Slashdot Mirror
Goldman Sachs Tries To Shut Down Dissident Blogger
The Narrative Fallacy sends along a piece from the Telegraph on efforts by Goldman Sachs to silence a blogger who is posting commentary critical of the bank. "Goldman Sachs has instructed Wall Street law firm Chadbourne & Parke to pursue blogger Mike Morgan, warning him in a recent cease-and-desist letter that he may face legal action if he does not close down his website goldmansachs666.com. According to the C&D letter, dated April 8, the bank is rattled because the site 'violates several of Goldman Sachs' intellectual property rights' and also 'implies a relationship' with the bank itself. Morgan claims he has followed all legal requirements to own and operate the website and that the header of the site clearly states that the content has not been approved by the bank. In a post entitled Goldman Sachs vs Mike Morgan, the blogger predicts that the fight will probably end up in court. He went through a similar battle with US home builder Lennar a few years ago after he set up a website to collect information on what he alleged was shoddy workmanship in its homes. 'Since I went through this with Lennar, I've had advice from some of the best intellectual property lawyers, and I know exactly what I can and can't do. We're not going to back down from this.'"
Why do companies go to these great lengths to censor these people? Its a lot more effective to let the bloggers blog in relative obscurity then to make a big deal of it and then increase the pagerank of their blog. Pursing these types of cases only leads people to believe you do have something to hide, and that something to hide just got a lot higher up on Google by threatening to sue them....
Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
if they just ignored it and called it blatantly untrue, he'd slip off the radar never to been seen again. the other side to this is that there are lots of guys like this blogger who take up causes like this just to try get their 15 minutes. this guy strikes me as one of this self rightgeous types.
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
This will cause a major Streisand Effect for Goldman Sachs. Now everyone will know what they want hidden.
It seems to me the banks are largely in control of the country, not the government or the people.
We need to transfer money to and from Europe and Brazil. We discovered that the banks: 1) Determine the exchange rate themselves; some banks won't even tell you their exchange rate in advance. 2) Charge a large fixed fee. 3) Charge a percentage of the money transferred.
Idiots.
I just bookmarked it and now will visit it daily.
[sarcasm]Death to the "internationalist Zionist conspiracy".[/sarcasm]
Comment removed based on user account deletion
... these bloggers would just not use the name of the company in their domain name. Instead, choose a name that is descriptive of the evil actions. Then merely identify what company is being referred to. And that opens up the ability to reference more than one company, too.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
The C and D letter itself undermines its argument. It notes that Goldmann Sachs owns the trademark "in the financial services market". Trademarks are restricted to particular market segments. The fact that Goldmann Sachs owns that trademark in the financial services market does not prevent others from using the same trademark in other market segments. If you want to start a chain of "Goldmann Sachs Cheeseburgers", you are free to do so. So, not only is GoldmannSachs666 clearly distinct from GoldmannSachs, but since it isn't in the financial services market, it wouldn't infringe even if it weren't distinct.
Goldman Sachs Cheeseburgers.
Too funny.
Especially near Passover.
Dave Barnes 9 breweries within walking distance of my house
But you know, even if you are right, being an asshole still shines through. You always have to consider the messenger.
Slashdot, where armchair scientists get shouted down and armchair theologians get modded up.
Goldman Sachs domains for sale buy your goldmansachs###.com domain today!!
Buy now, cash in on their IP.
Haven't there already been Blah-sucks.com cases that have been decided in favor of free speech?
Here are just a few more of the many abuses by banks:
The Federal Reserve Bank is not federal. There is nothing in reserve. It is not a bank. Three lies in the title! "The Fed" is controlled by the big banks.
Someone associated with the big banks, acting for "The Fed", determines the interest rate that will be paid on savings. There are often news stories saying how brilliant he is for lowering the interest rate, which allows the banks higher income, and means that those who save money get less interest.
Retirement savings accounts (IRAs): 1) IRAs are given a lower interest rate. 2) When IRA CDs are renewed automatically, it is always at a lower interest rate, taking advantage of people who are extremely busy before the renewal date, and don't have time to research a better rate at a different bank.
