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

reply to post by Matrix Rising



You're absolutely correct about the SEC not going after Paulson. Many people agree with you, and have concluded this lawsuit is a farce because of it.

It's not surprising, however. The SEC is pretty useless. For example, did you know that one person complained to the SEC for eight years about Bernie Madoff, and the SEC did nothing!

Re Obama and the secrecy surrounding him: I swear I have never seen a case like this one. A total unknown, now POTUS. And there are several of his college years which are still unaccounted for.

reply to post by mishigas


Exactly,

This is just nonsense. The SEC is doing this because the democrats want to push sweeping financial reform.

If this was real, they would be going after Paulson and Co.

What they are saying is Paulson picked these securities and then he shorted them. So their evidence is Paulson shorting these securities but they are not going after Paulson.

This tells me the whole thing is nonsense.

This is like if I robbed a bank and I had help from one of the bank tellers at the bank and they arrested me and said the bank teller didn't do anything wrong.

It has to be illegal for Paulson to pick these securities for Goldman and then short the same securities he picked.

The truth is, these securities were risky investments and people always short risky investments to cover their backside.

I lost money investing in penny stocks. Penny stocks are risky investments and I knew this going in. I didn't cry and complain when I lost money. I also invested in currencies and options and made good money.

The way you know this is garbage is is that they're not going after Paulson. They are accusing Goldman of working with Paulson & Co. but their not going after Paulson, nonsense.

They are going after GS because it was GS who misled investors, not Paulson. For whatever reason, GS was the party that perpetrated the fraud.

Now, once they get a conviction on GS, chances are good they will then go after others. They must get GS first.

This is probably the big reason GS refused to take a deal. This would make GS execs open for possible conviction of crimes.

reply to post by Matrix Rising

reply to post by mishigas

This is just nonsense. The SEC is doing this because the democrats want to push sweeping financial reform.

The timing of the suit and the proposed legislation is much too close to make it a 'coincidence'. It's a political maneuver to allegedly push sweeping financial reform, but in actuality it's meant to gain more control for this administration.

What they are saying is Paulson picked these securities and then he shorted them.

Right. There are 2 issues here:

1. It is a conflict of interest for Paulson to short their own creation
2. Paulson told the investors that they (Paulson) were taking an equity position in the CDO (going long), which was an out and out lie.

I wonder why Paulson isn't being targeted at this time?

I'm so glad I had the day off today. That was the most entertaining 10 hours of C-Span I've ever seen. There is absolutely a political angle to the timing of the SEC charge. I'm sure many of the Senators acting tough today have taken a ton of cash from GS and the financial sector as well. I still enjoyed the show thoroughly.

I'll let the judicial system work out guilt or innocence in the SEC charge. I'm not optimistic about how that will turn out, but I hope that the discovery process will turn up something more prosecutable.

Though I doubt anything will come out of the SEC charge, one thing that must come out of financial reform is derivative regulation.

From a PR perspective I think today might have been more damaging than the SEC charge. The Goldman peeps seemed very arrogant and that's saying something when your sharing a room with US Senators. Also they seemed less untouchable and more human than GS's reputation has it.

reply to post by jefwane


Well, one thing I am a little PEEVED about is that there has only been a CIVIL case forwarded.

You do understand what that means? Fines or forfeiture is the only thing that can be done. No jail time. No loss of position. Nothing but BULL#!

If they did what they are accused of, they brought the world to this economic ruin. In real numbers, this means they caused the redistribution of approximately $100 TRILLION!

I guess that is no big deal!

reply to post by endisnighe


Yes I realize that it is a civil case. I am aware of the possible penalties you mentioned. Also if GS loses the civil case I'm sure their will be many individual lawsuits to follow. In case I was unclear I do hope that the discovery process in the civil case leads to criminally prosecutable evidence. I'm a realist and doubt anything will come from the SEC case.

People need to look at Goldman Sachs for what it is. Not just GS, but ALL of their "kind", that is, Mega Corporations WITHOUT a country! They have NO allegiances, other than POWER.
In fact, they live to BANKRUPT countries.
Restructure YOUR debt, or liquidate...Greece, U.S., Japan, Portugal, Great Britain, etc, etc.
So, when we see that they are simply parasites, then we must look at their apologists and defenders.
Do THEY have a country?

reply to post by Stewie

People need to look at Goldman Sachs for what it is. Not just GS, but ALL of their "kind", that is, Mega Corporations WITHOUT a country! They have NO allegiances, other than POWER. In fact, they live to BANKRUPT countries.

