Friday, April 16, 2010

Meet The Bailout Recipients

I've written before about the myth of Wall Street genius, how it is propagated by starry-eyed journalists, and why debunking it is important for effective financial reform. From page 7 of today's SEC complaint against Goldman Sachs and one of its executives, Fabrice Tourre:

At the same time, GS&Co recognized that market conditions were presenting challenges to the successful marketing of CDO transactions backed by mortgage-related securities. For example, portions of an email in French and English sent by Tourre to a friend on January 23, 2007 stated, in English translation where applicable: “More and more leverage in the system, The whole building is about to collapse anytime now…Only potential survivor, the fabulous Fab[rice Tourre]…standing in the middle of all these complex, highly leveraged, exotic trades he created without necessarily understanding all of the implications of those monstruosities!!!”

The full SEC complaint against Goldman and Tourre is here.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

The appeal of the Tea Party gets more understandable all the time.

4/16/2010 3:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So know what the SEC hands out a "Record" fine on GS of probably 500 Million throw 1 guy in jail and GS shrugs it of as acceptable risk/reward ratio. What the hell is the point anymore.

4/16/2010 4:08 PM  
Blogger Spider said...

to 1st anon, yeah, but the Tea Party protesters are protesting Wall Street Banks, like they should. They protesting more taxes and the ever amorphous term "bigger government" (which makes no sense when you replace government with what it is here, "we the people". Bigger We the people? I digress).

The original tea party was against the WalMart of it's day, the East India Company. It was against goverment policies that favored its monopoly.

If the Tea Partiers of today had any sense they'd be protesting for more regulation of business and banking, they'd be protest for the SEC to actually do it's job, they'd protest for many on Wall Street to be imprisoned.

But alack and alas, they are not. Instead they have half-wits like Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachman ranting about things that really aren't the problem.

4/17/2010 7:44 AM  
Anonymous KAIMU said...


The Fab "Fab" and GS and next week or next year or two years or five or ten it'll be yet another "Fab" and another "GS" and so it has gone for nearly 100 years now. The same banks getting favoritism and bailouts today are the same ones getting it in 1913 and on an on every time there was a financial "emergency"!

Whining about Palin or Obama is the same as it was when we were all whining about Nixon and JFK. The political faces have changed in DC but little else.

Sorry to hear the Tea Parties are not "sanitized and perfect" enough for the "sofa protesters". I guess the same sofa dwellers now would have been the same ones sitting on the sofa during the Vietnam War and the Civil Rights. Naturally those who complain have never attended one. I protested against the US FED which is the bank of banks, the central bank of the USA.

Voting for the "lesser evil" will always still vote in "evil". I know it is a difficult concept to comprehend for 90% of US Voters but then again government didn't get this big in DEBT and banks did not get this powerful because US Voters were smart. Centralizing power and money has never worked to benefit the masses and that is essentially what the US Constitution wanted to limit.

Let me take you back to a time when America was debt free from 1834 to 1836. Andrew Jackson was President. The Second Bank of the United States was authorized for a twenty year period during James Madison's tenure in 1816. As President, Jackson worked to rescind the bank's federal charter. In Jackson's veto message (written by George Bancroft), the bank needed to be abolished because:

* It concentrated the nation's financial strength in a single institution.
* It exposed the government to control by foreign interests.
* It served mainly to make the rich richer.
* It exercised too much control over members of Congress.
* It favored northeastern states over southern and western states.

Sounds strangely familiar today! That's how WE THE PEOPLE got debt free 175 years ago. How now?

4/17/2010 8:27 PM  
Anonymous hair loss pills said...

In my opinion every person ought to glance at this.

5/19/2011 3:15 PM  
Anonymous escort valencia said...

It won't really work, I believe like this.

5/19/2011 3:15 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home