willfullyobscure: Certainly You Jest: WTF is the best investigative journalism around doing in fugging Rolling Stone?!?


you are confused on a few things, i sense. this is the Phil Spector style of investigative journalism.

Matty is not working for a serious rag because he is a lazy, speculative, ethically-challeneged dunce who trades off on histrionics to cover up logical and factual gullies you could hide a jumbo jet in.

[citation needed]

Journalists goring your political ox are not necessarily hacks.

eqtworld: What does that have to do with anything? People making 40k a year bidding on 400k houses caused the problem.

You're woefully ignorant of the mechanics of this crisis. The impact of those loans defaulting was magnified 100 fold by derivative trading based on an improper evaluation of their risk. I'm not sure you can blame all of that on GS, bad they definitely participated and have come out smelling like a rose. Makes one suspicious.

Goldman to make record bonus payout (June 2009) (new window)

Cucullen: eqtworld: What does that have to do with anything? People making 40k a year bidding on 400k houses caused the problem.

You're woefully ignorant of the mechanics of this crisis. The impact of those loans defaulting was magnified 100 fold by derivative trading based on an improper evaluation of their risk. I'm not sure you can blame all of that on GS, bad they definitely participated and have come out smelling like a rose. Makes one suspicious.

Goldman to make record bonus payout (June 2009) (new window)

People making good business decision is certain suspicious.

Certainly You Jest: willfullyobscure: Certainly You Jest: ethically-challeneged dunce who trades off on histrionics to cover up logical and factual gullies you could hide a jumbo jet in.

[citation needed]


* - I am a professional, working journalist with a full and working knowledge of the standards and practices that go into good reporting and writing. This is inflammatory, poorly supported, lazy, hack shiat. The man does get good sources though; as long as they fit the story he already wrote in his head.*

there's your citation. I give a shiat about the politics of the issue; but this is textbook populist bullshiatrhetoric.

They just play the game well.
They pull all the dirty tricks they are accused of in the excerpt but so would anyone when the rules of the game allow it.

Who bought pump and dump internet stocks?
Greed, lazy suckers that's who.
Who got burned when oil prices fell?
dice rolling speculators of course.

It's just business and outside of being a little better at it than others where is this blood sucking, all powerful, vampire squid nonsense coming from?

Manipulating legislation and exploiting the public is what all large corporations try to do.
It's what makes them great and if entities like Aetna continue to loot America that's the public's fault for ignoring evidence and letting their emotions be played.

It's like crying because fire is hot, the heat is why it's useful, just don't be stupid and get burned.

eqtworld: This is about the amount of trouble I would expect the economy to be in given the current default rates and amount of home equity lost: it's not 100x worse than could be reasonably expected.

You should google what caused the financial crisis, instead of being willfully ignorant.

Wow. When I saw the quote in the headline and that it was from Rolling Stone, I thought, "Matt Taibi?"

Lo and behold, it was Matt Taibi.

I don't know whether to feel smug with myself for identifying his awesome way with words or whether to look up some good pics of Matt somewhere because for some reason he looks awful in this video. And normally he's full of hotness, and I don't want these newer images to override what my brain remembers.

Good thing corruption doesn't exist in the United States.

Masso: People making good business decision is certain suspicious.

When "good business decision" includes sabotage, fraud and bribery, yes it is.

Certainly You Jest: WTF is the best investigative journalism around doing in fugging Rolling Stone?!?

Historically (past 40 years or so), Rolling Stone has been the best source of independent investigative journalism.

Even Stephen King alluded to that in the end of his book "Firestarter."

Cucullen: Makes one suspicious.

Not really. I started RTFAing, and he seemed to be whinging about what investment banks do, like it was some vast shadowy conspiracy. Investment banks track down investments that look like something they can turn a profit on, bundle them up, sell them, and make money. The fact that those investments may be garbage in the long term isn't their concern, nor is it their problem.

The fact that Goldman Sachs managed to come out of this looking good is that they were able to sniff out when the market was going to drop, and when they would stop being able to turn a profit, and they got out.

All bubbles are great moneymakers- if you get out before they pop. It's hard, perhaps impossible to predict when that's going to happen. You know it will, but you can't say when. Not with enough accuracy to maximize your profits. So you have to gamble, you have to lean on a bit more art than science, and you do your best to ride the bubble right up to the point it's going to pop, and you get out.

Goldman Sachs didn't get out in time, but it got out early enough that it wasn't a problem for them. They took a hit, but not so bad as some other banks.

Cucullen: When "good business decision" includes sabotage, fraud and bribery, yes it is.

