Goldman Sachs
NashvillePJfan
Posts: 594
I am so distraught by what I am reading about how this one investment bank is able to control government policy and steal from the working class. Has the band spoken out on this Wall Street greed factory and pointed to any ways we can get involved to stop the madness?
I gather speed . . . Great Western Forum - Jul 13, 1998; Great Western Forum - Jul 14, 1998; Verizon Wireless Amphitheatre Irvine - Jun 02, 2003; Verizon Wireless Amphitheatre Irvine - Jun 03, 2003; Tweeter Center - Jul 11, 2003; Santa Barbara County Bowl - Oct 28, 2003; Gorge Amphitheatre - Sep 01, 2005; Pepsi Arena - May 12, 2006 Summerfest - Jun 29, 2006; The Forum - Jul 09, 2006; Aloha Stadium - Dec 09, 2006; Bonnaroo - Jun 14, 2008; Tweeter Center - Jun 28, 2008; Tweeter Center - Jun 30, 2008; United Center - Aug 23, 2009
United Center - Aug 24, 2009; Verizon Wireless Amphitheatre Indiana -May 07, 2010; Madison Square Garden - May 20, 2010; Madison Square Garden - May 21, 2010
EV Solo 2008: LA1, Boston 1, DC1
EV Colo 2009: Nashville 1&2
Dead Man Walking: The Concert: March 29, 1998
United Center - Aug 24, 2009; Verizon Wireless Amphitheatre Indiana -May 07, 2010; Madison Square Garden - May 20, 2010; Madison Square Garden - May 21, 2010
EV Solo 2008: LA1, Boston 1, DC1
EV Colo 2009: Nashville 1&2
Dead Man Walking: The Concert: March 29, 1998
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
Who do you think was responsible for the "phat finger". Now the W.H. thinks it no big deal that their sc nominee was on an advisory board for Goldman. Fucking joke. If you are in the market get out now....
goldman sachs also 'donated' a little under $1 MILLION to obama's presidential campaign
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
the same people that own almost all of the major banks (ESPECIALLY after the financial "collapse" of 2008),
also own the White House, the Supreme Court, most of the Senate, and a good chunk of Congress.
Is it really that big of a surprise to so many on this board?
I'm not talking down, i just thought it had been more obvious than this for a while.
I mean it's been glaring, not just in this White House but in the last half dozen at least.
Again, Goldman Sachs is just the visible golden index finger of a giant blood sucking monster of Mammon.
One that does as it's own will pleases, and may or may not necessarily serve YOUR interests.
But don't go getting caught up blaming "Capitalism" for all this.
Remember that MOST of these folks are, in all actuality, some strange globalist form of a hybrid Fascist-Socialist breed. That is, they want to share YOUR wealth around with their rich ass friends, making you THINK that it is a giant happy global "brotherhood" of equally paying, equally sharing happy-dappy folk. But, the second you, or anyone else steps out of line, its SQUASH like a boot to the throat. So, keep paying your taxes, pay for your healthcare, get ready for your carbon credits, we may need a global poverty tax, don't think about yourself, the citizen in this new century "will be required to do more, not less", "work sets you free", get back on that tread mill and run run run ... the MAN is counting on you, bub! The bank man needs more money ... its for the good of the people. Honest, it is.
If I opened it now would you not understand?
Curious why you say this at this point?
I was screaming bloody bloody bloody murder about this almost two years ago (and probably on going for a year), but i would think its a little late to start worrying about the sky falling now.
The globalists already have the better chunk of their revised global banking policies in place.
They got SDRs back off the ground. They got consolidated authority for the SEC and Fed.
They got unlimited power to do what ever they want\need out of the Bail Out bill.
They got the bail out(s).
They essentially have unlimited behind the scenes manipulatory control of the entire banking system, including outright control of the individual banks if they so want or choose ... this is specifically *authorized* control, not just theoretical or conspiratorial control (like "the plunge protection team" or something) ...
