Paulson and Wall St. Question

E

ehoofnagle

Through all of this I hear and read that Paulson's motivation is pure. That he wants to achieve stability and he genuinely views his role as giving back to the nation and to the industry that has given him all of his advantages.

Thats all well and good but what about a conflict of interest?? He left Goldman and a salary of 20 million for his current job. He also had an equity stake of $485 million in GS shares. This stake had to be sold prior to taking office, TAX FREE!!!

Now I find it a bit interesting that before GS goes under it gets to become a bank (at a record time-48 hours) and now conceivably will greatly benefits from this 700 billion bailout.

Why can’t the USA get the same deal old Warren got on all of these companies that want to be/need to be bailed out?? An equity stake with dividends and warrants???

I also realize that Congress is made up of wealthy people. And many if not most got that way via Wall St.

http://www.rollcall.com/features/Guide-to-Congress_2008/guide/28506-1.html?type=printer_friendly

conflict of interest ?????
 
Why didn't someone ask him today, how much of that dough was he going to spend on those mortgage bundles at 65 cents on the dollar. bastards all.
 
Why can't Goldman and Morgan go under like Bear, Merrill and Lehman???

Why can't the government snatch these firms and parcel the assets off to other parties here in the US?

How is this free enterprise and capitalism?

The same greed and power that created this mess are going to make a killing if they are hired to help contain it.

Why should Goldman and Morgan get wealthier and all the others get decimated???
 
Quote from ehoofnagle:

Why can't Goldman and Morgan go under like Bear, Merrill and Lehman???
More...

You think that this is just about Goldman and Morgan?
You've got to be kidding.

Also, did it ever occur to you that Goldman and Morgan might just have their houses in order, compared to the "toxicity" at Bear and Lehman?
 
I realize its not just about GS or MS.

They might have their houses in better order but they clearly are on very shaky ground. Are we suppose to pat them on the back because they are not as bad as the others? GS was parceling the shit and selling it to customers while they aggressively shorted it. Some might call that genius. Is their no accountability on their parts at all?

With all the money they made it created power, and as the old saying goes "Power Corrupts, Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely".
 
r kidding right? "why can't GS go under"?

First of all, Buffet just took 5 billion in common with warrents further down the road at a great price. They just got a mother of all "one shot" injection from a Private Investor.

Second, GS has less exposure to CDO's than what BS and LEH had.

GS is in a league of its own. PERIOD. Or was until it became a depository bank.

Nevertheless, GS was saved by "Buffet".
 
Quote from EMRGLOBAL:

r kidding right? "why can't GS go under"?

First of all, Buffet just took 5 billion in common with warrents further down the road at a great price. They just got a mother of all "one shot" injection from a Private Investor.

Second, GS has less exposure to CDO's than what BS and LEH had.

GS is in a league of its own. PERIOD. Or was until it became a depository bank.

Nevertheless, GS was saved by "Buffet".
More...

Kidding? No. Buffet investing $5 Billion does not guarantee anything.

Read this blog post about the way Goldman has run their business.

http://boombustblog.com/index.php/R...o-you-guys-know-who-you-re-messin-with-1.html
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top