This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Goldman Sachs Moral Compass?

Courtesy of the StealthFlation Blog
There is no question that some of the most astute and ambitious individuals on the planet are attracted to the immense wealth generation which takes place on Wall Street. On that score, those that stake their claim at the hub of global capital formation are no different than any of us in their thirst to make money. After all, the innate craving to quench parched lips in aggregate has always been precisely what drives America's spectacular success story.
The desire to better one's lot in life is the collective fuel that advances the ferocious frenetic free market locomotive. The primal quest for cash greases the skids which make the capitalist wheels go round and round, without that deeply ingrained human need to succeed the free market express freight train would slow to a constricted comatose crawl.
The unapologetic harnessing of man's innate ambition and aspiration is fundamental to what made America the most dynamic and prosperous nation to have ever lifted humankind. So no, I have no problem with enterprise motivated by personal gain, I vigorously applaud it!
However, unlike Wall Street's perennial poster boy, Gordon Gekko, what I do have a distinct problem with is unabashed avarice and wanton greed. To handsomely profit from one's hard fought achievements in the private sector is to be commended as a personal triumph to be proud of. On the other hand, to be part of a firm which conspicuously and relentlessly siphons funds off of the public trust is a deplorable disgrace and decidedly un-American.
Friday's revelations via the internal tape recordings of Carmen Segarra, a Goldman Sach's embedded Fed regulator who was simply doing her job, once again demonstrates for all to see just how far we have fallen down the ravenous rabbit hole. The below excerpt is from our typically deferential main street media, you know something is going down when even they feel compelled to join in on the outrage:
More than four dozen hours of recordings, made by Carmen Segarra, a former Fed examiner, suggest that the Fed was far from the neutral, objective, evenhanded regulator it is supposed to be. Instead, the recordings show how red flags raised in a secret report done in 2009 by an independent investigator tasked with critiquing the New York branch appear to have been ignored even three years later. The report by the independent investigator, David Beim, a Columbia University finance professor, was commissioned as a warts-and-all review by New York Fed President William Dudley, a former Goldman Sachs partner, in late 2011. - Newsweek 09/26/14
Ask yourselves. Why was her viable investigation thwarted by the Federal Reserve itself? The very institution whose stated mission is to cautiously scrutinize and carefully monitor Wall Street's integrity, promptly scuttled the mere notion of legitimate inquiry. Goldman was simply given a free pass, same as it ever was. Perhaps it's asking too much of the Federal Reserve to police the very entities which it so clearly serves.
Now for the the Coup de Grâce, the Fed actually fired Ms. Segarra for actively pursuing a potentially glaring conflict of interest at GS. Apparently, The Street's securities sheriff is more interested in policing its deputies then chasing down the actual perpetrators. The giant vampire squid's sugar daddy is now eating its own young.
The country requires change. We demand the enlightened capitalism that our forefathers manifested, not the crony capitalism that Goldman Sach's espouses and deploys with ruthless duplicitous abandon. And no, it certainly can not be characterized as doing God's work. The time for substantive change beckons.............haven't you seen and had enough yet?
- Bdelande's blog
- 13760 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -


More than four dozen hours of recordings, made by Carmen Segarra, a former Fed examiner, suggest that the Fed was far from the neutral, objective, evenhanded regulator it is supposed to be. Instead, the recordings show how red flags raised in a secret report done in 2009 by an independent investigator tasked with critiquing the New York branch appear to have been ignored even three years later. The report by the independent investigator, David Beim, a Columbia University finance professor, was commissioned as a warts-and-all review by New York Fed President William Dudley, a former Goldman Sachs partner, in late 2011. - Newsweek 09/26/14
If you want to get really pissed view the following PBS Newshour clip at the link below. The story from Sept. 26th 2014 delves into how Goldman Sachs makes its money and just how the Fed has in many ways aided Goldman in exploiting the American public.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/making-sense/ray-rice-video-last-week-today-...