I'm not a genius, or in on their plans, so i don't know what other reasons they could need or want to tank the markets again for. I'm not saying it's not possible, but i AM saying that there is only so much lower that they can (or would likely be willing) to go in the markets in order to achieve their clandestine aims.
Could we a return back down to the 8,000 range?
Certainly. But its not looking to-to imminent (DOW currently fighting support\resistance line at 10,800 is a LOT better than staring at a freefall below 10,200) ... and to call a bottom (not that i would ever put money on a falling knife) i don't think they can really let the markets stumble much below 6,500 without causing global chaos.
Remember the 33rd degree Masonic motto ... "Ordo Ab Chao" ... Order OUT OF Chaos.
They are tending towards ORDER, a New World one, even.
I'm not saying they won't let the markets run down one more time.
But everyone was already given one stellar chance to bail in the middle of the "true" crisis of 08-09.
Why jump out again now?
I dunno.
Ride the wave where it takes you.
If I opened it now would you not understand?
contestant number 1: All the money people in the world are conspiring, and have been for centuries if not millennia. Capitalism is faultless, cause it's a big covert scheme with flawless honour among thieves that is to blame.
contestant number 2: This is what you get when you combine capitalist principles and ambitions for power and importance. Capitalism, or "capitalism" for you purists, will always be at the intersection between these two, and thus always give the capital owners power. Capitalism is flawed and the big players are constantly fucking eachother over in the pursuit of power and influence (although some cooperate from time to time for a usually limited period).
I'm gonna reveal that my chosen one is the second. The biggest grief people have with the money men is that they have power. At the same time, many here think that more power (money) should be given to them through de-regulation and such out of fear of the state. The state have what power it is granted, while eliminating it causes the people with money to rule, as they are the ones who can pay for anything they want.
You wanna keep the capitalist principle, you better be a staunch defender of tough regulations, cause otherwise, this is exactly what you get. Pompous overinflated financial egos that shun nothing in search of the next pay-out, and who gets away with it. Compare the complexity of the capitalist economy with a computer. You're a damn fool if you dont have anti-virus software and firewalls on your computer. The economy also needs the corresponding features to stay functioning. The "natural state" is not a functioning computer, but a mess of viruses and software errors that add up over time. Same with the fabled "natural state" of capitalism. Markets usually require assistance to remain free, otherwise a few big players eventually eat the others and make the rules themselves.
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
Laws against fraud, theft, and extortion are all that are needed to accomplish this "assistance" of which you speak. Government's role should be to enforce contracts, not re-write them. That has always been my take on things. I guess you could say, I'm for de-regulation to make things simpler-- but the few regulations left need to be enforced strictly.
Also, if you haven't heard yet, the Senate voted DOWN a full Audit of the Fed in the Financial Reform Bill.
sigh
edit - i don't mean that in a patronizing way
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
It's all good. I didn't think you did.
By the way, here's a list of how everyone voted. If your Senator voted "Nay" they voted against REAL transparency of The Federal Reserve:
http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_ ... vote=00138
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
How sloppy is the enforcement of the thousands of regulations on the books right now? How many of those "regulations" are really put in place for the loopholes that they provide under the guise of protecting consumers?
I'm pro-honest business, by not giving business a hand in writing the laws to their favor. The best way to do that is to keep the laws simple and easy to interpret.
Dan,
i still stand by my principles, even in as misunderstood a fashion as you seem to take them.
The free market may be the worst system ever invented, but there isn't anything better.
I have zero problems with proper regulation and even am pro-intervention, as long as it's the people, and at a state or local level doing the intervening. I have BIG reservations about BIG Government using it's heavy hand to "fix" things. As Vinny pointed out, it is almost ALWAYS the BIG Private Interests themselves doing this "regulating" or in the case of the Bush's, their Quote\Unquote "Deregulating" (hahahah) ...
Free markets can and do work.
They do NOT necessarily hand over the reins to the richest of the rich.