Credit Cards: 1) Credit card rules are changed any time the bank wants, with little prior notice. 2) Changes in the rules are hidden in complicated language.
Savings accounts: 1) Banks advertise a high rate, then lower the rate later, with very little or no notice. 2) Accounts don't show the interest rate. 3) Banks advertise phrases like "Great Rate" and then give an especially poor rate, depending on the lack of ability of most people to do research.
Bank Representatives: 1) Banks hire support people who have no power other than to waste time. 2) Online email support people press a button and give pre-recorded answers that have no relevance to the issue raised.
Either that, or they've figured that the old adage "No press is bad press" might be true and that this is a hell of lot cheaper than a real advertising campaign.
Gets the name out in the mainstream media.
Since it is hosted with Google, I wonder if *they* will fold under threats from G.S.?
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
They are going to lose just like paypal did to paypalsucks.com
Oh yeah, and paypal really grinds my gears.
A Magic the Gathering Article and Forum Aggregator
Mmm, Goldman Sachs Bacon Cheeseburgers!
Whatever Goldman Sachs is doing, it's going to get buried in a pile of stuff they aren't doing.
This is the same as Alien conspiracies in the 90's - So much bullshit and misinformation, interest eventually peaked, and then most people got bored and forgot about it.
OK, I'll bite....what was real about aliens in the 90's that was buried beneath all the bullshit?
We all know who has the better lawyers.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
I don't think the fact that there is a Streisand Effect matters here. That is slashdot trying to rationalize a decision made by lawyers for a large corporation. The guy is free to set up another site and post stuff that does not constitute infringement.
It doesn't matter what the blogger says here, that is not the main point of this C & D action. No tinfoil hat needed for this one- just a company protecting its copyright.
Look at it from Goldman's point of view: if they don't protect their trademarks they can easily lose them, which means they lose a lot of money. This is standard business protocol, nothing about this action screams "we're going to censor him at any cost."
I wouldn't want either Goldman or Sachs on my cheeseburger. The bacon is okay. :P
The more people who know that the better.
The "real" part is the tax money that was used, also the least important topic in retrospect.
This is the same as Alien conspiracies in the 90's - So much bullshit and misinformation, interest eventually peaked, and then most people got bored and forgot about it.
So you're one of those alien conspiracy deniers. It's people like you who make all the evidence look bogus. Nice try. Why don't you admit that you are in cahoots with the aliens?
People try to make sense of GS catapulting this guy to fame to their detriment when they should properly just keep him in the shadows. Isn't it obvious why? One small Word, one big object: EGO The people who run Goldman-Sachs are used to running everything--including the Fed, Congress, and the Presidency. They have saddled everyone of us with a debt of $165,000 for the bail out (so far) and most of that money goes into their pockets in bonuses, guarantees for their failed investments, and other devious ways they bilk people for cash. It sticks in their craw that some little nobody on the net can flip them the bird and blow raspberries at them and be untouchable. And they just cannot accept that. Their egos cannot stand it.
I don't want to troll here, but I ask quite honestly, do you even know what Goldman Sachs is?
They are a vast and influential investment bank with a worldwide presence. They were one of the top few campaign contributors to both Obama and McCain, and their former execs occupy high positions in the US Treasury department.
They have considerably less need to "get their name out in the mainstream media" than those scrappy little startups called McDonalds and Coca-Cola.
Your mind is clear / The things that you fear / Will fade with how much you / Believe what you hear
I'm sure there are plenty of top-secret spy plane sightings and god knows what else buried in the mounds of UFO bullshit.
Good look separating the worthwhile from the shit though.
This will inevitably lead to the Streisand Effect. Goldman Sachs just f*ed up bigtime.
Support Mike and his website.
Disclosure: Yes, I am short Goldman Sachs stock. I believe this company is evil and should not exist. We need to begin to break up companies that have as much control over world finances as Goldman Sachs.
Let me see if I get this right:
1. Short GS stock
2. Blog about how evil GS is
3. ???
