Posted on 07/22/2009 7:23:39 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
we’re not bashing them for making money, we’re bashing them for stealing. Don’t confuse the two. Making money legitimately, a lot of it, is to be applaud, but not when you’re stealing
Why bash Drug dealers or thieves. They are just making money.
They made money buy infiltrating the government and diverting billions of dollars to their company. That’s why. They did not earn it, they stole it. From you and me.
“Why bash Bernie Madoff for making money??
Are you implying that Goldman Sachs is managing a huge ponzi scheme similar to Madoff ? If so, I’d like to see some evidence.”
I would not put it past them.
Follow the money trail. They spent a lot of money buying the administration and this congress, and they got thier investment back in spades while wrecking havock on the lives of millions.
Madoff is a much better person, he stole from just a few instead of helping the government to enslave many.
Goldman Sachs was making bets with house money. Heads, Goldman wins. Tails, taxpayers lose. Moral hazard to the extreme.
The bastards did not make money, that are reporting tarp funds paid out to AIG as profit. The bastards at AIG and the Treasury should never, but never have paid 100% on the dollar on all of those bogus insurance contracts. With out tarp the bastards would be broke. Period.
I don’t get why you don’t get the analogy, unless you are being classist. Because one group wears suits, is highly organized and came from the right families and schools they are to be forgiven out of hand for plundering?
These people are WORSE then Madoff.
“GS got $13 billion in federal bailout money through AIG. And guess who engineered the AIG bailout? Former GS chairman Hank Paulsen. THAT is what has people ragging on GS now - they used AIG credit default swaps to increase their leverage and their profits, apparantly without making sure AIG could cover what had been issued. And when they found out AIG was not good, they ran to their sugar daddy at Treasury and he made sure GS got their money. Privatizing profits, publicizing risk and losses - that is the issue here.”
Goldman Sachs also sold billions of garbage securities to companies, and then “shorted” the stock of these companies. They are scum!
He's saying they are underhanded an as crooked as Madoff.
“we’re bashing them for stealing.
Kindly explain this “stealing” for me.... You steal when you forcibly take money from someone. “
So you pay your taxes voluntarily?
They have stolen our money by buy CONGRESS.
Paulsen basically looted the taxpayers with the AIG bailout. And he had a clear conflict of interest as former chairman of GS, which was a primary beneficiary of the AIG bailout.
Basically, GS made a lot of money prior to the meltdown by being able to increase their leverage by replacing reserves with AIG credit default swaps - which freed them up to invest money that should have stayed in reserve. And they apparently completely failed to perform any risk due diligence as to whether AIG could deliver its CDS commitments.
So when Goldman Sach's risk-taking blew up in its face, did it ask for the recipients of past, massive payouts (such as Paulsen) to return some of that money, money earned partially through excessive leverage? Of course not. They asked Paulsen to use taxpayer money to cover the risk.
You can quibble over terminology all you want. But what happened with AIG and GS amounts to legalized theft - there is NO enumerated Constitutional power to bail out an entity such as AIG. And Paulsen had a clear conflict of interest in devising the AIG bailout. You really should stop pretended the entire mess doesn't stink like dead meat.
“we’re bashing them for stealing.
Kindly explain this “stealing” for me.... You steal when you forcibly take money from someone. “
So you pay your taxes voluntarily?
They have stolen our money by buy CONGRESS.
Oh, spare me. That's the kind of nit-picking rationalization that is used to justify the wide range of legal corruption in DC today. Paulsen was bailing out his GS buddies. He should have instead been returning some of his own money earned from GS to cover the risk - as should have many other GS employees, current and former, who received bonuses - their earnings were gained partially through excessive risk - when the bill came due from that risk, THEY should have paid it, not the taxpayers who never benefitted from the excessive GS leverage.
Otherwise, this would sound eerily like the accusation against Dick Cheney because he was former CEO of Halliburton and this company won large contracts rebuilding Iraq.
Last I checked, Halliburton actually delivered something for those contracts. The AIG bailout money was just poured down a hole, with the federal government and the taxpayers making good on securities that had no existing federal guarantees at the time they were issued. Massive difference.
It truly is amazing to see ANYONE on FR defending the kind of legalized, unconstitutional theft we saw with the AIG bailout.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.