Only when you start COMBINING COMMUNISM WITH CAPITALISM to form some quasi-fascist-socialist state do you run in to this Mega-Corporate Runaway-Capitalism that we have now.
You've got a financial system that RAPES the poor and middle class, and hands all their essence right over to the super elite who have engineered the system in their favor. To be CRYSTAL CLEAR i'm not talking about some little minutiae of the public law or a loop hole or two ...
I'm talking about the VERY FABRIC of our current financial system ... IE the Federal Reserve system itself ... ie DEBT BEARING NOTES AS LEGAL TENDER ... possibly the biggest scam ever foisted over on the people.
Once you hand over the money supply to the elite private interests and their elite private bank ... either directly, or in the case of America, quazi-indirectly, vis-a-vis the "Federal" "Reserve", then you set the stage for the rapid decline of your Nation's financial health.
The biggest problem with America, historically speaking, was that IT WAS DOING TOO WELL.
The bankers were pissed because borrowing was down and saving were way up. They had to do SOMETHING, so they conspired together (yes, it's true, Dan... Conspiracies happen!) to come up with away to re-engineer the economy in their favor ... they have done this at least three times now in an epic fashion.
So, no, i don't accept your theory that free markets necessarily breed an over-fed elite and an underfed minority. There are PLENTY of cases in history to prove the opposite of this, and to show that the elite always try to BRING DOWN functioning free markets (what the fuck do you think has been going on in this country for the last century???) ... also their is MORE than plenty of case history to show what happens when NON-MARKET economies "thrive" in a country ... namely, they go to shit real quick!
The biggest problem with free markets from a philosophic perspective is one thing, and one thing only: THEY BREED COMPLACENCY ON THE PART OF THE THE PUBLIC.
Without a functioning democratic system, where the public is EDUCATED ON THE ISSUES, understands where threats lies, and PARTICIPATES IN A MEANINGFUL FASHION, then the free market is bound to become a No Mans Land real quick.
One other thing to add.
The SECOND greatest CURRENT threat to our system, besides the Federal Reserve, is and has been since its inception, the Federal Income Tax ... this abhorrent, mandatory, wealth redistribution and enslavement scheme is the next largest weapon in the Economic Terrorist's arsenal ... and they have used it to devastating effect wherever they can get it instituted.
Again, i point you straight back to the Communist Manifesto itself.
National Central Banks and Progressive Income Tax are BOTH MAJOR PLANKS OF THE COMMUNIST SYSTEM.
YOUR LEADERS ARE NOT "CAPTIALISTS", FOLKS.
YOU BETTER DO YOUR HOMEWORK!
If I opened it now would you not understand?
to many people confuse capitalism with corporatism...
My point is that the "free market" as you describe never ever have existed. (Like communism in that way) What we had before the corporatist free market democracies was absolutist monarchies. Rights then wasn't an issue as your life was a privilege granted by the king. Business was something you could do because the king gave his permission. The US was founded just when the scales of power started tipping from monarchy, feudalism and nobility towards the bourgeois class (traders, bankers, factory owners etc). The US at it's inception was a break from monarchy, true, but in favour of an oligarchy of land owners. There were no "free markets" then either at any meaningful scale.
What one regards as the "free market" today, only remains free because government enables it to be. All developed countries also early learned that they had to take some care of their citizens in the new industrialized world since people no longer grew their own food (nor can they), and social unrest was bubbling under the surface. Here is born the need for taxation, which later also was bolstered by the political wish for taxation in order to spend on social programs. True, taxes is a continuance of what the kings were doing to support their wars and pet projects, but has since been put to other and better uses.
Modern society as we know it exists in the space between free markets and communism, which are the extremes of left/right as we know it generally from politics. Righties will exagerrate how communist we are, and lefties will exaggerate how free market we are. The claim of communism is seriously over-rated, especially if you mean the US (Unless anything left of republican is by definition is communism, but that's utter BS), but as the right leaning people you are, you fret about encroaching "communism".
