Browsing this Thread:
10 Anonymous Users
|
Re: Not only the building is ugly. So is the company. Goldman Sachs.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
 
|
AND this has what to do with those corporate sociopaths aka Goldman Sachs?
Posted on: 2009/7/20 20:14
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Not only the building is ugly. So is the company. Goldman Sachs.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
i dont know why you guys are even debating over those talking heads or "analyst". If market goes up, they will have 10 analyst giving you a list of reasons why, and if market goes down, the media will have another/same 10 analyst giving you a different set of reasons. The bulls will be right when market goes up, and the bears will be right if the market goes down. When you throw hundreds of darts, 1 is bound to hit. If they are actually any good, they wouldnt be on media trying to earn their money they will be making it in the market!
It's all just random noise, forcus on the technical and the #s released, dont be a lemming and listen to those puppets.
Posted on: 2009/7/20 19:01
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Not only the building is ugly. So is the company. Goldman Sachs.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Posted on: 2009/7/20 16:06
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Not only the building is ugly. So is the company. Goldman Sachs.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
http://www.businessinsider.com/okay-t ... an-and-the-bailout-2009-7
http://www.nypost.com/seven/07192009/ ... ad_for_america_180130.htm http://www.examiner.com/x-3629-Philad ... re-Kings-driving-Ferraris
Posted on: 2009/7/19 18:21
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Not only the building is ugly. So is the company. Goldman Sachs.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
|
I feel it's a weak comparison but I'll leave you to that opinion. Perhaps we shouldn't be looking to Rolling Stone for great insight to our economic woes, but it certainly seems to have gotten the conversation started elsewhere.
Posted on: 2009/7/19 13:33
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Not only the building is ugly. So is the company. Goldman Sachs.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
|
McArdle is stating the obvious (which is valuable as the obvious is all too often ignored).
Taibbi has indeed turned himself into the Sarah Palin of financial journalism as McArdle asserts. Rather than addressing the real issues, Taibbi, like Sarah Palin, has chosen to rabble-rouse with half-truths and outright falsehoods. Taibbi's claim that Goldman "engineered every major market disruption since the Great Depression" makes exactly as much sense as Pailin's claim that Obama was "palling around with terrorists." Goldman and the financial industry as a whole have a lot to answer for. Taibbi's crappy journalism does nothing to help.
Posted on: 2009/7/19 12:39
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Not only the building is ugly. So is the company. Goldman Sachs.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
|
Then let's not pretend that McArdle has some great inside here. She's just arguing inside baseball because she has a few years on Taibbi studying this stuff. The pointy-heads she loves to rail against have been doing the same to her for some time. It's not as if she disagrees with the big picture anyway.
McArdle: Quote:
Posted on: 2009/7/19 10:18
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Not only the building is ugly. So is the company. Goldman Sachs.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
|
Quote:
And I suppose you think the same about Krugman. No. Krugman generally knows what he is talking about. Taibbi clearly does not. I don't always agree with Krugman but I respect his views. I am very critical of Goldman in particular and the financial industry in general, but that doesn't make Taibbi's hatchet job any less an example of poorly written trash.
Posted on: 2009/7/19 3:49
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Not only the building is ugly. So is the company. Goldman Sachs.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
I am an avid Krugman reader and I don't recall any such real estate bubble promotion. In fact I recall his bemoaning the fact that the only industry left in the United States was the buying and selling of houses to one another.
I DO have a serious gripe about Krugman although I have only a Master's in Economics and no Nobel Prize. And that is his FIRM and UNWAVERING belief that inflation cannot become a problem no matter how much money is printed and stuffed into corporate coffers because WAGES aren't rising. He is VERY wrong about that and if he reverses himself on THAT, I will be the first to holler about his flip-flop. All in all though, he is the most interesting writer for the Times. (Frank Rich wins for Sunday though.)
Posted on: 2009/7/18 23:28
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Not only the building is ugly. So is the company. Goldman Sachs.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
|
Quote:
He did? Citation needed. I keep hearing this from people that don't have facts to back them up. Maybe it's this piece from 2002 were he's talking about Greenspan NEEDING a housing bubble to replace the tech bubble and loss in business spending. He far from condoned it. By 2006 he was already yelling from the hilltops that the end was nigh. 2002: http://www.nytimes.com/2002/08/02/opinion/dubya-s-double-dip.html And yes, the whole point of the GS issue right now is that they have way too much influence on the national economy right now. If we know anything about Goldman, it's that they look out for themselves all else be damned.
Posted on: 2009/7/18 19:03
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Not only the building is ugly. So is the company. Goldman Sachs.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Newbie
|
Quote:
There is nothing wrong with greed, or capitalism. MY BRAIONZ.
Posted on: 2009/7/18 18:06
|
|||
|
Praise the lord and pass the ammunition.
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Not only the building is ugly. So is the company. Goldman Sachs.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2008/10/19 1:18 Last Login : 2020/9/25 20:40 From somewhere else
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1609
 |
That was my point about Obama, Dirt. He's not better.
