Home › Forums › Financial Markets/Economics › Has Goldman fatally damaged their Franchise?
- This topic has 680 replies, 15 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 7 months ago by
scaredyclassic.
-
AuthorPosts
-
April 20, 2010 at 11:22 AM #541921April 20, 2010 at 11:35 AM #541017
Allan from Fallbrook
Participant[quote=briansd1]Remember, Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002 signed into law by George W. Bush?
There was a lot more bi-partisan support back then. (423–3 and 99–0)
What we have now is the Party of No, Hell No!
*
We just have to wait see what the outcome of the SEC lawsuit is.
And we’ll see who supports financial reform and who doesn’t.[/quote]
Brian: How does everything manage to get framed by you in a partisan context?
How does Sarbanes-Oxley fit into this?
And, do you really believe that there are any teeth at all in the Dodd bill? Meaning, do you think that is honest financial reform?
None of these issues has dick to do with right or left, or Dem versus Repub. Its ALL about money, hence my earlier question as to why the Dems haven’t been going after Wall Street with an axe (hint, its cuz the banksters are throwing bags of money their way, too).
Wake up and smell the lucre, Bubba. Its a rigged game. As the old saw goes: If you can’t find the sucker in the game, chances are its YOU.
April 20, 2010 at 11:35 AM #541130Participant[quote=briansd1]Remember, Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002 signed into law by George W. Bush?
There was a lot more bi-partisan support back then. (423–3 and 99–0)
What we have now is the Party of No, Hell No!
*
We just have to wait see what the outcome of the SEC lawsuit is.
And we’ll see who supports financial reform and who doesn’t.[/quote]
Brian: How does everything manage to get framed by you in a partisan context?
How does Sarbanes-Oxley fit into this?
And, do you really believe that there are any teeth at all in the Dodd bill? Meaning, do you think that is honest financial reform?
None of these issues has dick to do with right or left, or Dem versus Repub. Its ALL about money, hence my earlier question as to why the Dems haven’t been going after Wall Street with an axe (hint, its cuz the banksters are throwing bags of money their way, too).
Wake up and smell the lucre, Bubba. Its a rigged game. As the old saw goes: If you can’t find the sucker in the game, chances are its YOU.
April 20, 2010 at 11:35 AM #541579Participant[quote=briansd1]Remember, Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002 signed into law by George W. Bush?
There was a lot more bi-partisan support back then. (423–3 and 99–0)
What we have now is the Party of No, Hell No!
*
We just have to wait see what the outcome of the SEC lawsuit is.
And we’ll see who supports financial reform and who doesn’t.[/quote]
Brian: How does everything manage to get framed by you in a partisan context?
How does Sarbanes-Oxley fit into this?
And, do you really believe that there are any teeth at all in the Dodd bill? Meaning, do you think that is honest financial reform?
None of these issues has dick to do with right or left, or Dem versus Repub. Its ALL about money, hence my earlier question as to why the Dems haven’t been going after Wall Street with an axe (hint, its cuz the banksters are throwing bags of money their way, too).
Wake up and smell the lucre, Bubba. Its a rigged game. As the old saw goes: If you can’t find the sucker in the game, chances are its YOU.
April 20, 2010 at 11:35 AM #541667Participant[quote=briansd1]Remember, Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002 signed into law by George W. Bush?
There was a lot more bi-partisan support back then. (423–3 and 99–0)
What we have now is the Party of No, Hell No!
*
We just have to wait see what the outcome of the SEC lawsuit is.
And we’ll see who supports financial reform and who doesn’t.[/quote]
Brian: How does everything manage to get framed by you in a partisan context?
How does Sarbanes-Oxley fit into this?
And, do you really believe that there are any teeth at all in the Dodd bill? Meaning, do you think that is honest financial reform?
None of these issues has dick to do with right or left, or Dem versus Repub. Its ALL about money, hence my earlier question as to why the Dems haven’t been going after Wall Street with an axe (hint, its cuz the banksters are throwing bags of money their way, too).
Wake up and smell the lucre, Bubba. Its a rigged game. As the old saw goes: If you can’t find the sucker in the game, chances are its YOU.
April 20, 2010 at 11:35 AM #541931Participant[quote=briansd1]Remember, Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002 signed into law by George W. Bush?
There was a lot more bi-partisan support back then. (423–3 and 99–0)
What we have now is the Party of No, Hell No!
*
We just have to wait see what the outcome of the SEC lawsuit is.
And we’ll see who supports financial reform and who doesn’t.[/quote]
Brian: How does everything manage to get framed by you in a partisan context?
How does Sarbanes-Oxley fit into this?
And, do you really believe that there are any teeth at all in the Dodd bill? Meaning, do you think that is honest financial reform?
None of these issues has dick to do with right or left, or Dem versus Repub. Its ALL about money, hence my earlier question as to why the Dems haven’t been going after Wall Street with an axe (hint, its cuz the banksters are throwing bags of money their way, too).
Wake up and smell the lucre, Bubba. Its a rigged game. As the old saw goes: If you can’t find the sucker in the game, chances are its YOU.
