No national or social purpose served by Goldman Sachs...

tomot

and toxic derivatives bets

The broader issue raised by today's hearing is: what human purpose is served by the existence of Goldman Sachs, which concocts toxic synthetic CDOs for the purpose of allowing speculators, who are often lied to and duped, to bet for or against them. Goldman Sachs can only be described as a speculative parasite which promotes the activities of other speculative parasites, such as the John Paulson hedge fund at the expense of the public and of its other clients. It was a crime to inject $10 billion of Treasury money into Goldman Sachs. It was another crime for the Fed to lend Goldman untold billions (just how many billions Bernanke still refuses to disclose) to keep them afloat and enable more predatory profits. These crimes must stop, and the public money must be clawed back. Most important, it is time to shut down the derivatives rackets.
Goldman got $12.5 billion from taxpayers for AIG credit default swaps

WOW! the above words are not mine. They are the conclusions from those that know more about this subject. I'm just one of those peons that's being held responsible, to pay the debt obligations. Your obligations to Freedom, have just been redefined!

pbacot

tomot,

Who are these people you quote? If you made money off GS, or had investment from them, you'd think GS served a purpose. Also somebody knowledgeable & in power thought GS served a purpose, and, moreover, was "too big to fail". Defining what that means and the solution (like the break-up of these too-big banks) seems to be the issue. Didn't they pay back the money taxpayers gave them? Just playing devil's advocate (but never GS advocate).

We were just considering moving our accounts from Wells Fargo to a local bank as a gesture. Thinking about how we start with small banks then all our accounts, credit cards, and mortgages etc. get taken over eventually by a couple big banks (currently Chase & WFB).
Then we'll break up these big banks . Eventually they'll buy each other out and consolidate again, just like when they broke up Standard Oil and AT&T. Is it just cyclical?

Regards,
Peter