4. Profit!
There's only one problem with this plan: GS stock has been rising since the start of the year. No wonder the guy believes GS "should not exist": Should GS stock continue to rise, there's no limit to how much the guy can lose.
(For those who have no clue what I'm talking about: "Shorting a stock" basically involves selling stock you don't own. Your only obligation is to return the stock you "borrowed." If you can buy said stock at a lower price than the price you sold it at, you profit on the difference. If the stock becomes worthless, you basically pocket whatever profit you made from the sale of stock you never owned in the first place.)
I believe what they are trying to cover under the UFO BS is Aurora. The reason I say that is they fly the damned thing over rural states like mine(AR) when it is cloudy, probably testing out those noisy but bad ass engines. The damned thing sounds like a cross between a freight train and a jet and if the sky is clear and calm at dawn you will see the "donuts on a rope" exhaust trail the thing leaves behind. It has got to be the noisiest "secret" I have ever heard.
But what better way to cover up Aurora than have every nutjob with an abduction story on hard copy so that everyone is looking for little green men instead of super expensive hypersonic combat aircraft? You have to admit, you couldn't cook up a better disinformation campaign if you tried. But with Goldman Sachs there are plenty of eyes on them after the bailout. What better way to cover up the truck full of money you are sneaking out the back than to promote some paranoid whackjob with the Streisand Effect? The only way Goldman Sachs will get caught is if some whistleblower manages to sneak some seriously damaging paperwork to Wikileaks. Otherwise they are just going to laugh all the way to the bank.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
I wonder what would happen if I stood on a street corner and shrieked that fact like a banshee, and gave interviews telling everyone how awesome The Firm is while throwing feces. If I wasn't gainfully employed...
They essentially own the US government. See how many people in positions of power are ex-GS.
It doesn't matter if the law isn't on their side, they are completely above the law anyway.
Of course, this particular web site seems to be a collection of paranoid rantings, which is strange given the amount of obvious dirt that exists on GS (last year's financial bailouts are a case in point, how much did GS make from them and who was running Treasury at the time again?)
I used to work in Goldman Sachs, IT dept. They were paying IRRATIONALLY high salaries. As a result, employees became PARANOIDS due to lack of job security.
I suspect that many Slashdotters are unaware of the numerous deep ties between Goldman Sachs and the Obama Administration. A few for instances:
This above list is by no means exhaustive. Nor are the sources cited above (The Huffington Post, The Nation, etc.) exactly known for their fierce and unstinting criticism of Obama.
Lawrence Person (lawrencepersonh@gmailh.com (remove all "h"s to mail)
http://www.lawrenceperson.com/
Throw this one there too... Edward Liddy of AIG (remember him on tv a few weeks ago in front of congress) has a $3 million stake in Goldman Sachs, he quit his job with Goldman before taking the $1/year job with AIG.. and now AIG is funneling billions of taxpayer dollars to Goldman. No conflict of interest there.
Seriously? Please tell me you are kidding, and that you're not really a moron asking that question.
What do you think Goldman Sachs is, a company that sells gold teeth on late night TV?
Get their name out to mainstream media indeed.
The DAVID STAR.
Six lines. Six triangles. Six vertex. SIX SIX SIX.
Thanks for the clarification. However, the Federal Reserve does, basically, decide the interest rate that will be offered by banks. Many banks are offering less than 1% interest, below the rate of inflation, encouraged by the actions of the Federal Reserve.
they think that the site implies relationship with goldman despite the 666 at the end? are they then implying that 666 is an appropriate manner to label them?
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
Believe me if you want, or don't -- but I'm an Aerospace Engineer, whose career focus has been on high-speed propulsion and aerodynamics. Aurora, at least as its been described by aviation "enthusiasts" (not engineers!) doesn't exist. There's no scramjet-powered or PDE-powered sustained hypersonic cruise vehicle. The closest we have is the X-51 , which has yet to fly, and is a testbed. The X-43A was also an experimental aircraft, and of course the Russians have flown axisymmetric test scramjets before.
