are invested in starts to lose, you can sell before you lose too much money. Only when shorting is involved do we see the type of market volatility that creates these crisis's, where the people who are not on the inside loose large amounts of money far too quickly.

The stock market is not supposed to be gambling, it is supposed to be legitimate investment in legitimate businesses whose values do not change so quickly.

All the evidence proves you are wrong, and that has been seen since this type of investment activity you support was allowed, and that has been seen over and over again.

reply to post by poet1b


Really? I bet I can spend a few hours and dig up multiples of sources proving me right, with hard data backing it up.

Everything I said was true, you just don't want to believe it.

reply to post by Light of Night


What are you waiting for, I will be happy to show what nonsense the sources you provide are, then to present the sources that prove you wrong.

The evidence is well recorded for both now and then.

Oh, yeah, wiki doesn't count.

reply to post by poet1b


Community Reinvestment Act

Source 1 Credit Default Swaps

Source 2 Credit Default Swaps

Source 3 Credit Default Swaps

Or better yet put in a google search "blythe masters credit default swaps"

Video 1 Democrats blocking attempts to reform system

Video 2 Democrats admitting that they were causing loans to be given out to unqualified buyers

Comminty Reinvestment Act was cause of Finacial Melt down

reply to post by Light of Night


Yeah, but none of this backs your claims. All you have done is provided a bunch of links with your interpretation that does not assign any specific statements that back you claims. You have no argument here, unless you point out what backs your claims.

Gingrich deregulated the investment industry, and since then we have had one bubble after another, that proves you wrong.

Well, I was writing an article about this but looks like the newspapers have beat me to it. Here is basically a dump of my sources without my article.

From www.opensecrets.org...

Obama's Top Contributors in 2008
University of California $1,591,395
Goldman Sachs $994,795 *Bank
Harvard University $854,747
Microsoft Corp $833,617
Google Inc $803,436
Citigroup Inc $701,290 * Bank
JPMorgan Chase & Co $695,132 * Bank
Time Warner $590,084
Sidley Austin LLP $588,598 * Law Firm
Stanford University $586,557
National Amusements Inc $551,683
UBS AG $543,219 * Bank
Wilmerhale Llp $542,618 * Law Firm
Skadden, Arps et al $530,839 * Law Firm
IBM Corp $528,822
Columbia University $528,302
Morgan Stanley $514,881 * Financial Services
General Electric $499,130
US Government $494,820
Latham & Watkins $493,835 * Law Firm

It's probably important to note for legal reasons the donations came not from the companies themselves but from individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals' immediate families. In contrast to $994,795 to Obama from Goldman Sachs, McCain only received $230,095.


Glenn Beck on Goldman Sachs in 2009

I've never been much of a Glenn Beck fan. But I came across this video of him explaining the Goldman Sachs spiderweb in 2009. It's probably not up-to-date but it's very much worth watching. I recommend watching it as it's difficult to explain.





(The next and last section is just my person opinion.)

GOLDMAN SACHS is like an angel?

I was disgusted to read this article the other day called "Government will 'Bankrupt Us'". It was a leading headline/link on Drudge Report for some reason. While I'm not dismissing the idea that we may go bankrupt one day given the amount of debt we are in among other things, I think it's just as much the fault of those who control our money system than the government if not more so. Like Baron M.A. Rothschild once said:

"Give me control over a nations currency, and I care not who makes its laws."

But what really disgusted me about this article is this guy Dr. Marc Faber, Editor & Publisher of The Boom, Doom & Gloom Report called Goldman Sachs an angel. I have no idea how much knowledge this man has or why Drudge linked to this article, but I won't be allowing Dr. Faber to try and brainwash me in the future.

Here's a link:

www.cnbc.com...

[edit on 26-4-2010 by theyreadmymind]

Originally posted by sremmos
Great to know that our Federal Treasury appointees for Clinton and Bush were people "betting" on crushing We the People.

Great to know that Obama was financed by these thugs.

Great to see how # really works in America.

Starred and flagged.

The thing is many of us already knew it, no one was listening,

reply to post by Light of Night


Very good links and I wish Americans would stop buying this nonsense from crooked politicians.

They create a problem and then inflate it to a crisis and they say they need billions of dollars to fix the problem they created.

Goldman didn't do anything wrong.

People make short bets all the time to cover their backside.

Lenders were forced by the government to give out loans to risky buyers because it was "compassionate." They said everyone should own a home. So they eased underwriting standards. I worked in the mortgage industry and I saw people get loans that I wouldn't loan a dollar based on their credit.

So many of these lenders were strong armed by the government to give out these risky loans and they covered their backside by playing the shorts. This is just smart business.

If you didn't give out these loans or you were against these liberal programs, then you were called a racist and you hated poor people.

Why do people fall for these crooked politicians spin year after year after year. They have us sinking in a sea of debt. They are using Goldman as a scapegoat. They are depending on class envy. The government created the mess and Goldman just covered their backside.

Originally posted by poet1b

... The stock market is not supposed to be a gambling casino where you place your bets.

The only purpose investment should serve is to raise capital for business ventures, not to work the market to queeze profit through hedging your bets.

Government didn't create this mess, eliminating the rules establishing good business practices is what created this mess.

If the companies want to bet in the markets, then they should pay the same rate of taxes you pay for winning at the craps table.

Hedge funds shouldn't be allowed, at least not as legitimate businesses.

Agree!

But I was taught and raised in a time with the apparently now quaint notion of "The only purpose investment should serve is to raise capital for business ventures,", such as patriotically promoting American business. And the apparently now quaint notion of business ethics.

Both those barn doors appear closed!

I used to joke years ago how Wall Street was getting more like Las Vegas. This "shining city on a hill" has dimmed not from enemies without but from greed within.

The people of this great nation have been conned into giving up their wealth, just as any good street conman would do, by appealing to their greed.

reply to post by ISHAMAGI


Perhaps you should keep up more with some other threads that were already pointing out from the beginning of the bubble market crash to the originations of that crash.

Many here in ATS that visit the Market data thread knew way in advance that this was coming. . .

If these lenders didn't give out these risky loans, the Democrats would dispatch the misery merchant Al Sharpton to march in front of their building, call them racist and say they hate poor people.

Goldman just covered their backside.

Lenders didn't wake up one day and say, let's give home loans to risky buyers. It was government who wanted to be "compassionate" and make sure everyone owned a home even if they haven't paid a bill in 3 years.

reply to post by Matrix Rising


GS did not JUST cover their backside.

They DID NOT disclose the information. That is called FRAUD.

Yes shorting something is used to cover possible losses.

Think of it this way, in agriculture many farmers now are using futures to offset possible losses due to possible declines in the price of the commodity they produce. That in and of itself is fine, but when a financier, not a bank creates these derivatives where they KNOW that they are not worth crap and then bet against them is FRAUD and is a CRIMINAL offense.

reply to post by endisnighe


I will disagree with one sentence. GS had no idea when the market would top, that was purely based on speculation at that point.

OK, please continue

reply to post by endisnighe


And then they got tax payer money to bailout their fraud.



Who runs America?