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

Friday, June 11, 2010

Goldman Thinks Americans Are Chumps

Goldman Thinks Americans Are Chumps- Well DUH!
FCIC says Goldman Sachs is playing the American people for 'chumps'

The Federal Crisis Inquiry Commission is pretty pissed at Goldman Sachs. Actually, make that really pissed. “We’re not going to let the American people be played for chumps here,” said co-chair Phil Angelides. His colleague Bill Thomas added that Goldman is attempting a "very deliberate effort to run out the clock.” Felix Salmon offers the back story:


Read the rest here


Anonymous said...

We are..we tolerate it from every angle.

High-frequency trader Getco hires key SEC staffer

Anonymous said...

Financial Reform Conference Committee Offers Industry Lobbyists Chance to Reunite With Former Bosses

WASHINGTON -- Lobbyists for the financial services industry enjoy longstanding ties to the members of Congress who were named this week to the conference committee on financial reform legislation, according to a joint analysis of available data released today by Public Citizen and the Center for Responsive Politics.

JR said...

Opinionator - A Gathering of Opinion From Around the Web
June 10, 2010, 6:32 pm
BP’s Mess, and Wall Street’s

Just because you can do something, does that mean you should? It’s a question that might have saved us a lot of pain in recent months if both Goldman Sachs and British Petroleum had asked it of themselves during the last decade.

Sure, Goldman, and other Wall Street firms, could — and did — create “synthetic C.D.O.s” to allow consenting investors, including Goldman itself, to gamble on the risk in the U.S. housing market. Sure, Goldman and others could — and did — package up mortgages that should never have been issued into mortgage-backed securities and sold them to investors around the world who, in turn, abdicated their responsibility to investigate the soundness of the investment because some rating agency — paid by the underwriters — had slapped a AAA-rating on them. That technology existed, and Goldman and others just availed themselves of it, right? Besides, they were simply supplying the demands of the marketplace, right?

More here:

Post a Comment