The "donuts-on-a-rope" == PDE crowd are mistaken. I'm not a climate scientist, but I've seen those types of clouds form in broad daylight in Southern California. More importantly, I've worked at one of the companies that was in the PDE business until recently, and I can tell you that engine would not produce such an exhaust formation. Moreover, if you seriously think such an engine would be able to produce enough thrust while operating at such a low frequency so as for you to be able to distinguish individual pulses like that, you are mistaken.
It's a virtual certainty that the U.S. Government has "black" aircraft programs that are supersonic. But airbreathing hypersonic cruise is not a real capability that these aircraft have.
First of all, there are psychological factors. It's not the company that responds, it's certain individuals that do. Individual who set policy, or individuals who carry out said policy.
People who set policy, i.e. people at the top of the food chain in business usually didn't get there by being kind, timid, passive, open-minded, self-effacing and objective. Instead they tend to have much larger egos than the norm and also tend to be more much agressive towards others than usual (usually in the guise of being "effective" "goal-oriented", "focused", and "exercising management authority"). They obviously must be smart enough to get away with being agressive, or they won't be successful. Oh, and by the way, I'm extremely happy that Business offers such people a constructive outlet for their energy and aggression. Because otherwise it would go into Crime or Politics (or both).
As a result, while they are successful, life shows them on a daily basis that their thinking is correct, their opinions are valuable, and that their approach to life is the right one.
Now consider what happens when you contradict someone like that. Consider first what it means exactly to contradict someone like that. You and he (or she) are in a business setting, and both are vying for a "group position", i.e. who leads the thinking of whatever group is listening at that time on the issue at hand. And the subject under consideration isn't the weather either, it's (as in the case of the blog on Morgan Sachs) about company policy. Policy as set out and supported over a period of time by themselves.
With that in mind think of how this contradicting opinion (and the one doing the contradicting) will be perceived. There are no credits for answering that the perception will be that of a threat, if not a challenge.
So lets reformulate our original and fairly neutral description of "contradicting" a executive of a firm like that.
I believe the way to formulate it that does justice to the depth of emotion and self-interest would be: "you issue a public challenge to an executive, implying that he is at best incompetent and unethical, and at worst a crook"
Now about the institutional factors. Consider that high-ranking individuals impact their environment in various ways. First of all, they lead, and they can't do that without some authority. Only the very rarest of individuals can lead purely through their influence, and without exercising authority. The norm is that you shape your environment through selection (read hire-and-fire), rewards, promotions to support and protect your general ideas and the "image" of what you do and what you stand for. In its positive form it's called "Esprit de corps". It's what e.g. the Armed Forces insist on instilling in recruits. They do that because it makes the social coherence of the organization stronger. But in its negative form it can also degenerate into group think, bullying, and abuse (e.g. Nazism, Communism, Party doctrine, Scientology, and even religious abuse at the Airforce Acacdemy (see: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4091956.stm)).
Now PR officials are a prime example of guards of a firm's public image (i.e. what others think of a firm and its actions). It's their job to be aware of the public image and to steer it in the way the firms wants it to be through propaganda. Lawyers are another example. Apart from their more mundane tasks of drawing up contracts they are specialists in the enforceable obligations in our society operates. Rules on topics like intellectual property, slander, defamation, torts, compensation for damages, etc..
Now do you understand the reaction of such companies? Their first-response mechanism is PR. Their secondary response are legal threats. Their tertiary response is litigation. All motivated by extremely aggressive and self-confident people who direct a lot of money and therefore wield a lot of power and who perceive the dissonant opinion as a threat to their personal position. Of course they get nasty!
Do I have a clue whether it is super or hyper sonic? Nope, all i can tell you is the bitch is LOUD. And freight trains don't go plowing over your head with that jet WOOOSH either. I have a buddy that works at LRAFB that says they like to do fly overs of the planes at LRAFB because our town is small but it is also lit up like an Xmas tree and it has tons of military and retired military so we don't complain when they get noisy.