One question thogh:
How can government regulation not be BIG GOVERNMENT? Who should do it if not the government, and won't they by your definition be BIG GOVERNMENT the moment they do anything?
PS: As for conspiracies, I know they exist, Everyday everywhere people conspire. BUT, such conspiracies that can be identified are almost always about individual gain and influence. You might stretch it to international politics between nations, even. What is BS is that the same conspiracies go on for centuries, or that all conspiracies are basically coordinated by a demi-god super-elite. That seems to be a roundabout way to acknowledge what visibly goes on in society, but refusing to see that what you're talking about is class struggle, which is very openly fought with capitalists on one side and workers on the other. If you just acknowledge class struggle coming from the structures of society being as they are, including capitalism, wealth, ownership and so on, you don't need the conspiracy.
(edit) So instead of digging deep into books from 200+ years ago or going on long walks into esoteric quasi-religious country, you can find more from just paying attention to what visibly goes on. The truth might not be as hidden as you make it out to be
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
Simple laws sound good, but are really impossible if you have a specific aim with them. If they're too simple, there's no need for loopholes, you just avoid them altogether. If they're too difficult, they get harder to enforce, and may trap more than was the intention. So the trick is to make them difficult enough so that the laws produce the desired result, but still simple enough for the enforcers to understand. That may result in loopholes, but loopholes are better than a wall missing if you catch my drift.
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
I'd also say that if your Senator voted nay he is for big banking. Vote looks to be down party lines. So Dems are you going to call your Senator and complain? I did.
my republican senator voted yeah but oddly the democratic senator from my state voted nay....
though, i saw this today
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/05/11/sanders-audit-fed/
Senate passes Sanders’ amendment to audit the Federal Reserve.
One of the frequent targets of ire from both the left and right is the Federal Reserve, which critics charge is failing to be “accountable to the President and Congress.” Shortly after noon today, the Senate passed, by a 96-0 vote, Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-VT) amendment requiring a one-time audit of the Federal Reserve since Sept. 2008. The audit covers the time when the Federal Reserve became active in using its resources to help prop up rapidly failing financial institutions and megabanks. Sanders had altered his amendment since its original introduction to limit it to an audit of the Fed’s books only since the recent financial crisis. The amendment originally called for a full audit of the institution’s records, and Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX), who successfully passed such a measure in the House of Representatives and advocates for ending the Federal Reserve, referred to Sanders’ amendment as “watered down.”
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
"..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
“..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rIcQLLYh ... re=related
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
'Goldman Sucks'. Yeah, I can dig it. I wonder why they didn't think of that?
sad how so little has changed
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
Shit is about to change real soon...................
United Center - Aug 24, 2009; Verizon Wireless Amphitheatre Indiana -May 07, 2010; Madison Square Garden - May 20, 2010; Madison Square Garden - May 21, 2010
EV Solo 2008: LA1, Boston 1, DC1
EV Colo 2009: Nashville 1&2
Dead Man Walking: The Concert: March 29, 1998
United Center - Aug 24, 2009; Verizon Wireless Amphitheatre Indiana -May 07, 2010; Madison Square Garden - May 20, 2010; Madison Square Garden - May 21, 2010
EV Solo 2008: LA1, Boston 1, DC1
EV Colo 2009: Nashville 1&2
Dead Man Walking: The Concert: March 29, 1998
Goldman Sachs director quits 'morally bankrupt' Wall Street bank
Greg Smith resigns as executive director of Goldman's European equity derivatives business after devastating attack
Juliette Garside and Jill Treanor
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 14 March 2012
Wall Street bank Goldman Sachs has suffered a severe blow to its reputation after one of its bankers announced his resignation in the New York Times by declaring his employer "morally bankrupt".
Questions were immediately raised about the relationship between the firm and its clients – whom the departing employee, Greg Smith, said were described as "muppets" by his superiors.