I share the disgust and anger many Americans feel hearing confirmed that Federal Reserve regulators were in bed with Goldman Sachs. While pondering the ruckus being made over revelations and tapes that Fed regulators were too darn cozy with Goldman Sachs I found myself wondering if Janet Yellen might be forced to resign. More on why this is a possibility in the article below.
http://brucewilds.blogspot.com/2014/09/yellen-could-be-forced-to-resign....
re ...(Goldman Sachs) certainly can not be characterized as doing God's work.
That depends on whose "God" you're talking about.
For instance - and this may come as a shock to the author - there's a particular tribal god that apparently told his "chosen" people that they were "above" everyone else - and that they could use any means to rob, steal, undermine , 'get one over on' non-tribe members - who were to be regarded as low-lifes... nothing more than cattle or, if you prefer the vernacular, "'goyim".
So, for once, maybe Goldman Sachs CEO Mr Lloyd Blankfein was speaking the truth - in describing his modus operandi as "doing god's work".
"The time for substantive change beckons.............haven't you seen and had enough yet?"
Where do I sign up for the squid hunt?
I'm passing out complimentary harpoons.....................
Many people do not understand that Goldman's god is Lucifer. They are doing their god's work.
If one believes the bible then this is Lucifer's world.
One question to ask: "Who is Lucifer?" ... there are several opinions, but few facts.
If Goldman is doing Lucifer's work then Lucifer is evil because Goldman is evil. One cannot do good by doing evil.
... but then again, good and evil are simply two sides of the dialectic created to keep us occupied.
The words "Goldman Sachs" and "moral compass" do not belong in the same sentence unless they are connected by some version of "does not have".
Perhaps you missed the $$$$ signs on the vampire Squid's Compass depicted there;-)
"The very institution, whose stated mission is to cautiously scrutinize and carefully monitor Wall Street's integrity"
Ahahahah! Sure buddy, sure!
Coup de Grâce
merci mon ami, je suis un con!
:-) Mais non! Excellent article!
Matt Taibbi and Alexis Goldstein comments
... " attracted to the wealth generation which takes place on Wall Street" I am positive that what goes down on Wall Street is not wealth generation. Wall street attracts hustlers; the best become true flim flam men.
The Squid's Compass
The country is in serious trouble. The Federal Reserve Act MUST be repealed AND the IRS MUST be dismantled. Our country MUST issue our own currency. Our country MUST never again grant a monopoly franchise to control our money supply to any entity other than our own citizens. It's a shame that most people in our country don't care to know about the financial chicanery that goes on with our money supply - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2sjyQGlAOs
You are 100% correct but posting a link that's 4.5 hours long is a bit much for people. Try this one....
Money As Debt
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jqvKjsIxT_8
Very well done
If they have a moral compass, it's missing the pointer.
Somehow I missed the sound on the recordings of Goldman Sachs managers shaking in their boots. I did happen to hear that ant walking by though.
I wish someone would steal that bronze Wall Street Bull in the middle of the night and recast it into a giant statue of Carmen Segarra. I’d love to see those Fed and Wall Street jacka$$e$ wake up to that one morning, as a reminder of what real bravery, courage, and strength looks like.
No, recast it as a giant vagina...with a big sign..."Cunts"
Good luck with that substantive change.
Twat.
I don't mind the rich. What I do mind, is how easy the middle class makes it for them to get richer. To paraphrase the Man with No Name, a billion dollars is alot of money: the least we all can do is to insist that they earn it.
Who said anything about minding the rich? Quite the opposite in fact. Although, I do agree with the remainder of your premise........FWIW
"Who said anything about minding the rich?"
The crowd that cherry picked Gekko's speech making him that poster boy. The OP seems like a head on defense against the same suspects. Whatever, I agree with the entire post.
