Just read this entire article and I fail to see what Goldman did wrong.
If they had done something to insure the Abacus fund would fail, that would be another story. It failed because of the housing crash. Goldman didn't know for sure housing would crash, as proven by the fact that they were more long than short in mortgage bonds, a fact that most ignore. If they knew housing would crash they would have been fully short. Ill-informed people need a scapegoat, and Goldman, with its high salaries is an easy one.
The technical issue of whether Paulson was an "outside advisor" is what this case is about, if you read the article carefully. Funny reading all the crazed responses that don't even focus on what this article says...lets just get out the burning torches.
Just read this entire article and I fail to see what Goldman did wrong.
ReplyDeleteIf they had done something to insure the Abacus fund would fail, that would be another story. It failed because of the housing crash. Goldman didn't know for sure housing would crash, as proven by the fact that they were more long than short in mortgage bonds, a fact that most ignore. If they knew housing would crash they would have been fully short. Ill-informed people need a scapegoat, and Goldman, with its high salaries is an easy one.
The technical issue of whether Paulson was an "outside advisor" is what this case is about, if you read the article carefully. Funny reading all the crazed responses that don't even focus on what this article says...lets just get out the burning torches.