What sabotage? What fraud? There were a few institutional failings, and there was a lot of bad math being passed around. It's not some shadowy conspiracy- it's a bunch of greedy people doing what greedy people do. Even worse, they were blatantly transparent about what they were doing, because, let's be honest: it's what we all expected from them.

And it's not bribery- it's campaign contributions.

t3knomanser: Not really. I started RTFAing, and he seemed to be whinging about what investment banks do, like it was some vast shadowy conspiracy. Investment banks track down investments that look like something they can turn a profit on, bundle them up, sell them, and make money. The fact that those investments may be garbage in the long term isn't their concern, nor is it their problem.

Is this an appropriate point to mention the ratings agencies?

Cucullen: Masso: People making good business decision is certain suspicious.

When "good business decision" includes sabotage, fraud and bribery, yes it is.

They're greedy and underhanded bastard, but I don't any conspiracy in what they do.

Came for the head crab reference, left dissappointed.

godofusa.com: SVenus: And the next bubble will be controlled by Goldman-Sachs, too.

Carbon trading. It's like a Ponzi scheme for jobs.

GE is going to make a KILLING from the AGW hoax.

I don't thing AGW is a hoax, however, I think the solutions being put forward and marketed as having any real impact on it at this point are hoaxes. The only way we could reverse it is to have huge amounts of the population die away and have the rest return to a pre-industrial existence.

the most telling comment from Taibi is the statement about people being afraid to talk to him and insisting on anonymity....he said it felt like he was doing a piece on organized crime.
at least we know what to stay away from. carbon futures....WTF?

Wow, a whole thread and nobody's mentioned Hank Paulson? Why is everyone talking about George Soros? He wasn't the CEO of Goldmans who later became Treasury Secretary who presided over a huge bank bailout which incidentally benefited his former employer.

Goldmans is the Haliburton of banking. The problem isn't that they are a bunch of shrewd traders (which they are), the problem is that they are a bunch of shrewd traders who can direct government policy.

SupremeLeader: Ah, the greater fool theory.

I use that to justify scamming retards out of their money by selling them magic crystals.

A great theory, as long as you get rid of your soul and conscience first.

Welcome to Sepculation 101. Then again, if the crystals you sell actually do have magic powers but the 'tards fail to disclose this to you, who's the greater fool?

Bad_Seed: Wow, a whole thread and nobody's mentioned Hank Paulson? Why is everyone talking about George Soros? He wasn't the CEO of Goldmans who later became Treasury Secretary who presided over a huge bank bailout which incidentally benefited his former employer.

Goldmans is the Haliburton of banking. The problem isn't that they are a bunch of shrewd traders (which they are), the problem is that they are a bunch of shrewd traders who can direct government policy.

Soros is a currency speculator/trader. He's done shiat to the Pound Sterling, and is pretty much persona non grata in Malaysia for destroying their currency. Soros is no "white hat" when it comes to currency futures & currency trade.

Now, Soros' currency trading was legal, just like speculating in mortgage backed securities was legal. If you want to blame GS for the crash in MBS prices & connect the dots over to the housing market, then you should have a field day with Soros' currency trading.

Bad_Seed: Wow, a whole thread and nobody's mentioned Hank Paulson? Why is everyone talking about George Soros? He wasn't the CEO of Goldmans who later became Treasury Secretary who presided over a huge bank bailout which incidentally benefited his former employer.

Goldmans is the Haliburton of banking. The problem isn't that they are a bunch of shrewd traders (which they are), the problem is that they are a bunch of shrewd traders who can direct government policy.

Agreed. Everything that's happened since the bailout from both parties has been a wholesale loot of the treasury, because they now know they can do anything. It's rats fleeing a sinking ship with everything they can.

willfullyobscure: Certainly You Jest: WTF is the best investigative journalism around doing in fugging Rolling Stone?!?


you are confused on a few things, i sense. this is the Phil Spector style of investigative journalism.

Matty is not working for a serious rag because he is a lazy, speculative, ethically-challeneged dunce who trades off on histrionics to cover up logical and factual gullies you could hide a jumbo jet in.

You know, you may be right. Apparently you spotted many of these these "logical and factual gullies" in his article.

If you have a minute, would you mind pointing them out to us, telling us where he's wrong, and what the truth really is?

Thanks in advance.

SupremeLeader: Wait, the crystals actually work?
This changes everything!

Well, this depends on your definition of "work". Warding off evil spirits, not so much... but convincing a cute hippie witch you're a SNAG, no pun intended; they work like a charm.

legion_of_doo: Soros is a currency speculator/trader. He's done shiat to the Pound Sterling, and is pretty much persona non grata in Malaysia for destroying their currency. Soros is no "white hat" when it comes to currency futures & currency trade.