April 20, 2010 at 11:44 AM #541022briansd1
Guest[quote=flu]
1) SEC v Madoff. Oops
2) SEC v Mark Cuban… Oops
3) SEC v several companies accused of options backdating… Oops..[/quote]2000-2008 was a different time.
The SEC’s budget was cut.
Some history:
Mr. Cox – a devoted student of Ayn Rand, the high priestess of unfettered capitalism – has a long record in the House of promoting the agenda of business interests that are a cornerstone of the Republican Party’s political and financial support.
It’s about time we give the SEC more money and directive to enforce our financial laws.
April 20, 2010 at 11:44 AM #541134Guest[quote=flu]
1) SEC v Madoff. Oops
2) SEC v Mark Cuban… Oops
3) SEC v several companies accused of options backdating… Oops..[/quote]2000-2008 was a different time.
The SEC’s budget was cut.
Some history:
Mr. Cox – a devoted student of Ayn Rand, the high priestess of unfettered capitalism – has a long record in the House of promoting the agenda of business interests that are a cornerstone of the Republican Party’s political and financial support.
It’s about time we give the SEC more money and directive to enforce our financial laws.
April 20, 2010 at 11:44 AM #541584Guest[quote=flu]
1) SEC v Madoff. Oops
2) SEC v Mark Cuban… Oops
3) SEC v several companies accused of options backdating… Oops..[/quote]2000-2008 was a different time.
The SEC’s budget was cut.
Some history:
Mr. Cox – a devoted student of Ayn Rand, the high priestess of unfettered capitalism – has a long record in the House of promoting the agenda of business interests that are a cornerstone of the Republican Party’s political and financial support.
It’s about time we give the SEC more money and directive to enforce our financial laws.
April 20, 2010 at 11:44 AM #541671Guest[quote=flu]
1) SEC v Madoff. Oops
2) SEC v Mark Cuban… Oops
3) SEC v several companies accused of options backdating… Oops..[/quote]2000-2008 was a different time.
The SEC’s budget was cut.
Some history:
Mr. Cox – a devoted student of Ayn Rand, the high priestess of unfettered capitalism – has a long record in the House of promoting the agenda of business interests that are a cornerstone of the Republican Party’s political and financial support.
It’s about time we give the SEC more money and directive to enforce our financial laws.
April 20, 2010 at 11:44 AM #541936Guest[quote=flu]
1) SEC v Madoff. Oops
2) SEC v Mark Cuban… Oops
3) SEC v several companies accused of options backdating… Oops..[/quote]2000-2008 was a different time.
The SEC’s budget was cut.
Some history:
Mr. Cox – a devoted student of Ayn Rand, the high priestess of unfettered capitalism – has a long record in the House of promoting the agenda of business interests that are a cornerstone of the Republican Party’s political and financial support.
It’s about time we give the SEC more money and directive to enforce our financial laws.
April 20, 2010 at 11:54 AM #541033Guest[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
Wake up and smell the lucre, Bubba. Its a rigged game. As the old saw goes: If you can’t find the sucker in the game, chances are its YOU.[/quote]In any society, people at the very top will always get protected. There’s no way around that.
We just need to make sure the powerful don’t abuse their power too much.
Like I said before, I don’t believe in all or nothing. I’d rather end up with something rather than nothing.
You already know my feelings about incremental improvements over time. I think of small improvements as compound interest that add up to a lot over decades.
Do you want a fixer house or nothing at all while you hope for that dream house?
April 20, 2010 at 11:54 AM #541147Guest[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
Wake up and smell the lucre, Bubba. Its a rigged game. As the old saw goes: If you can’t find the sucker in the game, chances are its YOU.[/quote]In any society, people at the very top will always get protected. There’s no way around that.
We just need to make sure the powerful don’t abuse their power too much.
Like I said before, I don’t believe in all or nothing. I’d rather end up with something rather than nothing.
You already know my feelings about incremental improvements over time. I think of small improvements as compound interest that add up to a lot over decades.
Do you want a fixer house or nothing at all while you hope for that dream house?
April 20, 2010 at 11:54 AM #541595Guest[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
Wake up and smell the lucre, Bubba. Its a rigged game. As the old saw goes: If you can’t find the sucker in the game, chances are its YOU.[/quote]In any society, people at the very top will always get protected. There’s no way around that.
We just need to make sure the powerful don’t abuse their power too much.
Like I said before, I don’t believe in all or nothing. I’d rather end up with something rather than nothing.
You already know my feelings about incremental improvements over time. I think of small improvements as compound interest that add up to a lot over decades.
Do you want a fixer house or nothing at all while you hope for that dream house?
April 20, 2010 at 11:54 AM #541683Guest[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
Wake up and smell the lucre, Bubba. Its a rigged game. As the old saw goes: If you can’t find the sucker in the game, chances are its YOU.[/quote]In any society, people at the very top will always get protected. There’s no way around that.
We just need to make sure the powerful don’t abuse their power too much.
Like I said before, I don’t believe in all or nothing. I’d rather end up with something rather than nothing.
You already know my feelings about incremental improvements over time. I think of small improvements as compound interest that add up to a lot over decades.
Do you want a fixer house or nothing at all while you hope for that dream house?
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.