Maybe that is why the black ops pilots like us too? Hell if I know. I just wish they'd find a way to put a muffler of some sort on that mother, because she sure is loud as hell. Living so close to the base all my life and having friends there and family that's retired Air Force I've got to check out just about every type of plane the USA has officially got, from the C130(can't believe the amount of cargo space they got in those) to the F4 to the F15. pretty much everything but the Raptor, which I don't think is flying nationally yet. And whatever this new mother is, it is an order of magnitude louder than anything I've seen or heard us fly before. So maybe you're right and it is supersonic not hypersonic. As far as the donuts on a rope I can't remember ever seeing them except on the mornings after the new superbitch flies over.
What I CAN tell you is that mother from the sounds it makes and how quick it passes overhead is FAST and LOUD. Of course after seeing how long they denied the Goblin I doubt any of us will know for decades unless they crash the thing in a populated area. I just hope it ain't that damned loud on the flight deck because if it is I feel sorry for the guys that gotta service that mother.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Wow! Did you look at the Facts About Goldman Sachs. He suggests that Goldman Sachs is very corrupt.
There is NO trademark issue here. He makes it very clear that he is not a representative of Goldman Sachs.
Thanks for the advice about FXAll.com. Often we would not be transferring large amounts, just several thousand dollars. We have accounts with HSBC, one of the partner banks.
Would FXAll do business with us?
The web site says "Institutional clients who have a relationship with an FXall liquidity provider, a prime broker or a broker-dealer may be eligible to trade over FXall."
Is a corporation an "institutional client"? Is HSBC an "FXall liquidity provider"? The web site is written with a lot of jargon, and assumes that readers already know a lot about the business of foreign exchange.
I hope he has a bottomless pit of money to fight this, if not he's already lost.
Today, you purchase your rights.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
There are some surprisingly uninformed criticisms here.
- a guy looking for his 15 minutes
No. I have not noticed he has much interest in fame. At least he doesn't seem to try too hard.
- site is up only because he's shorting
No. His short position is besides the point. He expects them to go down on fundamentals. This is a protest site.
To this post:
Can you point out some specific posts that qualify as 'bordering on schizophrenic lunacy'?
The few posts I looked over sound about right.
I think this site (or anyone like it) is not just a good idea, but serves an important role to further necessary civic action. This far into the economic crisis that /.ers think otherwise surprises me.
As a current client, I know the site holder to the extent of what DD I could do. His other site does provide quite a bit more information.
No, they are a company whose image has taken a big hit. They are currently hiring an entire marketing department which, in part, will "shape a messaging and brand strategy reflects today's dynamics and the firm's leadership role in helping to define it."
They went from being the largest bulge bracket firm to being a holding bank, lots of AIG's government money is going straight to them(with the attendant bad will), and a huge chunk of their growth in the last 2 years was from subprime derivatives.
If you want a higher interest rate at any given time, just check out www.bankrate.com, which is a great site for researching the health of a bank and its various interest rates. Here's a page I often turn to in order to see what the highest rates are:
http://www.bankrate.com/brm/rate/mmmf_highratehome.asp?web=brm¶ms=US,416&prodtype=chksav&market=416&product=33&state=US&sort=2
To choose a bank to deposit money into for savings, I generally will look at the bank with the highest interest rate that also has 4 stars(which indicates very good health). The bank I'm currently with for savings emails me whenever their rate changes, and they have excellent 24/7 customer service, with a competitive interest rate.
Another good site for this kind of thing is the finance section of www.fatwallet.com:
http://www.fatwallet.com/forums/finance/
The users keep a running list of the top returning CDs, Savings Accounts, and Credit Cards. They talk about all the minutiae of the different accounts and customer service, etc...
Knowledge is just opinion that you trust enough to act upon. -Orson Scott Card
I own a small ISV startup, and you would be surprised how many people are more than willing to fabricate and spread complete lies about your company and products (for various reasons of their own, usually vested interests e.g. competitors, or people using your as a scapegoat for their own failures, especially in government), and you'd be surprised how much damage they can do to your business.