The difference between Soros shorting the Pound and Goldmans making off like bandits is that Goeff Howe was not a former Soros employee.

The political trolls might want to consider that lots of G&S employees work for and contribute to both political parties. The usual partisan tactics applied to this subject make you look even more retarded then usual.


G&S isn't the only company to repeatedly pay fines for security violations that equaled a tiny fraction of the profits they earned while breaking the law or the only company to receive large insurance payouts on terrible investments only because the government bailed out there insurance company, but they are a good example.

The article would be much stronger without the veiled, potentially unintentional anti-semitism in the first paragraph.

Hint to writers: if you're going to talk about anything regarding banking (particularly investment banking), stay as far away from the term "blood-sucking" as you can, even if it is perfectly descriptive. Even if you don't mean it to, it carries a weight that few of us are taught about today, but most of us sort of "know" what it means.

AnotherDisillusionedCollegeStudent: The article would be much stronger without the veiled, potentially unintentional anti-semitism in the first paragraph.

Hint to writers: if you're going to talk about anything regarding banking (particularly investment banking), stay as far away from the term "blood-sucking" as you can, even if it is perfectly descriptive. Even if you don't mean it to, it carries a weight that few of us are taught about today, but most of us sort of "know" what it means.

Would it be ok, if the Bank had a less Jewish-sounding name?

AnotherDisillusionedCollegeStudent: Hint to writers: if you're going to talk about anything regarding banking (particularly investment banking), stay as far away from the term "blood-sucking" as you can, even if it is perfectly descriptive. Even if you don't mean it to, it carries a weight that few of us are taught about today, but most of us sort of "know" what it means.

sounds anti-vampire to me. or anti-leech. are you saying you can't talk about greedy bankers without being anti-Semitic?

willfullyobscure: Certainly You Jest: willfullyobscure: Certainly You Jest: ethically-challeneged dunce who trades off on histrionics to cover up logical and factual gullies you could hide a jumbo jet in.

[citation needed]


* - I am a professional, working journalist with a full and working knowledge of the standards and practices that go into good reporting and writing. This is inflammatory, poorly supported, lazy, hack shiat. The man does get good sources though; as long as they fit the story he already wrote in his head.*

there's your citation. I give a shiat about the politics of the issue; but this is textbook populist bullshiatrhetoric.

Sorry, I see that you already answered my last question - just as expected.

For your next trick, I suggest that you label Taibbi as an "anti-Semite" and a "neo-Nazi". Maybe that will make people ignore him.

/You can always hope

godofusa.com: crab66: godofusa.com: Democrats, the party of Wall Street.

The opposite of truth is always fun.

Goldman Sachs is a Democrat factory. See: John Corzine. The "Wall Street Wizard" who destroyed New Jersey.

Not to mention Tim Geitner, this administrations little darling.

Farker T: For your next trick, I suggest that you label Taibbi as an "anti-Semite" and a "neo-Nazi"

done and done. it's a reflexive response.

blood...bankers...man, it's gonna be weird in September (new window)

Awesome article. Maybe they can make a crappy movie with Clive Owen.

GaryPDX: Not to mention Tim Geitner, this administrations little darling.

When did he work for Goldman?

The_Patriot: blood...bankers...man, it's gonna be weird in September (new window)

Thanks for the link to the most unreadable web page I've ever gone to.

hahawinnipeg: Awesome article. Maybe they can make a crappy movie with Clive Owen.

I think you and I are the only people here who will get that reference.

Clarence Potter: GaryPDX: Not to mention Tim Geitner, this administrations little darling.

When did he work for Goldman?

The TAX CHEAT worked for the Federal Reserve Bank of NY, so just as corrupt as GS.

Clarence Potter: GaryPDX: Not to mention Tim Geitner, this administrations little darling.

When did he work for Goldman?

When hasn't he? 5 years at the NY Fed and he was clueless?..uh huh.

GaryPDX: When hasn't he? 5 years at the NY Fed and he was clueless?..uh huh.

When, specifically, did he work for Goldman?

ExperianScaresCthulhu: Linux

hardly. last time i checked, this Country was founded on a Government of, by and for the People, not wallstreet, Citibank, GM, or any other company.

Clarence Potter: GaryPDX: Not to mention Tim Geitner, this administrations little darling.

When did he work for Goldman?

Do you mean "work for" as in "was employed by", or as in "worked to benefit"?

