Has Goldman fatally damaged their Franchise?

[Veritas]

I agree with you flu. I think this is more irrational exuberance and I do not see what is driving it and I am also in the process of moving some things to “safer” areas (if such a thing exists).

[briansd1]

[quote=flu]you might also want to check out Glass Steagall when and how it was repealed. Both parties contributed to this mess, dude.

[/quote]

I agree with you.

But human nature is such that the most recent influences and incentives contribute the most to the behavior.

The military knows that very well. Notwithstanding the rules and regulations, it’s important to have strict enforcement. Chaos takes over when there’s no enforcement.

[quote=flu] BTW: it’s getting very close to election time. Coincidence that Obama is suddenly pretty quite about Wall Street reform????[/quote]

I thought that the argument was that financial reform was motivated by the elections.
Apparently not.

[briansd1]

[quote=flu]you might also want to check out Glass Steagall when and how it was repealed. Both parties contributed to this mess, dude.

[/quote]

I agree with you.

But human nature is such that the most recent influences and incentives contribute the most to the behavior.

The military knows that very well. Notwithstanding the rules and regulations, it’s important to have strict enforcement. Chaos takes over when there’s no enforcement.

[quote=flu] BTW: it’s getting very close to election time. Coincidence that Obama is suddenly pretty quite about Wall Street reform????[/quote]

I thought that the argument was that financial reform was motivated by the elections.
Apparently not.

[briansd1]

[quote=flu]you might also want to check out Glass Steagall when and how it was repealed. Both parties contributed to this mess, dude.

[/quote]

I agree with you.

But human nature is such that the most recent influences and incentives contribute the most to the behavior.

The military knows that very well. Notwithstanding the rules and regulations, it’s important to have strict enforcement. Chaos takes over when there’s no enforcement.

[quote=flu] BTW: it’s getting very close to election time. Coincidence that Obama is suddenly pretty quite about Wall Street reform????[/quote]

I thought that the argument was that financial reform was motivated by the elections.
Apparently not.

[briansd1]

[quote=flu]you might also want to check out Glass Steagall when and how it was repealed. Both parties contributed to this mess, dude.

[/quote]

I agree with you.

But human nature is such that the most recent influences and incentives contribute the most to the behavior.

The military knows that very well. Notwithstanding the rules and regulations, it’s important to have strict enforcement. Chaos takes over when there’s no enforcement.

[quote=flu] BTW: it’s getting very close to election time. Coincidence that Obama is suddenly pretty quite about Wall Street reform????[/quote]

I thought that the argument was that financial reform was motivated by the elections.
Apparently not.

[briansd1]

[quote=flu]you might also want to check out Glass Steagall when and how it was repealed. Both parties contributed to this mess, dude.

[/quote]

I agree with you.

But human nature is such that the most recent influences and incentives contribute the most to the behavior.

The military knows that very well. Notwithstanding the rules and regulations, it’s important to have strict enforcement. Chaos takes over when there’s no enforcement.

[quote=flu] BTW: it’s getting very close to election time. Coincidence that Obama is suddenly pretty quite about Wall Street reform????[/quote]

I thought that the argument was that financial reform was motivated by the elections.
Apparently not.

[Veritas]

What will be crucial the next few months is what the Fed. does or does not do to interest rates in combination with the surging market and finally, if it is true there are still many pent up foreclosed properties that BAC inherited from Countrywide that they are planning to unload this summer. That combo. could really be a game changer. I do not think the Fed. wants to damage this fragile real estate recovery, so I am predicting they do not let free market forces take over interest rates at this time.

[Veritas]

What will be crucial the next few months is what the Fed. does or does not do to interest rates in combination with the surging market and finally, if it is true there are still many pent up foreclosed properties that BAC inherited from Countrywide that they are planning to unload this summer. That combo. could really be a game changer. I do not think the Fed. wants to damage this fragile real estate recovery, so I am predicting they do not let free market forces take over interest rates at this time.

