That makes sense only to conspiracy theorists who cannot read. If you understood what the report said, you'd see that there is nothing nefarious about it.
There is also nothing nefarious in an economist serving as a political analyst and then returning to economics. Some economists specialize in what is called social choice theory and some are well versed in politics.
But, if you cannot judge the substance of what they say, there are two ways to proceed: you can suspend judgment and have not opinion until you understand the matter, or you can believe in the worst and defame people for no reason. The former is dictated by both the scientific method and Judeo-Christian morality. You chose the latter.
Regarding the statements in the report that less government spending would be a drag on the economy: I believe you are confusing economic “fact” with historical reality. Keynesian economic “facts” are simply not factual.
Regarding the statements in the report that less government spending would be a drag on the economy: I believe you are confusing economic “fact” with historical reality. Keynesian economic “facts” are simply not factual.
Social choice theory-that's where big daddy gov., er um "the people" redistribute wealth to achieve a state of GSachs, er um "Pareto" optimality, as per the welfare clause.
"A confidential new report prepared by Goldman Sachs for its clients says...
Oh, bless their hearts! They're providing us "people" with free confidential reports! They're continuing their tradition!