You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Goldman Sachs: Pic of the day
- Thread starter ByLoSellHi
- Start date
Quote from asiaprop:
can you show us your receipt which shows you paid GS a single penny? And maybe you can also show us where AIG passed on a SINGLE penny to GS other than through contractual obligations. Its ridiculous how you guys look at GS while nobody is mentioning AIG at all, the company which actually wrote all those contracts in a reckless manner. Now you want to punish GS for demanding delivery on what AIG owed to GS? AIG would have never been bailed out without the BROAD support of the government and lawmakers. Its a blatant lie to state that GS was involved in getting this deal done.
i didn't think its GS's fault directly, its quite obvious who instigate the deals, its the whole deal that is immoral from beginning to end
Paulson never decided to bail out AIG himself, it was a broad based decision by government and lawmakers. Paulson never had this discretion nor will he ever have. Please post a link to ONE credible source if you believe otherwise.
Quote from mgmaggie:
my two cents worth, Paulson, need I say more.
it was not even GS's fault indirectly. The decision to bail out AIG and all other companies from which GS (and a lot of other banks, AND normal corporates) profited was made by government and actually the legislative branch. The VERY people the TAXPAYER elected. I can cite hundreds of documents, recorded video footage how everyone else BUT GS decided to shoot billions into AIG.
Quote from dtan1e:
i didn't think its GS's fault directly, its quite obvious who instigate the deals, its the whole deal that is immoral from beginning to end
Quote from asiaprop:
can you show us your receipt which shows you paid GS a single penny? And maybe you can also show us where AIG passed on a SINGLE penny to GS other than through contractual obligations. Its ridiculous how you guys look at GS while nobody is mentioning AIG at all, the company which actually wrote all those contracts in a reckless manner. Now you want to punish GS for demanding delivery on what AIG owed to GS? AIG would have never been bailed out without the BROAD support of the government and lawmakers. Its a blatant lie to state that GS was involved in getting this deal done.
Contractually AIG was debit and was unable to fulfill their obligations and had to be bailed out by US taxpayers.
We were told that A PRIMARY TREASURY DEALER in LEH was too big to bail out then IN THE SAME WEEK, they bail out AIG. To think that GS didn't have anything to do with it is asinine.
GS was toast if they were not paid on the AIG bets.
Quote from asiaprop:
it was not even GS's fault indirectly. The decision to bail out AIG and all other companies from which GS (and a lot of other banks, AND normal corporates) profited was made by government and actually the legislative branch. The VERY people the TAXPAYER elected. I can cite hundreds of documents, recorded video footage how everyone else BUT GS decided to shoot billions into AIG.
LOL the taxpayers' representatives did NOT want to bail out AIG, that was WELL documented. The lobbyists worked their magic and swayed just the right amount of votes to get it done.
They coined the term "systemic risk" and used scare tactics similar to 9/11.
NO. Do a quick check of who runs the government and you'll quickly find Washington is littered with former GS execs. They are "too big to fail" (which is total bull shit) so they will be bailed each and every time they blow themselves up. This will continue until the People of America decide to take their country back.
Quote from Shreddog:
So the fundamental question: Is Goldman making obscene profits off the US taxpayer?
Let's ignore the the tarp funds, the zero interest loans, the ability to use toxic garbage as collateral at the discount window, the AIG bailout that allowed GS to get paid by AIG in full. Ignore all of this and ask yourself this simple question:
What if GS blows up badly enough to take the firm down next quarter? This is a reasonable question since it was conceivable they could have gone down in Q4 of last year. Will they be allowed to go under? The answer to this answers the fundamental question.
Quote from asiaprop:
can you show us your receipt which shows you paid GS a single penny? And maybe you can also show us where AIG passed on a SINGLE penny to GS other than through contractual obligations. Its ridiculous how you guys look at GS while nobody is mentioning AIG at all, the company which actually wrote all those contracts in a reckless manner. Now you want to punish GS for demanding delivery on what AIG owed to GS? AIG would have never been bailed out without the BROAD support of the government and lawmakers. Its a blatant lie to state that GS was involved in getting this deal done.
<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/_wVQ3_ZaYB4&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/_wVQ3_ZaYB4&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>
Now you're getting to the crux of the problem. It's foolish to think the people ELECT our politicians. Yes, a vote counts and we get to choose but choose what? We get to choose from a pool of candidates delivered to us from Washington and when one does arrive from outside of Washington she is seated in front of Charlie Gibson who puts on his "grandfather" glasses and looks down on her and chastises her like she is his 8 year old grand daughter. Granted, Palin was not qualified to serve as the VP but to belittle her on national television like that was disgraceful. Funny, I've never seen Charlie wear those glasses since.
Quote from asiaprop:
it was not even GS's fault indirectly. The decision to bail out AIG and all other companies from which GS (and a lot of other banks, AND normal corporates) profited was made by government and actually the legislative branch. The VERY people the TAXPAYER elected. I can cite hundreds of documents, recorded video footage how everyone else BUT GS decided to shoot billions into AIG.
Asiaprop,
I think you are missing the point of these GS threads and why people are so upset. GS is not the real target of these discussions. It's just so happens GS has conveniently landed in the cross-hairs because of their obscene profits. What the true issue here is the entire system.
The US Government is run by the banking cartel. I'm not writing a thesis here so I'm not going to cite actual numbers but it's common knowledge that GS, AIG, C, BAC, etc... are huge political contributors. It's also common knowledge that GS's (and other banks) former executives occupy various seats in the government. GS currently runs the government. To deny that fact is pure folly.
Bankers can create money out of thin air, lend it to you to buy a house, and then foreclose on you when they blow up the economy. So in the end, a bank can lend you money at the cost of nothing and then take your home, which has a lot of value, when their actions cause you to lose your job. You can't see the fundamental problem with this scenario?
I think you are missing the point of these GS threads and why people are so upset. GS is not the real target of these discussions. It's just so happens GS has conveniently landed in the cross-hairs because of their obscene profits. What the true issue here is the entire system.
The US Government is run by the banking cartel. I'm not writing a thesis here so I'm not going to cite actual numbers but it's common knowledge that GS, AIG, C, BAC, etc... are huge political contributors. It's also common knowledge that GS's (and other banks) former executives occupy various seats in the government. GS currently runs the government. To deny that fact is pure folly.
Bankers can create money out of thin air, lend it to you to buy a house, and then foreclose on you when they blow up the economy. So in the end, a bank can lend you money at the cost of nothing and then take your home, which has a lot of value, when their actions cause you to lose your job. You can't see the fundamental problem with this scenario?