Goldman Sachs: The Reputation You Deserve

While Doyle’s post is well taken . I laugh and cry over the arrogance of bad press. Not as much the topic itself but the hypocrisy of the arrogant of the gate-keepers writing the bad press.  The funny part of this is that while the public does not much like Congress. Its disdain for the arrogance of press is not much better.

Thinks the press get’s that picture?

While Doyle’s post is well taken . I laugh and cry over the arrogance of bad press. Not as much the topic itself but the hypocrisy and the arrogance of the gate-keepers writing the bad press.  The funny part of this is that while the public does not much like Congress. Its disdain for the arrogance of press is not much better. 
 
Thinks the press get’s that picture?

While Doyle’s post is well taken . I laugh and cry over the arrogance of bad press. Not as much the topic itself but the hypocrisy and the arrogance of the gate-keepers writing the bad press.  The funny part of this is that while the public does not much like Congress. Its disdain for the arrogance of the press is not much better.  
  
Thinks the press get’s that picture?

Flees are smarter than what you still hold as truth. No longer do they jump on humans. So maybe you want to start all over again.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/business/general_business/february_2010/confidence_in_economy_s_future_is_at_lowest_point_of_obama_s_presidency

Since goldman sachs is a major cause of the economic  problems in the US and other countries maybe they should worry about their reputation.

WOMEN WITH INTELLIGENCE AND EXPERIENCE,MEN WHO SUPPORT THEM AND COUNTRY BEFORE PARTY ALWAYS

PUMAS,BUBBAS,EQUALISTS AND THOSE PEOPLE RULE

While ignoring the silly comment above by our blog’s self-designated, and not very good at the job, jester, I can only comment that and Wall Street firm’s arrogance is usually grounded in some knowledge that it will be protected. (I say that to give evidence that her comment existed, but will soon be erased.) 

I like your comments about not playing.  I’ve never had the means really to do any playing with Wall Street.  Instead, I protected what little I had in terms of money with very low risk means to save and let it grow.  Just from the changed behavior of my significant other, who did not lose as much as many during the financial crisis but who did lose some, I can see him deciding not to play as much anymore.  Instead, to protect the money he planned to give to his nieces and nephews, he purchased a house in a golf community in AZ.  He got a good deal buying it in a short sale, he golfs there now in the winter, rents it sometimes, allows friends and family to use it.  Even in this market, he has already gained on his investment.  

I wonder if this is the type of investing you’ll see happening more than in dealing with investment firms.

Yes, they have no “good” reputation left, but they still have influence, power and money coming in. There is no justice for them, yet….We can hope for change, har, har

As far as I’m concerned reputation is the least of these scoundrels worries. A crook is crook is a crook whether they’re playing the shell game on a downtown corner or playing while dressed in a $5000 suit.  I read an interesting piece over at OPEd News, writer goes by the handle of George Washington.  Here’s a sample:

“Nobel prize winning economist George Akerlof predicted in 1993 that credit default swaps would lead to a major crash, and that future crashes were guaranteed unless the government stopped letting big financial players loot by placing bets they could never pay off when things started to go wrong, and by continuing to bail out the gamblers. (Not only has the government rewarded the gamblers, bailed them out and let them engage in a new round of risky betting, but it hasn’t even reined in credit default swaps.)
And instead of trying to restore trust in our financial system – which is a prerequisite for any sustainable economic recovery – Summers, Geithner, Bernanke and the boys have tried to sweep the problems under the rug and con the public into believing that everything is okay and that no real reform is needed.”

I’m tired of the pussy-footing.  We are in serious, serious trouble.  And regardless of what these crooks on Wall St. would have us believe along with all their handmaidens in DC, they are at the center of the rot as we continue to dance around the edges of what is “legal or not.”

They can take their fears of bad reputation and stuff it!  The belong behind bars, where they can keep Bernie Madoff company.

Maybe that brave Mr. George Washington may care to come out from behind that anonymous name.

Sorry if I disappointed you by pussy footing around. Actually I am not sorry, because I was not pussy footing at all. The fact of whether people choose to play the game or not is the biggest question facing Wall Street right now.

The question was whether GS is taking too much risk. I answered it.

Goldman Sachs–high frequency trading–Green Shoots Green Shoots-Rah Rah Rah!

LD, the picture of Lloyd Blankfein towards the top of your story is very evocative–a lttle bit of Daddy Warbucks, a little bit of bemused imp, a lot of self-satisfaction, and pure shyster to the bone.