Couldn't agree more. It's time to enforce ANTI-TRUST LAWS like we once did!!!!! Increase tariffs and protect our economy!

Without these 2 things our economy will continue to go in the toilet and slave labor will soon become a reality.

Small businesses cannot compete with gigantic corporations...they can simply drive them out by paying for slave labor. And since we don't raise tariffs to offset this cost...our economy suffers and jobs STILL continue to leave the country.

reply to post by endisnighe

Well, one thing I am a little PEEVED about is that there has only been a CIVIL case forwarded.

I know...it's BS. They are talking about possibly doing criminal charges...we'll see about that though.

What they need to do is bust up all the large financial institutions. Hit them with the anti-trust stick and KILL TO BIG TO FAIL.

The size of these companies are too large and because of their size put our entire economy at risk.

Guys please..

If you watched this whole panel today you should be able to conclude the problem is the Senate and elected officials. How dumb can they seriously be? #, I'm not that bright and I could have taken 10 hits of acid and drank 476 beers and slapped my hand with a hammer and been smarter than the "maverick" or that moron Levin.

The best course of action would be to get rid of every politician, never vote DEM OR REPUB. again, ever - then never allow corporate campaign contributions.

GS didn't make anyone lose their house. It was your elected reps most of you cherish so much that allowed the bank to give you those loans based on your phantom job or paltry 50k and under salary.

motherjones.com...

The New York Democrat is a member of both the Senate Committee on Finance and the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, and he's received so much money from Wall Street over the years—more than $14 million—that he actually shut down his personal fundraising efforts between 2005 and 2008. Since then he's raised a staggering $284 million for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, which he headed until recently, and much of it has come from Wall Street. In June 2007 alone, when lobbying for the carried interest rule reached a fever pitch, employees of private equity firms contributed nearly $800,000 to the DSCC.

The defense lobby? Pikers. They contributed $24 million to individuals and PACs during the last election cycle. The farm lobby? $65 million. Health care? We're getting warmer. Health care was the No. 2 industry, at $167 million. And the finance lobby? They're No. 1, with a very, very big bullet. They contributed an astonishing $475 million during the 2008 election cycle. That's up from $60 million almost two decades ago.

reply to post by David9176


What WE need to do, is eliminate the usage of the banks. WE need to eliminate their power over us.

Barter, using silver and gold will eliminate the DEBT vehicles that they use to control us.

Instead of ending the fed, we make it impossible for them to even influence us anymore. We trade actual commodities of value instead of instruments of debt.

How bout that idea?

www.watchblog.com...

Greenspan had a big hand in the Social Security brouhaha. Back in 1981 Reagan appointed Greenspan head of a Social Security Commission that was supposed to fix the system. How did he fix it? By recommending the most regressive tax we have ever had in U.S.: the payroll tax, which applies only to workers at the bottom and the middle class. His recommendations became law in 1983. He tried later to reduce worker benefit increases without success. In 2001 he was in favor of Bush's tax cuts and recently for Social Security privatization, even though they both would increase the deficit. He says he is for low taxes. But he recommends tax cuts to take care of the rich and a payroll tax to take care of the poor. After being for tax cuts for the rich he asked Congress to follow their pay-go approach when legislating for the poor. Then he had the gall to complain about the huge deficit when he had previously recommended the huge tax cuts.

However, there was an outfit called Long Term Capital Management (LTCM), a highly risky hedge fund for super-wealthy investors. It had "only" $3.5 billion, but borrowed $100 billion to invest. The borrowed money and the $3.5 billion equity disappeared. What do you think Greenspan did? He bailed out LTCM. Yes, we must have de-regulation. However, we cannot allow such a big, rich, influential company to die.

hubpages.com...

Edmund L. Andrews reports in today's NYTimes (12-18-07) that Greenspan ignored repeated warnings on the dangers of subprime mortgages from Federal Reserve governor Edward M. Gramlich nearly seven years ago, in 2001 from senior Treasury Department official, Sheila C. Bair, and from leaders of a housing advocacy group in California, John C. Gamboa and Robert L. Gnaizda who warned that deception was increasing and unscrupulous practices were spreading. "He never gave us a good reason, but he didn't want to do it (press lenders to adopt a voluntary code of conduct). He just wasn't interested."

guanteik.blogspot.com...

In the article, Burry said he began seeing problems in the housing market as far back as 2004 with the reappearance of interest-only mortgages. “Increasingly, lenders concerned themselves more with the quantity of mortgages they sold than with their quality,” Burry wrote. At the same time, the Federal Bureau of Investigation reported cases in mortgage fraud increased fivefold between 2001 and 2004, Burry said.

reply to post by GreenBicMan

GS didn't make anyone lose their house. It was your elected reps most of you cherish so much that allowed the bank to give you those loans based on your phantom job or paltry 50k and under salary.