Um - you may disagree with Krugman on an issue, but in general, I'm more inclined to respect his opinion than the nice lady from The Atlantic. Or an anonymous poster on JCList. But that's just me. I'm kind of silly that way. Quote:
Posted on: 2009/7/18 18:05
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Not only the building is ugly. So is the company. Goldman Sachs.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
T-Bird,
Krugman lost all credibility regarding economics when he promoted the real estate bubble after the tech crash, and then denied doing so this year. Keynesian economics doesn't work. Anyways, guess who Obama's 2nd biggest campaign contributor was? Goldman. Shocker. http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/con ... ?cycle=2008&cid=N00009638
Posted on: 2009/7/18 17:52
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Not only the building is ugly. So is the company. Goldman Sachs.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
For RickSp (Reply #14)
http://www.monkeybusinessblog.com/mbb ... an-mcardle-apart-123.html Internal memo sent to GS employees this week. http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs ... -sachs-internal-memo.html
Posted on: 2009/7/18 17:51
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Not only the building is ugly. So is the company. Goldman Sachs.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2008/10/19 1:18 Last Login : 2020/9/25 20:40 From somewhere else
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1609
|
Gee - isn't that Nobel prize winning Paul Krugman? What a populist hack he is! What does he possibly know about economics and markets???
 Are banks self-interested and profit driven? Of course. Does Goldman seem to take it to an absolutely different level? Definitely. To have the head of the NY Fed be on your board (as was the case for the first five months of this year)? To be able to insist the CEO of AIG resigns before you bail out AIG and then put a Goldman board member in his place so that AIG will funnel $13 billion in AIG bailout money to Goldman so they recoup 100 cents on the dollar in stupid CDS bets? To engineer the placement of John Thain as Merrill's CEO along with the failure of Lehman? (Remember, Merrill was acquired at an astonishingly high price smack in the middle of the emergency Lehman negotiations. Participants were directed by treasury halfway into the weekend to ignore Lehman and focusing their efforts on Merrill.) Do these sound like standard "invisible hand" situations? Goldman probably can't single-handedly manipulate the oil markets, but they played a very large role among a small number of players who did. Shorting your own sh!tbag CDOs and screwing your own clients isn't exactly admirable, either. Laddering definitely was a very real (and illegal) concept that GS employed during the heyday of the tech boom - why someone questions the veracity of these facts is in itself questionable. Taibbi did write a biased piece - no question. But you know what? This isn't a standard "business is greedy" kind of story. It demands all caps and swearing and outrage. Mainstream reportage on Goldman that points out in neutral language that the bank has closer ties to the government than its competitors and that gee! the bank is profitable when no one else is, without explaining why in any great detail, gives the average person the impression that there isn't anything out of the ordinary with GS. And there certainly is. Check out the Carlyle group sometime. Look at its founders and their very close relationship with GS. Sadly, the Obama administration doesn't seem to be much better in terms of its dealings with GS, if at all.
Posted on: 2009/7/18 17:35
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Not only the building is ugly. So is the company. Goldman Sachs.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
|
Quote:
And I suppose you think the same about Krugman. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/17/opinion/17krugman.html
Posted on: 2009/7/18 17:02
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Not only the building is ugly. So is the company. Goldman Sachs.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Good to see that a few of you have your head out of the sand.
What has GS done for JC? Can some of you list it for us? And please back it up. Here are a few more links for most of you to scoff at. Ah the blissful. http://trueslant.com/matttaibbi/2009/ ... -giving-goldman-a-chance/ http://www.goldmansachs666.com/ http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2009/07/video-goldman-sachs-coup http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/0 ... allow_goldman_to_man.html http://robertreich.blogspot.com/2009/ ... and-why-we-should-be.html Yeesh, I need some fresh air now. 
Posted on: 2009/7/18 16:53
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Not only the building is ugly. So is the company. Goldman Sachs.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2009/3/19 15:20 Last Login : 2020/6/2 11:06 From Scenic McGinley Square
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
709
|
Quote:
Very true, but it isn't a huge waste. The building has become a contingency space for goldman (in addition to their other location in Connecticut. There a fair amount of people who are there daily, but there are also vast empty floors that are just waiting for people to sit down and keep trading.
Posted on: 2009/7/18 16:28
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Not only the building is ugly. So is the company. Goldman Sachs.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
That Atlantic article is a hack piece.
It is indisputable that Goldman alums made the decisions that let Lehman (competitor) go under. Goldman alums also bailed out AIG which allowed Goldman to get paid back 100% on $13 billion of trades where AIG was the counter party. Further GS has enormously benefited from the implicit govt guarantee and the next to 0% interest that they pay for funds. There is also a developing story on GS collecting a vig on electronic trading. Bottom line is that GS is the most Machavellian of all the banks and absolutely uses their alums in govt to ensure that they get their way as much as possible. Frankly were AIG not bailed out, GS may have been in the same hurt locker as LEH and Bear Stearns... The building is ho-hum and it basically serves as emergency trading space should downtown NYC come under attack again. That's how much GS thinks of JC...
