GoldmanSachs666 Message Board

According to the Collins English Dictionary 10th Edition fraud can be defined as: "deceit, trickery, sharp practice, or breach of confidence, perpetrated for profit or to gain some unfair or dishonest advantage".[1] In the broadest sense, a fraud is an intentional deception made for personal gain or to damage another individual; the related adjective is fraudulent. The specific legal definition varies by legal jurisdiction. Fraud is a crime, and also a civil law violation. Defrauding people or entities of money or valuables is a common purpose of fraud, but there have also been fraudulent "discoveries", e.g. in science, to gain prestige rather than immediate monetary gain
*As defined in Wikipedia

Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Goldman Sachs & Stonewall Jackson

The Consensus on Big Banks Starts To Move

 By Simon Johnson, co-author of 13 Bankers: The Wall Street Takeover and The Next Financial Meltdown

The ideology of unfettered finance is crumbling.  Whatever you think of the merits of the Goldman case from a legal or short-term perspective, the SEC’s allegation – and Goldman’s response – have further moved the mainstream consensus away from “finance is generally good” to “big banks are frequently scary.”
Senator Ted Kaufman should get a great deal of credit for his well timed charge on this issue – as I argue in BusinessWeek/Bloomberg.  But Lloyd Blankfein also gets an inadvertent assist, quoted in the Financial Times yesterday as saying that the SEC case against Goldman would “hurt America.”
Mr. Blankfein is starting to sound – and act – a lot like Nicolas Biddle, head of the Second Bank of the United States (by far the most powerful commercial bank of the day), during his confrontation with President Andrew Jackson in the early 1830s.


Read the rest here


Post a Comment