Comments on: Congratulations, Goldman — and I wish you many, many more

By: Claudia Deutsch

Claudia Deutsch — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 21:00:11 +0000

Again, we totally agree. I’m not saying they are praiseworthy in terms of ethics or doing good for society or any of that stuff. I’m saying that they are brilliant at keeping their activities one nanometer to the correct side of the law, and that the only way to stop them is to change the law.

By: jteasthill

jteasthill — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 20:00:50 +0000

Dear Ms. Deutsch,

As a unit director of a competing capital markets group, I, once, held Goldie (GS) in very high esteem, indeed, mirroring your stated sentiments; thorough, sharp, and innovative were cool (in the days that we bet house capital). These sentiments have waned as The Street shed its ethical and productive codes for opportunistic chicanery.

Goldman may be the best of what is left, but this is hardly praise worthy any longer.

JT Easthill

By: Claudia Deutsch

Claudia Deutsch — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 15:03:05 +0000

But we are in total agreement. What I’ve been hollering for lo, these many months, is that it is futile to lash out at financiers who legally game the system to their own advantage. What we have to do is fix the system, close the loopholes, stop expecting that the Blankfeins of the world will suddenly emulate Mother Theresa.

By: jteasthill

jteasthill — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 13:15:34 +0000

Mr. Taibbi nails it, here.

Ms. Deutch, without the repeal of Glass-Steagall (flooding the financial services sector with incompetence and unimaginable greed) and Phil Graham’s “modernization” of financial services (see High Risk success rate for CITI or BoA, for example), AIG would still be just an insurance company.

Goldman is not at fault, but there is something very wrong and we are yet to see the worst of it.

JT Easthill

By: cliveshome

cliveshome — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 08:15:56 +0000

LET THEM WIN WITH THE MONEY THEY MAKE: lets hope a recession gets them….

http://cliveshome.blogspot.com

By: jasong

jasong — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 01:16:51 +0000

“And it is the people who flock to Walmart for the bargains that is destroying small business.”

So folks who might (have no choice but to) shop at Wal-Mart to save a few bucks on their kids’ school supplies are immoral monsters, but Goldman execs who help create and perpetuate a “horrid” system in order to redirect billions of taxpayer dollars into their already-fat wallets are somehow praiseworthy?! Wow.

By: Russ G

Russ G — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 22:04:19 +0000

If you voiced your opinions in an intellectually honest way then yes, you would be entitled to them. Thus far you have not even come close.

By: larryp

larryp — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 21:49:47 +0000

Claudia,

It might be a good idea to actually get a basic understanding of CDO’s and CDS’s before you form an opinion. Because if you did understand how they work you’d know that what Goldman did was not legal. They committed securities fraud!

By: Claudia Deutsch

Claudia Deutsch — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 20:39:25 +0000

Honesty doesn’t get me anywhere with you folks, does it? Nowhere in my original post, follow-up posts, or rejoinder comments, have I pretended that I understand credit default swaps, collaterlized debt obligations, etc. I don’t even really understand subprime mortgages. Everything I read tells me those esoteric financial instruments pretty much brought the financial system to its knees. Washington pumped huge sums in order to help it get back to its feet. I will NOT castigate Goldman or JPMorgan for figuring out how to do so,without breaking the law.
And btw, am I not allowed to have opinions on health care reform either? I mean, I’m not a doctor, I’m not an actuary…

By: Claudia Deutsch

Claudia Deutsch — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 20:31:40 +0000

No, Jason, I am not a moral nihilist. But I also do not assume that rich people are by definition immoral. Nor do i take a black-and-white stance — i.e., if you are a bad actor in one area, you are by definition a bad actor in another. AND I do not see past bad actions as proof of current ones. AND I do not always believe in retroactive immorality.

For example…slavery is ghastly, we all know that now, but if you were a plantation owner 200 years ago, slavery was the way of the land. So, if you treated your slaves with incredible kindness — were you really immoral for those days? Or were you in fact a lot more moral than free-market folks who pay pittances today?

Another example. I have big problems with many of Walmart’s labor practices. However, I think its track record on environmental issues is unsurpassed. And it is the people who flock to Walmart for the bargains that is destroying small business. You lump them all together — Walmart is bad, end discussion.

And do I equate the immorality of child labor with that of esoteric financial trading and overpaying execs? I;ll bet you can guess the answer…