[Veritas]

What will be crucial the next few months is what the Fed. does or does not do to interest rates in combination with the surging market and finally, if it is true there are still many pent up foreclosed properties that BAC inherited from Countrywide that they are planning to unload this summer. That combo. could really be a game changer. I do not think the Fed. wants to damage this fragile real estate recovery, so I am predicting they do not let free market forces take over interest rates at this time.

[Veritas]

What will be crucial the next few months is what the Fed. does or does not do to interest rates in combination with the surging market and finally, if it is true there are still many pent up foreclosed properties that BAC inherited from Countrywide that they are planning to unload this summer. That combo. could really be a game changer. I do not think the Fed. wants to damage this fragile real estate recovery, so I am predicting they do not let free market forces take over interest rates at this time.

[Veritas]

What will be crucial the next few months is what the Fed. does or does not do to interest rates in combination with the surging market and finally, if it is true there are still many pent up foreclosed properties that BAC inherited from Countrywide that they are planning to unload this summer. That combo. could really be a game changer. I do not think the Fed. wants to damage this fragile real estate recovery, so I am predicting they do not let free market forces take over interest rates at this time.

[SK in CV]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]

Pat: Utter gibberish and utterly divorced from reality.

Goldman had NO counterparty risk with AIG at all. Their position was nearly fully collateralized through cash and securities and the balance was covered by insurance (in the form of CDS).

You might want to assemble the actual facts before weighing in on a topic.[/quote]

I don’t think gibberish. I’ll take your word that some of it was collateralized, though some reports I’ve found indicate that it was much less than the $11,000,0000 that you suggested.

On the insurance part, AIG is an insurance company. CDSs ARE insurance. If they go bankrupt, insurance claims against them are general credit obligations. Those contracts would have been examined and probably never sorted out. Hence my claim yesterday that it would last 10 years.

[SK in CV]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]

Pat: Utter gibberish and utterly divorced from reality.

Goldman had NO counterparty risk with AIG at all. Their position was nearly fully collateralized through cash and securities and the balance was covered by insurance (in the form of CDS).

You might want to assemble the actual facts before weighing in on a topic.[/quote]

I don’t think gibberish. I’ll take your word that some of it was collateralized, though some reports I’ve found indicate that it was much less than the $11,000,0000 that you suggested.

On the insurance part, AIG is an insurance company. CDSs ARE insurance. If they go bankrupt, insurance claims against them are general credit obligations. Those contracts would have been examined and probably never sorted out. Hence my claim yesterday that it would last 10 years.

[SK in CV]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]

Pat: Utter gibberish and utterly divorced from reality.

Goldman had NO counterparty risk with AIG at all. Their position was nearly fully collateralized through cash and securities and the balance was covered by insurance (in the form of CDS).

You might want to assemble the actual facts before weighing in on a topic.[/quote]

I don’t think gibberish. I’ll take your word that some of it was collateralized, though some reports I’ve found indicate that it was much less than the $11,000,0000 that you suggested.

On the insurance part, AIG is an insurance company. CDSs ARE insurance. If they go bankrupt, insurance claims against them are general credit obligations. Those contracts would have been examined and probably never sorted out. Hence my claim yesterday that it would last 10 years.

[SK in CV]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]

Pat: Utter gibberish and utterly divorced from reality.

Goldman had NO counterparty risk with AIG at all. Their position was nearly fully collateralized through cash and securities and the balance was covered by insurance (in the form of CDS).

You might want to assemble the actual facts before weighing in on a topic.[/quote]

I don’t think gibberish. I’ll take your word that some of it was collateralized, though some reports I’ve found indicate that it was much less than the $11,000,0000 that you suggested.

On the insurance part, AIG is an insurance company. CDSs ARE insurance. If they go bankrupt, insurance claims against them are general credit obligations. Those contracts would have been examined and probably never sorted out. Hence my claim yesterday that it would last 10 years.

[Author]

Posts