Posted on: 2009/7/18 16:22
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Not only the building is ugly. So is the company. Goldman Sachs.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
Joined:
2009/2/22 2:42 Last Login : 2011/7/30 19:58 From Italian Village
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
124
|
Yeah who cares really. You should be more upset at the "federal" reserve that rapes you your whole life....look into it.
But if you do care and it matters, I think (not sure) that GS has contributed a lot of money to downtown JC, or financed it. I'm not sure if it was by choice or a tax break or what, but they did.... and they certainly do compensate their employees. I once had anger towards the wealthy, but now I am so sick of working hard for nothing, that I only wish I wasn't a jackass at 18, and went to a decent finance college, and got a job for GS. As for the building, I had the pleasure of going in it once, and it is amazing. Their cafeteria is incredible and there is more variety in there than anything outside the building. The seating area also overlooks the Hudson and lower Manhattan. It sure beats the jail-cell without windows that I work in. 
Posted on: 2009/7/18 16:11
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Not only the building is ugly. So is the company. Goldman Sachs.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
they still need to fillup the building, it's such a waste. last time i checked half the building are still empty with only the backoffice and tech guys in there. Originally they were suppose to move some of the trading floor here, but the traders basically told the management to go f themselves and stayed in nyc.
Posted on: 2009/7/18 16:03
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Not only the building is ugly. So is the company. Goldman Sachs.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
GS is a decent building. Not Ceasar Pelli's best work, but more than acceptable.
Posted on: 2009/7/18 15:49
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Not only the building is ugly. So is the company. Goldman Sachs.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
GnomeGeneral wrote: Me, too! I know people who work there; the hours sound brutal, but they compensate their employees well and the benefits are pretty good, too. No company is perfect when it comes to scruples - there are far worse out there. And I'll take the GS tower anyday over the monstrosities sitting at Grove & Columbus (Grove Pointe and that ugly concrete blob across the street - I forget the name of the office building).
Posted on: 2009/7/18 15:30
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Not only the building is ugly. So is the company. Goldman Sachs.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
|
Megan McCardle from the Atlantic commented about Tabbi's Goldman piece - "Matt Taibbi is becoming the Sarah Palin of journalism. He seems to deliberately eschew understanding his subjects, because only corrupt, pointy-headed financial journalists who have been co-opted by the system do that. And Matt Taibbi is here to save you from those pointy headed elites. " You can read the rest here:
Matt Taibbi Gets His Sarah Palin On The short answer to your question is that Tabbi makes a lot of wild accusations which are both unsupported and simply wrong and hopes that those reading the article don't know enough about the subject to notice. Either that or he doesn't know enough about what he is writing himself. Both may be true. He claims that Goldman "engineered every major market manipulation since the Great Depression" which is absurd. He implies that Goldman rigged the oil markets to give us $4 per gallon gasoline which is ridiculous. His claim that Goldman turned a sleepy oil market into a giant betting parlor, suggests that Taibbi knows nothing about the oil markets. He wildly overstates Goldman's role in the housing crunch and on and on. Tabbi's purple prose is annoying and he doesn't seem to have the first clue about that which he is writing. There is much that Goldman can be criticized for, but Taibbi is too clueless to get it done.
Posted on: 2009/7/18 14:58
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Not only the building is ugly. So is the company. Goldman Sachs.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Heck,
As long as Hank Paulson distributed that TRILLION bucks and drove GS's major competitor, Lehman, into bankruptcy Goldman has an easy job of it. Building is just fine...company should be tossed into the Caymans where the execs hide their bonuses...compliments of the American taxxpayer.
Posted on: 2009/7/18 14:19
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Not only the building is ugly. So is the company. Goldman Sachs.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
I'd like to know what people think is inaccurate about the article.
Posted on: 2009/7/18 14:14
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Not only the building is ugly. So is the company. Goldman Sachs.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
|
I don't find the building either terribly beautiful or horribly ugly.
Regarding Matt Taibbi's hatchet job - it was simply lousy journalism. The writing is over the top and he gets his facts wrong. I think that there is a lot that Goldman and the entire financial industry has to answer for, but Taibbi gets it all wrong.
Posted on: 2009/7/18 13:55
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Not only the building is ugly. So is the company. Goldman Sachs.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
I do agree with you about the look of the GS Building. It looks to me like it wasn't finished at the top. I don't get the top of it. Was the original plan for it to come to a point at the top? I don't understand why it starts angling in slightly at the top and then just stops and is flat.
Up close though, I do think it is very nice.
Posted on: 2009/7/18 13:24
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Not only the building is ugly. So is the company. Goldman Sachs.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I wish I worked for GS.
Posted on: 2009/7/18 12:59
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Not only the building is ugly. So is the company. Goldman Sachs.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
or don't care.
Posted on: 2009/7/18 12:32
|
|||
|
||||