No, they didn't make anyone lose their house. That's true. But they knew the housing market was going down and made their bets accordingly. Was it legal? By our current crap laws and the repeal of Glass Steagal....yes...it was legal.

So while the rest of the public was unaware what was happening....they made their bets on our economy failing...and at that point they aren't going to want to lose on their bets....

reply to post by David9176


Dude, no one knew anything was going down like that and it was apparent because if you were watching GS wasn't positioned AT ALL to profit from it.

They only came up under 500,000,000 after all of it.

500,000,000 is a lot to me and you but not the billions of misinformation you have been fed from those assholes in the Senate.

Please, rewatch that entire thing. Mainly the Blankfein part. You will be doing yourself a big favor. If you already have and still don't agree please list which part and I will debunk it for you using simple information or analogies. I'm not trying to sound like a bitch, but your friend. I am 100% correct here and can tell you how a market maker functions in financial transactions. It is quite simple but Levin couldn't figure it out after it was told to him over 8432 times.

It's getting real #ing dumb in Washington DC lately.

reply to post by endisnighe

Barter, using silver and gold will eliminate the DEBT vehicles that they use to control us.

I don't know how that could be done. I believe people should have the right to know what is happening with our currency and how it is inflated/deflated. These large banks are essentially a component of the Federal Reserve themselves. We bust up the banks....get things under control and then dive into the Fed and look at our best options on how to tackle the issue without destroying our economy. I'm just afraid of the consequences of busting up the Fed as the fraud involved is insane. I don't want our country to fall. But at any rate, I am no expert (not even close) on how this should be done.

The only problem with enforcing anti-trust laws is that it takes a long time to do...years even...and it hasn't been done in a very long time...not since Jimmy Carter busted up AT&T....and look at them now....right back to the powerhouse they were before because we no longer bust up the too big to fails and too powerfuls to exist.

If obama tried to enforce any anti-trust law...people will call him socialist...we all know it. It's the same thing with tariffs. It will be called a hidden tax etc etc. Obama has ZERO INTENTION of raising tariffs. I keep screaming it all over this website that we need to impose tariffs and everything thinks I"m a huge fan of Obama. He's not doing anything that will truly turn our economy around....but then again...I don't think he's Satan either. There is all kinds of blame to go around.

Big Corps HATE tariffs and anti-trust laws. HATE THEM. They are the ones who are essentially pushing the globalization of the world as they know no laws or country....they only know how to exploit them.

reply to post by GreenBicMan


GBM, I watched about 1/4 of it. The problem is that these hearings are not a court of law.

I watched the entirety of the initial questioning of the guy that created these vehicles. He sounded just like me when I created a couple ideas in the labor market in my area. I did not pay my guys an hourly wage, I paid them a percentage of the contract after I took out my sales and my tools component. (I supplied all hand tools and equipment) I did not know the outcome before the job was complete. Neither did this guy. He created something that had not been tried before.

Things can go sideways when you commit to doing something never tried before. Or, no one actually knows what it actually means until the results are in or if you do not have the inside knowledge of the math or formula inherent in the system you create, you have an advantage.

reply to post by GreenBicMan

Please, rewatch that entire thing. Mainly the Blankfein part. You will be doing yourself a big favor.

I'll check it out again. I have to ask you though, do you think it's safe for institutions to be this large?

reply to post by David9176


The problem is David, our system of currency is done. It cannot be fixed.

This system was meant to be destroyed at this time. I do not know how old you are, but I railed against Reagan and his policies. My father and I discussed the policies back then.

He was a member of the JBS and I know it is a fringe group, but lo and behold, everything they said was going to happen, happened.

Now here is the thing you have to ask yourself. Do we as a people trust the very people that created the problems, to try and fix it? You may think Obama is an outsider, but he is not. Otherwise he would never have become president. THAT is a fact.

Fear, is the mindkiller.

Observation and relevance to existing precursors is what you need to see.

The SS system could have been used at this time. It was drained on purpose. It does not exist. As fiat money does not exist.

My final point you have to understand, does the debt REALLY exist?

Or is it being used to destroy our sovereignty?

Is this all a plan? Was this ALL planned? Every time I look at history I have to assume that historical fact and it's relevance in modern day situations has to be factual.

Plans, within plans, within plans.

When you think you know the plan, you see another skin on the onion. The BEST thing to remember, trust NO ONE in power. Especially the ones that pursue that power.