<<I have no problem with enterprise motivated by personal gain, I vigorously applaud it! However, unlike Wall's Street's perennial poster board, Gordon Gekko, I do have a distinct problem with avarice and greed. To privately succeed from one's hard fought achievements in the private sector is to be commended and a great triumph to be proud of. On the other hand, to be part of a firm which conspicuously and relentlessly siphons funds off of the public trust is a deplorable disgrace and decidedly un-American.>>
Bruno, your moral compass cartoon is funny, and for those of us who have a moral compass, you are right. However, instead of morality (which is quite subjective) I would keep my focus on crime. I would say rather than immorality in general, UNPROSECUTED FRAUD is specifically the problem. To be clear, it is specifically the fact that banks are running most of the "western" economies, that is the problem. We have been experiencing a huge and worsening CRIME WAVE OF WHITE COLLAR CRIME. Banker criminals have taken over our regulatory agencies and now run the government - specifically BANKING FRAUD crime, is the solvable half of our problem. (The fact that our economies rely on government fiat, is the "unsolvable" part of the problem. But that problem will eventually fade back with the rise of unrecorded markets.)
It isn't morals that we need to focus on, it's crime.
<<The country requires change. We demand the enlightened capitalism that our forefathers manifested, not the crony capitalism that Goldman Sach's espouses and deploys with ruthless duplicitous abandon. And no, it certainly can not be characterized as doing God's work. The time for substantive change beckons.............haven't you seen and had enough yet?>>
Yup. But change isn't going to be in the armed revolution so many are calling for. It will rise with unrecorded markets, and the use of alternative (even "enemy") currencies. I'm for allowing every currency out there - national, local, crypto-, barter. The more the merrier. We should each decide what scrip we will or won't use, and for what. Down with the government scrip monopoly. Withdraw consent, withdraw acquiescence, and have patience to wait until the crims run out of marks. Down with no-risk, no-reward, no-choice government controls. Currencies must rise, and fail or grow depending on their own merits. People must learn that every investment, even down to which currency you use, requires thought of related risk and reward.
The 'revolution' happens as each individual looks at his own business interests and withdraws support, both in big ways and small, gradually from the criminals in banking and gov. If they're a criminal, then we make it our goal NOT TO DEAL WITH THEM. If they run things, then we may have to have limited dealings for awhile, but we remember they are criminals so we watch them like hawks in whatever dealings we have. We do not read or believe their propaganda. We do not give them any information that we don't strictly have to. We do not speak of them with respect. We do not trust them. We do not be obtrusive or obvious. Others may ridicule, so this isn't for thin-skinned babies, but over time they see. Oh, and we do not care about looking stupid to morons. We cannot be shamed into compliance, only forced into it, and that for a time as minimal as we can make it.
As my young nephew once said to me, "You are always looking out for ways to save money and yet you always seem to have it." I said, "Yes, that's it exactly." Nothing is served by doing business with criminals, even if they seem to be the only ones in the game. If we teach others by example to think for themselves, to take responsibility for their financial survival, then the moral compass will follow. And eventually, when the groups of people doing this become large and visible enough, our countries will (I think and hope) recover.
"It isn't morals that we need to focus on, it's crime."
No, it's morals. Goldman et al. have purchased the government, so everything they do is legal. Congressmen have made insider trading legal for themselves, and banks provide tips to enrich the congressmen. Congressmen then make bank fraud legal. The banks no longer have to mark bad debts to market. They pledge the same assets as collateral for multiple loans; whey they do it, it's called rehypothecation, when you do it, it's fraud.
I think the point he was making is that morality is too abstract and subjective a concept to be taken seriously as the first line of attack. Besides, sociopaths can't be shamed.
The perpetrators must be prosecuted. It's the only thing people like this understand. No one becomes a politician, or a big-swingin' dick at an investment house, without having terminal narcissism.
Morality is gray. Crime is black-and-white.
Couple other things have been puzzling me: wasn't it Warren Buffet who accused Goldman Sachs of selling "weapons of financial mass destruction?" But then, wasn't it Warren Buffet who also, in addition to taking a 10% interest in the company, bailed GS out? Rather than letting the firm hoist itself with its own petard? Oh yeah... and didn't Buffet also own 13% of Moody's? That would make him its largest shareholder, I believe.
Is your FedEx guy buying gold yet?
Personally, I actually DO find morality in black and white. There's things I simply won't do. It would be flat assed wrong to do them.
I won't lie to benefit myself. I will fabricate stories and shit that are harmless to others in the timeless form of 'bullshit'. But I will never tell an active, harmful lie.