Watch the video embedded here:

Is Tim Geithner Too Close to Goldman Sachs? (pops)

Clarence Potter: GaryPDX: When hasn't he? 5 years at the NY Fed and he was clueless?..uh huh.

When, specifically, did he work for Goldman?

You can't read? He was at the NY Fed for 5 years. You don't have to be on their payroll to do their bidding.

It would be interesting to learn how much wealth was destroyed in the GS-underwritten CDOs, as a percentage of the entire wealth destruction from the housing bubble. Likewise with GS- financed IPOs in the tech bubble. I suspect it would not be nearly enough to justify Taibbi's thesis - and the fact that he doesn't seem to talk about the low interest rate regimes that preceded each bubble is fairly telling. After all, the Fed deliberately pumped up the housing bubble to fight weak employment and what looked like a really bad looming recession (not necessarily an irrational call on their part). My guess is that a world without GS would be a world that looks a hell of a lot like our world.

Farker T: willfullyobscure: Certainly You Jest: willfullyobscure: Certainly You Jest: ethically-challeneged dunce who trades off on histrionics to cover up logical and factual gullies you could hide a jumbo jet in.

[citation needed]


* - I am a professional, working journalist with a full and working knowledge of the standards and practices that go into good reporting and writing. This is inflammatory, poorly supported, lazy, hack shiat. The man does get good sources though; as long as they fit the story he already wrote in his head.*

there's your citation. I give a shiat about the politics of the issue; but this is textbook populist bullshiatrhetoric.

Sorry, I see that you already answered my last question - just as expected.

For your next trick, I suggest that you label Taibbi as an "anti-Semite" and a "neo-Nazi". Maybe that will make people ignore him.

/You can always hope

maybe I was unclear.

FORSOOTH, all ye now present:I giveth NOT the paltry weight and inconsequent value of a pile of Human Excreta in return for the value of my Opinions on the political nature of this Discourse, yea, even verily.

leaning on inflammatory populist barnburning is hack shiat whether it is Taibbi or O'Reilly. I stand by my professional assessment. this is all sizzle, no sausage.

GaryPDX: You can't read? He was at the NY Fed for 5 years. You don't have to be on their payroll to do their bidding.

Oh, I see... your confusing conspiracy for fact. Got it, thanks.

eqtworld:
Come on, this is like the 9/11 truthers who think Bush blew up the Pentagon with a missile and flew remote control jets into the towers.

This is exactly right. Bunch of scary-sounding conspiracy nonsense by someone who has no idea what is really going on.

Clarence Potter: GaryPDX: You can't read? He was at the NY Fed for 5 years. You don't have to be on their payroll to do their bidding.

Oh, I see... your confusing conspiracy for fact. Got it, thanks.

If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, guess what? How do you explain little Timmy at the NY Fed and supposedly being completely clueless of what was happening and now he's the Sec of Treasury?

Yea okay. Coincidences of this magnitude do not exist.

Hobodeluxe: AnotherDisillusionedCollegeStudent: Hint to writers: if you're going to talk about anything regarding banking (particularly investment banking), stay as far away from the term "blood-sucking" as you can, even if it is perfectly descriptive. Even if you don't mean it to, it carries a weight that few of us are taught about today, but most of us sort of "know" what it means.

sounds anti-vampire to me. or anti-leech. are you saying you can't talk about greedy bankers without being anti-Semitic?

No, I'm saying if you're going to talk about greedy bankers, don't use anything that can be interpreted as anti-Semitic. There's too much history there to be ignorant of the implications of the usage, and it will severely damage your argument to a wide portion of your audience.

Blood-sucking is an anti-Semitic epithet implying a few things - one, that Jews were exploiting the Christian society that they lived within and leeched off of it, and two, the belief that Passover bread had to be made with the blood of Christian children (which is most likely an analogy for the banking practices of the time - interest was considered a sin by the Church). Anti-Semitic literature since time immemorial has depicted Jews as parasites.

Personally, I think it's a tribute to the United States that Jewish people are not considered separate from the rest of us, and that most of us can be ignorant of these sorts of things without malice, but it's unwise to use these phrases without understanding what they imply.

AnotherDisillusionedCollegeStudent: The article would be much stronger without the veiled, potentially unintentional anti-semitism in the first paragraph.

Hint to writers: if you're going to talk about anything regarding banking (particularly investment banking), stay as far away from the term "blood-sucking" as you can, even if it is perfectly descriptive. Even if you don't mean it to, it carries a weight that few of us are taught about today, but most of us sort of "know" what it means.

Some of us weren't raised in anti-Semitic environments. Care to enlighten those of us as to the anti-Semitic connotations of "blood-sucking?"

Oh, you did. Never mind.