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

Sunday, September 11, 2011

The Doom of Goldman Sachs

Jason Raznick's article, "Is Goldman Sachs Doomed?," can really get your dander up, but I stopped itemizing each preposterous statement and decided to say exactly why it would be a good thing to doom Goldman Sachs. They should suffer from an unfavorable legal judgment that results in executives languishing in jail for their fraudulent behavior.

Goldman Sachs earned its "bad press." The words came from actions. The people are the victims of Goldman Sachs.

Goldman Sachs should be judged legally for its participation in the creation of the financial crisis. Its ruin or death would mean that the public would not have to worry about that entity vacuuming up the last of the public pensions and savings so that GS can enjoy inordinately large salaries and bonuses. It should be the fate of Goldman Sachs to be judged for its actions.

Upon what premises should their destiny be based, you ask? Answer: On those outlined in the FCIC and Levin/Coburn reports! It is incomprehensible why anyone feels the necessity of being a Goldman Sachs apologist. They are what they have been described as being in those two reports. Their deeds cannot be washed away no matter how much anyone wants them to be.
Is Goldman Sachs Doomed?
By Jason Raznick - Forbes
. . . .

Goldman Sachs (NYSE: GS) has an historic legacy, being part of some of the most exclusive deals on Wall Street, and having many alumni in powerful positions in government and corporate America. If history truly repeats itself, Goldman Sachs may one day be considered as a second-rate bank, or may even become defunct.

Goldman Sachs has always been unique amongst investment banks, with 14 principles that it claims to strictly adhere. For a long time, it was the only firm that refused to partake in hostile takeovers, indicating its vested concern for its clients’ best interests. Given recent developments in global finance, is the house of Goldman in the same position?

There are several reasons why Goldman may fall victim to the American people. The most obvious reason is a function of bad press. Starting in 2010, the public became increasingly aware that Goldman Sachs played a large role in the housing collapse. The problem is, GS may not have been a huge factor in the collapse, but the government wanted to use one firm as a scapegoat. Goldman was the perfect option; widely recognizable and widely despised.

After the first lawsuit, which alleged that Goldman Sachs’ management was aware of mismanaging counterparty risk in transactions involving the 2007-ABACUS CDO, Goldman Sachs paid $550 million dollars in damages. Since then, Goldman Sachs has been the target of various mortgage-related lawsuits. The city of Cleveland, Allstate Insurance, and other entities have been suing Goldman Sachs; the company stated in its most recent 10-K filingthat a reasonable estimate of losses is approximately $3.4 billion.

Apart from damage to its books, Goldman has faced severe public backlash. Although some could argue that the government wanted to use GS as a scapegoat for the banks’ roles in the financial crisis, the fact remains that Goldman Sachs has been the prime target. Along with the masses, investors have not been investing themselves with Goldman as much as they used to before the financial crisis.

. . . .

Read the entire article here, if you think it is worth your while reading an apologist for GS


Post a Comment