I do not steal. I don't take from anyone that they do not voluntarily give to me for performance or charity, and chaity is passed on to others. I take charity not for myself.
I don't kill. Even though I was USMC, my particular life wound up pretty peaceful, and I turned it to Volunteerism in an all voluteer county ambulance where I actually saved lives.
I don't cheat. Even as my wife and I have been together for 36 years. I don't cheat on her. I don't cheat on finding cash, or having someone offer me a deal that is patently unfair to them because they're in desperate straights. I want a fair price in all my dealings.
I don't renege on my word. I signed a fucking contract, I honor it. My mortgage is still at 7.5% and I'm paid ahead. I AM looking to refi the thing for some shit I want to do. But the original contract gets paid off.
I harm no one. I have a job, and position, many would envy these days. I don't brow beat my employees, I don't terminate anyone on a whim. I don't talk down to them or conciously make them feel inadequate. When I ask how things are they tell me extremely personal things that they know I will not act upon. I have their trust and though they may have day to day pissiness about me, they know that they can come to me at any time. I won't go into details about what they have needed, but instant permission to leave to take care of family is core to it.
I'm not out to screw anyone. I tell vendors that I want an appropriate prompt payment discount, and when they provide it, they're on our pompt payment list and they get paid nealy as soon as we get their invoice. I tell them about what we have coming up and they seem to apprreciate that. (I will admit, that though I pay my personal utiiities a month and a half or so at a time, I seem to have some personal block on paying the city required garbage bill. That one has a very high psychological wall preventing it for some reason.)
In all, morality, at an individual level, is nothing BUT black and white.
I think the point he was making is that morality is too abstract and subjective a concept to be taken seriously as the first line of attack. Besides, sociopaths can't be shamed.
The perpetrators must be prosecuted. It's the only thing people like this understand. No one becomes a politician, or a big-swingin' dick at an investment house, without having terminal narcissism.
Morality is gray. Crime is black-and-white.
Couple other things have been puzzling me: wasn't it Warren Buffet who accused Goldman Sachs of selling "weapons of financial mass destruction?" But then, wasn't it Warren Buffet who also, in addition to taking a 10% interest in the company, bailed GS out? Rather than letting the firm hoist itself with its own petard? Oh yeah... and didn't Buffet also own 13% of Moody's? That would make him its largest shareholder, I believe.
Is your FedEx guy buying gold yet?
"Yup. But change isn't going to be in the armed revolution so many are calling for. It will rise with unrecorded markets, and the use of alternative (even "enemy") currencies. I'm for allowing every currency out there - national, local, crypto-, barter. The more the merrier. We should each decide what scrip we will or won't use, and for what. Down with the government scrip monopoly."
Ren, you're on it. I would, however, maintain issuance of the FRN through the Primary Stealers with one stipulation: these banks would be stopped out of the new competitive note issue; They would only be permitted their current monopoly priveleges. You see, I'd like to watch and enjoy the spectacle of the FRN and its Primary Stealers face competition and its/their inevitable extinction.
As my young nephew once said to me, "You are always looking out for ways to save money and yet you always seem to have it." I said, "Yes, that's it exactly."
It's sad that it isn't self-obvious nowadays.....
I concur with much of what you lay out. However, in my view, the waning of moral integrity is at the very heart of what ails the country economically and otherwise today....
The lack in fundamental bearings of a moral compass is precisely why these clowns are acting the way they are......
The problem is painfully obvious. The question: what do you- what can you- or anyone else, do about it? I had my day in the sun, putting my money where my mouth was. Within a year of being harrassed daily, I was cured of ever wanted to fight this system again. It's too big. And the one and only thing one is assured in revolution is a new, improved set of narcissistics
What to do? Minister truth to what is, and those who are, right in front of one.
Moral, intellectual, and financial bankruptcy. The trifecta. The solution however is not 'well intended regulators' because no matter how well-intentioned it still is .govt which =@ gunpoint. The solution is to let capitalism function. AKA no bailouts, TARP, QE, etc. Glass-Steagall is not the solution, either, as what should happen is true free market so no FDIC and no abdication of responsibilty of depositors doing their due diligence as to soundness of financial institutions. Give me a market of ratings agencies that themselves would have to prove not being bought and paid for, not SEC, CFTC, etc.