Unfortunately if you show yourself to be a pussycat who just rolls over and does nothing, these people and their damaging lies do proliferate rapidly and exponentially, and you'll be crushed - so your hand is forced - you have to be willing to show that you take the liars seriously and will fight unfair slander to the end. So you are in effect forced to have policies in place to defend yourself against unfair attacks. And once you have procedures and policies, it gets harder to sit and say on a case-by-case basis, are these negative comments legitimate, or bogus. E.g. sites like this can be and often are set up by competitors or other people with vested interests. I'm guessing the top management in a very large company don't sit on a case-by-case basis and say "go after this guy", they just have e.g. lawyers and others who work for them who are tasked with dealing with these kinds of things routinely and systematically.
So while I don't condone this (I'm a big 'consumer advocate' myself), I can at least understand it.
... I don't get it. Shouldn't she have bruises or something? :P
---
I completely understand this post. Perhaps not the ones previous, but this post - yes.
Quartz Extreme and Core Image. Are there any other real reasons to spend all that money on generic hardware?
Why get so upset, what's 13 trillion between friends? Really it's only $42,105 for every man, woman and child - I'm sure the bankers that gamed the system and broke it the first time have learned their lesson and will do better this time around.
Below the comment there is a "read the rest of this comment" link... yet there is no more to read than what already showed up before I clicked the link!
... seems to me that money related industries and the issuance of currency need to be put back in public hands.
Over the last few weeks I've been thinking long the way the current monetary system is structured, the real problem is that the banks (private investors) own the government.
I know I'm not the only one who' tired of all the BS.
Attorneys don't know jack shit about PR, just about greed. Seriously, if they knew anything about PR, then we wouldn't have the asshat judge who tried to sue for $54 million and eventually lost his job, his pants and the lawsuit, Barbara Streisand would still feel as though she lives in privacy, and Goldman nut-Sachs wouldn't be a headline on slashdot.
Start listening at 51:40.
Seastead this.
Not Goldman Sachs. They're probably the most recognizable name in finance. They hate being covered by the press. The press picks on them because they're basically the Harvard of investment banking.
because I'm his alien boss and there is a termination clause should he admit he in cahoots with us. And we're not speciist I have the same termination clause in my contr
Wasn't Bear Stearns on a rampage to shut down criticism on the internet just before it went bust?
lots of AIG's government money is going straight to them
Shock of all shocks. AIG owed Goldman money. A LOT of money. The whole reason for AIG to be bailed out was so that the companies that AIG was obligated to pay money to would be minimally affected. Goldman happened to be the biggest one of those.
All of Goldman's positions were either hedged or collateralized (mind you most of AIG's trading partners did not ask for collateral from AIG, Goldman did). If Goldman had to cash in on its hedges of exposure to AIG (if AIG had not been bailed out), the AIG collapse would have cascaded its way through the financial system far worse than it did.
"Nature doesn't care how smart you are. You can still be wrong." - Richard Feynman
When I was still making porn films, just a little strip of pubic hair in the middle was in vogue with the women. Why are so many of these web sites like that? Why not use the full width of the screen?
1. Henry Paulson, former treasury secretary and key architect of the bailout plan, is a former CEO of Goldman Sachs.
And he sold all of his Goldman stock before accepting the position. So, he had zero legal tie to the firm at that point.
2. Goldman Sachs has receieved 10 billion in TARP money.
Change "has received" to "was forced to take." It was money they did not want, and are going to pay back ASAP.
3. Goldman Sachs has received 12-20 billion in additional monies via the AIG bailout.
Oh, you must be talking about the money that AIG legitimately owed Goldman. You can argue day and night about the AIG bailout, but to whom was the money going to go to if not the companies owed money by AIG?
Take your FUD elsewhere, please. You have zero understanding of the current economic problems and shouldn't speak about them out of turn.
"Nature doesn't care how smart you are. You can still be wrong." - Richard Feynman
Wow, nobody has posted the wondrous story of Blue Jeans Cable?