Smith, who was based in London, made a savage attack on the culture of Goldman, which only two years ago was damaged by another London-based banker, Fabrice Tourre, who described creating "Frankenstein" products that showed scant regard for the needs of the firm's clients.
Smith's public resignation letter made reference to the Tourre affair, as well as to the infamous description of Goldman in Rolling Stone magazine as "a great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity".
Smith said that none of these incidents had taught the firm any humility or integrity. He wrote: "It makes me ill how callously people [at the bank] talk about ripping their clients off. Over the last 12 months I have seen five different managing directors refer to their own clients as 'muppets', sometimes over internal email."
Smith reckoned the fast track to a promotion involved persuading clients to invest in stocks or other products "that we are trying to get rid of because they are not seen as having a lot of potential profit". "Today, if you make enough money for the firm (and are not currently an ax [sic] murderer) you will be promoted into a position of influence," he wrote.
Smith described himself as an executive director and head of the firm's US equity derivatives business in Europe, the Middle East and Africa. He is thought to have been the only person in that department and was a vice-president, which some City sources suggested might be a disappointment after 12 years with the firm.
Goldman wanted to get clients to trade "whatever will bring the biggest profit to Goldman" – a strategy referred to as "hunting elephants".
"You don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure out that the junior analyst sitting quietly in the corner of the room hearing about 'muppets', 'ripping eyeballs out' and 'getting paid' doesn't exactly turn into a model citizen," wrote Smith, who said he had been selected to appear in a recruitment video and in 2006 had managed the summer intern programme in New York for sales and trading.
Goldman Sachs was quick to deny the accusations levelled by Smith, but may face an uphill battle in clearing its name with clients, which range from governments to major international companies and big players on the financial markets.
It was reported that publishers were trying to track down Smith to offer him a book deal.
Lord Oakeshott, the Liberal Democrat peer and his party's former Treasury spokesman in the Lords, said he would table questions to seek clarity on any relationship between the UK government and Goldman.
He said: "We know in the City that Goldman help themselves before their clients. Now here's the proof. Greg Smith says you get promoted there if you make enough money for the firm and you are not an axe murderer - and the people of Greece and the rest of the eurozone are paying the price after Goldmans cooked their books and Greece joined the euro at an unsustainably high exchange rate. Until this culture is stamped out, Goldman are not fit and proper to receive a penny of British taxpayers' money or advise our government in any way."
Goldman advised Labour on the nationalisation of Northern Rock and acts as an official market marker of UK government bonds, known as gilts. Goldman alumni can be found in US political circles: the US Treasury secretary at the time of the banking crisis was Hank Paulson, who quit as boss of Goldman to take up the role in the Bush administration.
Smith reckoned much had changed since Paulson quit, and the current bosses, chief executive Lloyd Blankfein and president Gary Cohn, were appointed. The pair had "lost hold of the firm's culture on their watch", during which time Blankfein once blurted that he was doing "God's work".
Smith yearned for the previous culture – "the secret sauce that made this place great" – which had been about "teamwork, integrity, a spirit of humility, and always doing right by our clients".
Blankfein and Cohn issued a joint statement from New York, where a new head of public relations, Jake Siewert, a White House press secretary during the Clinton administration, was installed only three days ago.
"In a company of our size, it is not shocking that some people could feel disgruntled. But that does not and should not represent our firm of more than 30,000 people," said the statementby the pair, who were told by Smith that he said he wanted his public resignation to be "wake up call".
Smith's own career prospects might now be in doubt despite him boasting of his full scholarship from South Africa to Stanford University, selection as a Rhodes Scholar national finalist, and bronze medal for table tennis at the Maccabiah Games in Israel.
David Way, a headhunter at Marks Sattin, reckoned these anecdotes read like a CV. But, Way noted: "like most of the City's major employers, Goldman Sachs have a strong network of alumni running companies across the world who could be bosses or clients for high-level professionals changing jobs."
