ACA itself suggested securities that ended up lowering the overall quality of the securities inside the CDOs SEC’s case against Goldman Sachs weakens | Business
I'm sorry, but how does all of this change the fact that Republican sponsored legislation is the root cause for the problem?
i keep hearing about john paulson being the shortselling mastermind that packaged the subprime mortgages and bet against them. he a different person than hank paulson the former treasury secretary, right?
good grief. is it so hard to admit that special interest influence is too prevalent in both parties and THAT is what got us into a lot of this financial mess?
It doesn't change the fact the republicans sponsored the bill, it reveals just how many "Limousine Liberals" participated in the Bipartisan Vote,(plus the Democrat President who signed it into law). So you can pound your girly little hands all you want, but the Dems are just as responsible as anyone else
i watched charlie rose interview two reporters and a lawyer about the subject. im not sure if the goldman sachs side was well represented but it was the best source of info ive had about the situation so far. in a nutshell they said the issue is the lack of disclosure about the fact that paulson (the world's most famous shortseller) packaged the mortgages. they said the difficulty in the SEC's suit is that its unclear whether this is illegal. but then today goldman sachs comes out and denies this, so it seems like they think its illegal. or----they are more worried about PR. the damage is evident given that their stock dropped pretty big the day of their reporting of heavy profits. the main group that was screwed was a german state bank. they speculate that none of these large but less sophisticated groups will want to deal with GS anymore. their analysis of regulation needed was to stop the gambling with other peoples money (publicly traded stock)--shareholders cant analyze this stuff. they can gamble with thier own money through parterships. and/or to make these bets be backed by capital. insurance companies have to back their "gambles" with a certain % of capital because the public's money is on the line. all this seems to make some sense to me. anyone think i have it wrong?
That knife cuts two ways, and you know it. Politicians from both parties are intimate with Goldman. For you and Texas to try and draw political lines is foolish and dodges the real issues. Typical partisan bs.
If you don't agree with his point you are either ignorant or naive. Gramm Leech Bliley was as bi-partisan as a bill gets. To hold either of the fear herds responsible for a bill that was passed with broad bi-partisan support is disingenuous.
