This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Goldman Sachs Moral Compass?

Bdelande's picture




 

 

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?

 

- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Sat, 09/27/2014 - 12:26 | 5262698 Frankly Speaking
Frankly Speaking's picture

I thought corporations were now considered people in which case they should be subject to incarceration or the death penalty. What say you?

Sat, 09/27/2014 - 22:04 | 5263942 lincolnsteffens
lincolnsteffens's picture

No, Corporations are not people. Corporations are "persons". The word "person" has been corrupted in such a manner by law and government as to make you believe the word person applies to you. It does not mean a human being unless it is modified as in "natural person". Otherwise in legal terminology it excludes the man or woman. Government cannot interact with you in legal or contractual matters without your conversion to a fictional entity such as a person because of the separation of powers in the Constitution. Once you "volunteer" into person-hood the government can do what ever it wants with you because as a person you only have privileges that can be taken away. Oh, so you think you didn't volunteer? Proving you are a human being and not bound by legislation is one tough thing to do. If only 5% of the people asserted their rights the government would pull back on the scam.

Sat, 09/27/2014 - 15:43 | 5263122 tvdog
tvdog's picture

Yes, a corporation guilty of felonies should face the death penalty - loss of its charter. In recent history, the closest I can see is Arthur Andersen. According to Wikipedia:

"In 2002, the firm voluntarily surrendered its licenses to practice as Certified Public Accountants in the United States after being found guilty of criminal charges relating to the firm's handling of the auditing of Enron, an energy corporation based in Texas, which had filed for bankruptcy in 2001 and later failed.[1] The other national accounting and consulting firms bought most of the practices of Arthur Andersen. The verdict was subsequently overturned by the Supreme Court of the United States. The damage to its reputation, however, has prevented it from returning as a viable business, though it still nominally exists."

The first corporate charters in the U.S. provided for a time-limited, one-year charter. After the year was up, if the company wanted to continue operating it would need to go back to the legislature to get its charter renewed. Charters need to be revoked for predator companies.

Sat, 09/27/2014 - 16:14 | 5263192 r00t61
r00t61's picture

"I'll believe that corporations are people when Texas executes one."

Sat, 09/27/2014 - 13:46 | 5262854 KnuckleDragger-X
KnuckleDragger-X's picture

A long stretch in a prison with a bunkmate named Bubba could be highly educational for Wall Steeters and FOMC members....

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!