Nice.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/goldman-r ... 57964.html
Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (GS) saw $2.15 billion of its market value wiped out after an employee assailed Chief Executive Officer Lloyd C. Blankfein's management and the firm's treatment of clients, sparking debate across Wall Street.
The shares dropped 3.4 percent in New York trading yesterday, the third-biggest decline in the 81-company Standard & Poor's 500 Financials Index, after London-based Greg Smith made the accusations in a New York Times op-ed piece.
Smith, who also wrote that he was quitting after 12 years at the company, blamed Blankfein, 57, and President Gary D. Cohn, 51, for a "decline in the firm's moral fiber." They responded in a memo to current and former employees, saying that Smith's assertions don't reflect the firm's values, culture or "how the vast majority of people at Goldman Sachs think about the firm and the work it does on behalf of our clients."
Former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker, 84, whose "Volcker rule" would limit banks like New York-based Goldman Sachs from making bets with their own money, called Smith's article "a radical, strong" piece. "I'm afraid it's a business that leads to a lot of conflicts of interest," Volcker said at a conference in Washington sponsored by the Atlantic.
Goldman Sachs slid $4.17 to $120.37 yesterday, leaving the shares still up 33 percent this year. The stock advanced 0.7 percent to $121.20 by 11:16 a.m. in Germany today.
David Wells, a spokesman for Goldman Sachs in New York, declined to comment beyond the contents of the memo and an earlier e-mailed statement in which the firm said it disagrees with the views expressed in the op-ed.
Fraud Lawsuit
Executives at Goldman Sachs haven't changed their behavior even after the firm paid $550 million to settle a fraud lawsuit with the Securities and Exchange Commission and was accused by the U.S. Senate's Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations of misleading clients, Smith wrote. The company published a report in January 2011 with 39 recommendations on how to improve its business practices and client focus.
"Over the last 12 months I have seen five different managing directors refer to their own clients as ‘muppets,' sometimes over internal e-mail," Smith wrote. "It astounds me how little senior management gets a basic truth: If clients don't trust you they will eventually stop doing business with you."
The article was e-mailed across Wall Street. One employee at Bank of America Corp.'s Merrill Lynch division, a competitor to Goldman Sachs, said his team was told not to send copies to clients. Parodies such as "Why I am leaving the Empire, by Darth Vader" on thedailymash.co.uk and theborowitzreport.com's "A Response from Goldman Sachs" also circulated.
‘Does Hurt'
"It does hurt them," said Stephane Rambosson, managing partner at executive search firm Veni Partners in London and a former Citigroup Inc. banker. "The perception of the firm has gone down, and a lot of the winners of tomorrow are sitting back and thinking, ‘Do I want to be with Goldman?'"
There's little evidence that the firm's popularity with clients has been hurt by the SEC lawsuit, the Senate's criticism or a recent ruling by Delaware Chancery Court Judge Leo Strine, who faulted Goldman Sachs's handling of a conflict of interest. The bank won more business than any other in advising companies on takeovers and equity offerings last year, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.
Some clients of Goldman Sachs's sales and trading department, the business in which Smith worked, said they are always cautious in dealings with Wall Street banks, understanding that their interests can diverge.
‘Prostitution in Vegas'
"The argument that Goldman has become increasingly profit- driven, sometimes at the expense of clients' best interests, and that some employees use vulgar and disrespectful language, is hardly news," Whitney Tilson, founder of hedge fund T2 Partners LLC, wrote in an e-mailed commentary. "What's the next ‘shocking' headline: ‘Prostitution in Vegas!?'"
Smith was an executive director in London, a title equal to vice president in New York. The firm employs almost 12,000 vice presidents, and most said in a recent internal survey that "the firm provides exceptional service" to clients, Blankfein and Cohn said in the memo. Smith, who sold U.S. equity derivatives to clients in Europe, the Middle East and Africa, didn't respond to calls seeking comment.