Its sure not my god.
We are running out of good options to resolve these issues. The thing to focus on is we do have options. You may not like them. But they are still there.
Goldman, Morgan et al should all rot in hell . . .
Hey Jamie, how's that sore throat ?
Nothing that guillotine therapy wouldn't sort out - hopefully sooner rather than later, along with all the other well-documented parasitic banking scum.
nope. They have "RIGHTS" but no responsibilites. BP - slap on the wrist fine which gets passed on to "consumers".
I always correct people who think the term 'consumer' applies to me.
I'm a producer. I make things to trade with other people who also make things.
A consumer is a corporate's bitch.
I always correct people who think they aren't consumers.
You produce, great. You then trade your EXCESS production. That is to say, savings is production in excess of consumption.
You eat, use energy, etc. We all consume, even if it is a shitty broad label.
We are Citizens, to refer to us by our shopping habits is an attempt to semantically demean us and disempower us. It was a label that was applied to Citizens in the 1970's as part of the political correctness destruction of language, so that we cannot even discuss things amongst ourselves as our language has become vague and imprecise.
i am not a consumer, that is implied, all life on earth consumes. I am a sentient being in a political process. I am a citizen, I am the government as defined by the constitution of my country.
Do you think it's too late? People as a whole don't remember the time before they were called consumers. Kinda like how no one remembers their previous lifestyle before the Internet.
Hmm ... scratching my head ... before the Internet, there were BBSes. They had forums in them, like Zero Hedge. In between, there was AOL, which had forums in it. Let's see ... before BBSes, there were zines. They worked through the mail. Once a month, you would send in a contribution, wherein you could respond to what others had submitted the previous month ... kind of like a forum ...
Really miss the community Bulletin Board Sites..there was a sense of neighborliness in them. One or two had openings to the true internet, though it was hard to figure out how to use it.
During the Clinton shut down I was an intern at a fire department. I went searching for a support for something I know longer remember. I found a phone number on an BBS linked internet site. I dialed the number and it rang about ten times. Finally someone answered.
"Hello? Who is this?"
"Hi, my name is <OldPhart>. I see in Bulletin (whatever it wsa) that you supply support for city annexations. Is this correct?"
"Um, who are you?"
"I'm just an intern for the Victorville Fire Department. How you doing with the shut down and all. It's bit ridiculous, isn't it?"
"You're who?"
"I'm nobody"
"How'd you get this number?"
"I found it on a BBS site."
"Well, shit, we've had this speaker on the wall for years. This is the first time it's ever been used. You scared the shit out of us."
"Really? Damn. sorry about that, but this is a listed number to reach you on this site (wwwthissite.com)"
"This number is supposed to be government only and classified."
"Well, obviously, it isn't."
I'll end it there, other than they had no assistance available for what we were looking for at the time.
Mar. 3, 2008
http://www.treasury.gov/press-center/press-releases/Pages/hp856.aspx
Really? Henry Paulson (aka “Hank the Shank”) a former Goldman Sachs CEO for eight years has a sudden animosity towards speculation? The Goldman Sachs firm is practically synonymous with the word speculation.
There will *never* be any consequences for the bad acts committed by Goldman Sachs on this earth. That's why I hope they land in the Lake of Fire.
interesting that there has never been any public discussion in the media over the instant conversion of Goldman Sachs from a brokerage and investment firm to a bank. - simply so they could receive TARP and other bailouts.
Any other firm of that size would have received scrutiny before being licensed as a bank. Yet while Hank Paulson was secretary of treasury it happened over night.
Why wasn't Leahman Bros allowed to become a bank?
I just thought it was because they had so much money, they had to be a bank...
That's a good question.
I suppose it's just another one of God's "mysterious ways".
I wouldn't be dissing honest skanks by comparing them with Paulson... ;-)
Corporations do not have morals. That's the beauty of the scam. No personal liability.