Let’s look at another former GS chief exec, who also happened to be Treasury Secretary, Henry Paulson (don’t know who put all those words on top of his picture):

Reverse Robin Hood…

Oowawa,  
And who’s that big guy over at Marketwatch?

Goldman Sachs taking Risk?  It’s only a game, and they’ve got really really deep pockets that go way into the U.S. Treasury . . .

Larry, I wasn’t criticizing you.  Although many of the financial pundits are into happy talk, merely giving the public a false sense of the “good times are a-coming round the corner.”

I’ve appreciated your honesty.  If it wasn’t for a computer glitch that reacts so poorly to blog radio, I’d follow your broadcasts more closely.  But I do read your blog and it’s the principle I respect.

Without principle and integrity, we stand on nothing but sand. Sometimes I get so angry I could scream.  But mostly, I feel like weeping. I told you months ago, my husband quit public accounting many years ago because he decided he wasn’t good at fiction writing.  What I didn’t tell you is that the very next job [large corporation] he was told to sign off on a bunch of bogus numbers.  He refused and was fired on the spot.

In both cases, he landed on his feet not because he was a hero but because he made a choice, drew a line in the sand and said, “No.” 

I suspect you would do the same thing.  And that’s what we need to start hearing from our politicians and professionals of all stripes: No, I refuse to go there.

And if we don’t?  Then we are truly doomed.   

Very interesting, Larry D. 

One of the ways I knew my son was going to do just fine as an adult is when he came into the kitchen and announced, “The only thing a person has of real value is a reputation for being honest.  Without thta you are nothing”  I am sure he heard it from a teacher (good job!) but I think it stuck.  He’s done very well in life and is the straightest shooter I know.

Absolutely!

That was not an apology, I take.

I admire your husband. Great husband to have.

I would not make an assumption that Larry would do the same, as you said.

That was not an apology, I take. 
 
I admire your husband. Great husband to have. 
 
I would not make an assumption that Larry would do the same, as you said. Is best to take a wait and see attitude.

That was not an apology, I take.  
  
I admire your husband. Great husband to have.  
  
I would not make an assumption that Larry would do the same, as you said. Is best to take a wait and see attitude. Same as I do with Obama.

My brother had similar circumstances. He started out as a CPA with a very large firm, and signing off was their norm. He moved on to banking and as CFO found that nothing was any different. He would tell them that the risks weren’t covered by sufficient collateral, and they told him  one time to be quiet, “You’re only the bookkeeper”. That  bank (S&L) went under, and some of the officers went to jail. He went on to another bank but finally had enough. Now he teaches at a small college which he wanted to do to begin with.

Market Watch–I comment over there occasionally, but I’m just a little bunny among all those ferocious bears; and anyway most of those people actually have money at stake every day and are highy motivated–I don’t.  Anyway, Market Watch is a big Wall Street cheerleading site (except for the commenters).  I much prefer truthtellers like Larry Doyle (Sense on Cents) or Karl Denninger (Market Ticker).

My brother had similar circumstances. He started out as a CPA with a very large firm, and signing off on iffy stuff was their norm. He moved on to banking and as CFO found that nothing was any different. He would tell them that the risks weren’t covered by sufficient collateral, and they told him  one time to be quiet, “You’re only the bookkeeper”. That  bank (S&L) went under, and some of the officers went to jail. He went on to another bank but finally had enough. Now he teaches at a small college which he wanted to do to begin with.

. . .a negative impact on. . . the morale and performance of our employees. . .

And this is why they need to pay obscene bonuses.  barf

Larry Doyle on CNBC!  It was great watching your articulate performance, LD.  But you know what would really give you an edge up during such panel discussions?  Shaving your head as bald as a billiard ball.  Look at Blankfein and Paulson (Bernanke is almost there).  Where would Daddy Warbucks have gotten if had a luxurious head of hair like you?  I look forward to seeing a balder, more pugnaciously dominant LD on future panel discussions . . .

Yes, morale is down. They get no respect and they have to take those big bonuses. Poor babies.

Larry Doyle on CNBC!  It was great watching your articulate performance, LD.  But you know what would really give you an edge up during future panel discussions?  Shaving your head as bald as a billiard ball.  Look at Blankfein and Paulson (Bernanke is almost there).  Where would Daddy Warbucks have gotten if he had a luxurious head of hair like you?  I look forward to seeing a balder, more pugnaciously dominant LD on future panel discussions . . .
Today, 10:24:27 AM – Flag – Like – Reply – Delete – Edit – Moderate

Every night before I go to sleep I end my prayer “And God bless mommy, and daddy, and Scruffy, and Mopsy, and Pooh-Bear, and Lloyd Blankfein . . .

