Political Discussion

[MSbklawyer]

Secondly, Goldman shorted actual CDS assets, which helped the escalation that brought Lehman and Bear down. Goldman shorted against many of the banks, which helped to bring them down and get them sold off to competitors at fire sale prices.

Thats what I'm asking: How does shorting a company or a bank help bring it down? How does betting something will happen cause it to happen?

[backtoschool]

Is there something untoward about that, BTS? I mean, is there something about shorting a stock (or a currency or, for that matter, a country as a whole) that actually contributes to its demise -- like a self-fulfilling prophecy or something?

I ask because people who bet against the dollar or who take a financial position that would benefit at the U.S.'s misfortunes are spoken about on the financial news programs in the same tone of voice and with the same facial expressions as one would use when talking the dog do-do they had to scrape off the bottom of their shoe -- kind of like you did when referring to Goldman. But as I see it, if the horse you bet against is going to lose, it's going to lose; and betting that way doesn't make it any more likely to be so -- or does it in the financial world?

I see your point, MSbklawyer, but yes, there is something very ""untoward" about Goldman shorting AIG and CIT, Wells Fargo, etc. First of all, Goldman made billions shorting AIG, and then made billions more when AIG paid them for their default swap losses. But AIG didn't pay them really. We paid AIG as a bailout and then AIG gave that money to Goldman. That is money that could have gone to job creation, food stamps, mortgage refinancing, etc....

Secondly, Goldman shorted actual CDS assets, which helped the escalation that brought Lehman and Bear down. Goldman shorted against many of the banks, which helped to bring them down and get them sold off to competitors at fire sale prices. We will be paying for this debacle for years as taxpayers and also as banking consumers who will have less access to loans and will have our fees raised on basic banking services.

So, in my opinion, what Goldman did is a little more destructive than betting on a losing horse to lose.

What is worse, is that Goldman's shorting was private investing for a private, in house hedge fund that they always traded for before executing their client's trades. Again, this practice costs companies profits which slows down job creation,etc....

[MSbklawyer]

Goldman would hedge against our growth, our future, and even our national survival, if it would make them a dollar. They are the biggest "hedge fund" out there and they are betting on our failure.

Is there something untoward about that, BTS? I mean, is there something about shorting a stock (or a currency or, for that matter, a country as a whole) that actually contributes to its demise -- like a self-fulfilling prophecy or something?

I ask because people who bet against the dollar or who take a financial position that would benefit at the U.S.'s misfortunes are spoken about on the financial news programs in the same tone of voice and with the same facial expressions as one would use when talking the dog do-do they had to scrape off the bottom of their shoe -- kind of like you did when referring to Goldman. But as I see it, if the horse you bet against is going to lose, it's going to lose; and betting that way doesn't make it any more likely to be so -- or does it in the financial world?

[momisery]

You could be right about the sucker in many cases. But in our case, our jobs demand that we have cell phone and internet access yet they do not wish to pay for them. In todays job market you need all the tools you can get to land a job and keep it. As for TV, I myself do not like our DISC network, but without it we do not get one channel clearly and I live a few miles out in a small rural town, so that could be why.

[momisery]

Perfect, and I blame that on society because we allow that behavior and we allow people to hide behind our laws and our constitution and bill of rights. There is right and wrong but we seem to give a whole bunch of grey area.

[justbroke]

I thought jb was talking about George Soros....

I'll never tell.

[WhatMoney]

With his insider trading skills and his financial acumen, Soros would be a good chief executive of Goldman Sachs.

Or the Bank of the United States.

LOL - the conspiracy right wingers would blow their gaskets.

[backtoschool]

I thought jb was talking about George Soros....

Maybe justbroke did mean Soros. But I needed to rant about Goldman, so I conveniently used the GS initials to serve my purpose. Besides, as the father of the "super-bubble" theory, Soros is too competent to run our financial system.

But....

With his insider trading skills and his financial acumen, Soros would be a good chief executive of Goldman Sachs.

[WhatMoney]

I thought jb was talking about George Soros....

[backtoschool]

And who do you suppose the Government would have run the newly created Bank of the United States?

(I'll give you one hint... their initials are G.S. LOL Because only people of that caliber could ruin a financial system. Misspell intended.)

Your post made me smile justbroke.

Goldman-Sachs only cares about Goldman Sachs. Goldman would hedge against our growth, our future, and even our national survival, if it would make them a dollar. They are the biggest "hedge fund" out there and they are betting on our failure.

They hedged against CIT, hedged against AIG, and made a lot of money doing so. They got a double payout in the AIG debacle. They got paid by AIG (which means they got paid by the american taxpayer) and they got paid by shorting AIG and hedging against AIG in the market.

But....

They also are a necessary evil. They fuel a lot of growth and are the most stable and most savvy of our investment banks.

I have very mixed emotions about Goldman Sachs. To me they represent the best and the worst of Wall Street.

[WhatMoney]

People have much higher bills today... tv was free, phones were cheap, lots of things have changed

BTW momisery, TV is still free (over-the-air and digital quality too), and my land line phone costs me all of $12/month. People are suckered into getting the expensive alternatives today - for no good reason other than advertising or stupidity.

At last count I get 28 channels in free digital TV, most of them HD. I only really need one: the local PBS channels.

[justbroke]

My point is, given a chance people will fraud, business or govenment.

I can put it even simpler. When there's a lot of money on the table... there will be an equal amount of fraud, waste, and abuse.

[momisery]

My point is, given a chance people will fraud, business or govenment. This past year the most problem we have had has been business fraud and some are in prision. There will always be those who have no morales and no concern for society, all we can do is catch them if we can and charge them. Without government, there would be no "we the people" controling the direction our country is going, which is exactly the problem today, we have not had a say those elected are a bunch of crooks with their hands out. Government works for the people if we put the right people in. If your looking for the perfect system without fraud you will not find it in business or government because people are involved and they are not perfect.

[momisery]

I worked in that great PRIVATE system and have two sisters that are nurses. IF you want FRAUD look there.

[momisery]

I would say, look to the great depression if you are wondering what would have happened with no bail out, and no social programs. Only look at a much larger scale. During the great depression people did stay closer to family and moved in with family easier, instead of someone returning from Nevada to Illinois to move in with Mom and Dad, first who will pay the truck rental fees? Also, families had farms and grew their own foods and many canned and sewed. They only had a 25% unemployment rate then, now it is 17% if you count the real numbers per the government. And the people today are at food pantry's since there are no gardens. Keep in mind too that times were different, Dad pulled the car under shade tree and fixed the engine, today you HAVE to use a garage with all the complicated do hickeys under the hood.. lol.. We now have AC, back then we used fans and we were used to it, and AZ and NV were not so settled. People have much higher bills today... tv was free, phones were cheap, lots of things have changed. Without some sort of help, or to allow a total collapse would mean those banks, like BOA would lay off all their employees as they closed their doors, the numbers in the streets would grow. Believe me, if it gets that bad people will steal from you to feed their families because there is little to hunt today or fish for free. No one should wish the great depression on a society again. Now, was it handled correctly, well of course not it turned into a hand out for those with huge incomes and bonuses.