Monster Cable sent this small cable co a threatening letter with a grab-bag of patents that they claim he violated. Little did they know the owner was a former lawyer himself. His reply to Monster is absolutely priceless.
CommentBot 0.7a running with args "-module irritate,disagree -target random"
"The Fed's task is to supply enough reserves to support an adequate amount of money and credit, avoiding the excesses that result in inflation and the shortages that stifle economic growth." (Source, via 'pedia
In financially dire times, like right now, offering extremely little interest is just the right thing to do. On one hand, this benefits entrepreneurs who can borrow at lower rates and attemt to fight recession from their side, on the other hand it actively discourages people from saving (which is good in that situation). Seems counterintuitive, doesn't it? The idea goes like this: If you're saving up your money now, the market will continue to shrink. Companies will probably lower their prices in order to convince any buyers to buy more product. Now, prices all around will be tumbling. What you could buy for $20 weeks ago is now only $15. Deflation sets in. Your money's getting more and more valuable and just because of that, you'll hold back with spending. Instead of buying something now for $500, you'll wait a week for it to arrive at $400. Then another week for $300 and so on.
At some point, just cutting down on the margins will not be enough. Now jobs will be cut and salaries shrunk. As usual, this will mostly affect people easy to replace. Salespeople, manufactoring personnel, accountants, lower, perhaps middle management.
Since it's all recession, crisis and less money now, you'll spend even less. Instead of brand food and eating out once a week it's Tesco's Value and one brand meal per week at home. The whole circle goes on until in the end the economy actually shrinks into non-existence.
In order to avoid that: Spend healthily. Save up enough for a nice retirement, but don't overdo it. All the wealth we currently have only exists through this fragile system of (a little) inflation. Money needs to travel in order to create additional wealth. Spend it (along with everybody else) and you'll get back more (through bigger paychecks).
I sure hope they are hedged. If my company was leveraged over 1000:1, (pdf, see page 25) I'd want it to be hedged.
Banks CREATE money. They do this by creating notes for money that's been loaned.
I'd love to change the world but I can't find the source code.
That's part of the reason banks are able to steal from people: Their are people like you who try to convince others that everything they do is only logical.
Ah, that's what you MEAN, isn't it? It would be more interesting if people couldn't find places that criticised money.
Kikes to a man, I'll wager.
Anybody who is interested in the immense banking fraud we have can start reading here:
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/04/time-to-breakup-goldman-sachs.html
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/04032009/transcript1.html
additionally, you can add
127.0.0.1 nytimes.com
to your hosts file
-- I was raised on the command line, bitch
1/ True, Goldman Sachs strongly encourages mobility to/from public service and international institutions - for obvious reasons including (but not only) self-interest. Note that Paulson repeatedly declined until he was "forced" into accepting the position. In hindsight - we now understand why.
2/ Goldman Sachs escaped the subprime crisis by correctly hedging it; had a sound balance sheet (having started deleveraging much earlier) and much cash at hand; had secured financing both from Warren Buffet *and* directly from the market; and had not had a single quarterly loss. Even JP Morgan with all their deposits and unscathed balance sheet received four times as much public money. So what is your point here? By the way looking at where the stock trades it seems it was a wiser use of taxpayer money than GM, AIG or Citi... and GS just laid out a plan to repay within the next few months.
3/ This is an old myth - debunked multiple times. GS had contracts that either AIG would honor - or AIG insurers would have. GS is really *paranoid* about counterparty - and has been so much before anybody else. It is only the dramatic cascading effect of AIG collapse that would have hit GS - and ruined practically everybody. AIG is huge - from being (by far) the largest airline in the world to even the insurer of most french city councils. (Yes, even the french Ministry of finance made the trip to Washington to beg for an AIG bailout.) Think Boeing canceling the 787 program, public transportations stopping in many cities, prime time soccer matches canceled, etc. Really, as bad as *that*.
Point being: this blog is a lunatic troll based on uneducated misunderstandings and outright lies only to serve a populist agenda.
I sincerely wish GS wins that one.
Disclaimer: I used to work at GS (AC posting).