Seven former Goldman Sachs partners and managing directors, positions that are more senior than vice president, said in interviews that Smith shouldn't be taken seriously because he was a junior employee and may have been disgruntled about his pay or career. All asked not to be identified because they didn't want to risk ruining their relationship with the firm.
Still, six of the seven said they agreed with Smith's criticism of how the firm has treated clients under Blankfein and Cohn's management and that current members of the management committee would, too. Even so, they said they don't expect the board of directors to take action or that anything will change because the firm has made money and outperformed most rivals.
‘On a Pedestal'
"He may have aired a few comments that are true, but he's placed himself on a pedestal," said Jason Kennedy, CEO of the Kennedy Group, a London-based recruitment firm. "The reason he's been at Goldman Sachs for 12 years is that he liked the name and probably liked the money."
It's rare for people on Wall Street, especially at Goldman Sachs, to speak out publicly against their employers or former employees, said Roy Smith, a former Goldman Sachs partner who's now a finance professor at New York University's Stern School of Business.
"Who's going to hire someone who would do that?" he said. "The industry will close ranks on such things as whistle- blowing in this context."
Sales and Trading
NYU's Smith, who's not related to the author of the op-ed, said Wall Street's culture has changed because trading has become a more important source of revenue than the fees banks get from advising companies on takeovers or financing. Goldman Sachs generated 60 percent of its 2011 revenue from sales and trading.
The relationship with clients in the trading department differs from the investment bank, Smith said. Firms often are on the opposite side of a client's trade, and can profit at the client's expense. Still, it's not as simple as the article describes, he said.
"It just doesn't happen that it's easy to make money by ripping off your clients or counterparties because they're pretty smart people for the most part," he said.
Though some competitors relished the criticism of Goldman Sachs, which was the most profitable securities firm in Wall Street history before it converted to a bank in 2008, they may not be so different.
Smith's opinion piece "seems to be symptomatic of many, if not most, of the banks around the world," said Tom Kirchmaier, a fellow in the financial-markets group at the London School of Economics. "It might be that Goldman, as one of the most successful ones, is also one of the most extreme."
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Employees of Goldman Sachs seem to have confidence in abundance, if we have to believe the tweets from @GSElevator. The tweets from this anonymous banker became a global phenomenon and close to 400.000 people are following his latest gossips. After reading these conversations (often monologues), you might understand why former executive director of Goldman Sachs, Greg Smith, decided to leave the company. But for now, let us enjoy the bluntness and overconfidence of these six figure earning brats.
#1: I would pay like $500k to watch the Kardashians play scrabble.
#1: Can we please stop calling them hipsters and go back to calling them pussies?
#1: The lottery is just a way of taxing poor people who don't know math.
#1: If I could choose between world peace and a reasonable fortune, my first Lambo would be orange.
#1: If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.
#1: When life gives you lemons, order the lobster tail.
#1: Almost time for children to learn a valuable life lesson. Santa loves rich kids more.
#1: [At the gym] What machine should I use to impress the girls?
#2: The ATM.
#1: Listening to Obama talk about the economy is like listening to a chick talk about football.
#1: A guy came up to me at the gym and asked me what event I was training so hard for. Life, motherfucker.
#1: YOLO is poor for carpe diem.
#1: Fact. Nearly 50% of all American workers have less than $10k saved for retirement.
#2: Damn. That wouldn't cover a ski weekend.
#1: Getting laid off from Goldman is like being traded by the Yankees. You’ll probably still make millions, but it’s just not the same.
#1: Black Friday is the Special Olympics of capitalism.
#1: Money might not buy happiness, but I'll take my chances!
#1: Handshakes and tie knots. I don't have time for someone who can't master those basic skills.
#1: I never give money to homeless people. I can't reward failure in good conscience.
#1: Groupon... Food stamps for the middle class.
#1: If you can only be good at one thing, be good at lying... because if you're good at lying, you're good at everything.
#1: My garbage disposal eats better than 98% of the world.
Holy shit this is some funny stuff