And Baby Daddy.

Maybe instead of bailing them out, somebody ought to be investigating them to shut them down. They are on the way to owning a big share of the world’s mineral wealth once carbon trading kicks in. Our politicians are the equivalent of $20 street whores. Look at what they give Goldman Sachs. I doubt thety are even getting anywhere near $20 proportionally.

I think I read that Goldman Sachs has a 10% share in that carbon trading company and Al Gore’s company has 10%.

Docelder, upthread I made what may or may not be a really rash statement that GS has financial protection from the U.S. Treasury.  I believe this is so, not only because they are one of these “Too Big to Fail” companies we hear about, but because of the very complicated ways that GS benefitted from the AIG bailout.  The routes by which GS receives government money are devious and indirect.  It’s a complicated mess, and that’s the way they want it to be.  Googling AIG and “Goldman Sachs” and bailout all together yields a bewildering array of provocative articles, like this one, taken at random:

SEC Investigating Goldman Over AIG Collapse

Docelder, upthread I made what may or may not be a really rash statement that GS has financial protection from the U.S. Treasury.  I believe this is so, not only because they are one of these “Too Big to Fail” companies we hear about, but because of the very complicated ways that GS benefitted from the AIG bailout.  The routes by which GS receives government money are devious and indirect.  It’s a complicated mess, and that’s the way they want it to be.  Googling AIG and “Goldman Sachs” and bailout all together yields a bewildering array of provocative articles, like this one, taken at random: 
 
SEC Investigating Goldman Over AIG Collapse

Is it correct to say that there are many incestuous relationships among the players?

Exactly, we had Bush “giving” drugs to Medicare people when really it was a gift to insurance and pharma. Bush bailed out the banks to help us… right. Then Obama bailed them out some more, again to help us and all the while acting like he was pissed in doing so. Now Obama wants to pass health care for us… right, it is for pharma and insurance companies. He wants cap and trade for us… right, it is for companies like Goldman Sachs that already have the carbon trading set up. The thing is “us” collectively no longer even have representation at all. Damn global corporations have co-opted it for themselves, But what to do? Until we get a third party or until a second revolution comes… regular people are plain screwed.

Well sowsear, I think “incestuous” is exactly the correct word:

Goldman Sachs Alumni Hold Many of the Top Government Positions

If SEC makes GS repay 13B to AIG, will the taxpaers get anything back? Or is the first question, will the SEC look very hard at the valuations involved?

[...] Goldman Sachs: The Reputation You Deserve : NO QUARTER [...]

The Fed, led then by Tresury Sec. Tim Geithner, paid out 100%….(even after GS had approached AIG about taking a lesser amount from them)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/26/goldman-sachs-approached_n_437041.html

As Murray on The Mary Tyler Moore Show once said:
“I have all my money invested in children’s shoes.”

Hmmm – perhaps that’s why I, a fiction writer, ended up a Financial Controller. However, since this isn’t my field I made it very clear I do everything by the book. And maybe, because it isn’t my field, they are afraid I’d screw up doing anything shady anyway.
You have to be very smart or very stupid to be dishonest and like most here i”m middle of the road.

GS sure contributed big to Obama & Dems in 09. It’s a profitable investment. Need another reason to vote Republican in the midterms?

Take a trip down memory Lane: http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/07/13/goldman

Thanks, elaine.  Another trip down memory lane with Goldman Sachs:

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/28816321/inside_the_great_american_bubble_machine

Gee, I wonder why GS is having an image problem?

Well the image problem isn’t hurting the stock.  GS up $5.89 a share today. Currently trading @ $163.61 a share & S & P gives them 5 stars=projected 1 year target $216 a share. With cap gains tax at 20% in 2010 who doesn’t want to be looking at that kind of profit?

Well if I buy it, it will tank.

Mayv

Well if I buy it, it will tank.  
 

Well, elaine, I have my moral principles and would NEVER buy GS, no matter HOW much money they stand to make by wheeling and dealing and manipulating the market . . .

(Okay . . . I’m broke and couldn’t buy a GS share if it were half the price . . . but all I’ve got left is my moral indignation.)

“When you sleep with dogs, you wake up with fleas.”

Too bad the press covered up the dogs Obama was sleeping with.  Goldman Sachs contributed more than $1.5 million to his 2008 campaign, so I expect they knew they would be protected.

Wonder why the stink never rubs off on Warren Buffet?

[...] Goldman Sachs: The Reputation You Deserve The fact that Goldman believes they need to highlight this adverse reputation risk in its annual report strikes me as just further evidence of an arrogant firm. [...]