Goldman Sachs Analyst: Income ‘Inequality’ Will Lead To ‘Prosperity And Opportunity For All’
Goldman Sachs Analyst: Income ‘Inequality’ Will Lead To ‘Prosperity And Opportunity For All’
Last week, the Wall Street Journal reported that Wall Street banks are on pace to pay out a record $140 billion in compensation this year. “Workers at 23 top investment banks, hedge funds, asset managers and stock and commodities exchanges can expect to earn even more than they did the peak year of 2007,” the Journal found.
The New York-based investment bank Goldman Sachs has “set aside $16.7 billion for compensation and benefits in the first nine months of 2009,” which is a 46 percent increase from last year. But according to a Goldman adviser, Wall Street’s record pay is necessary “to achieve greater prosperity and opportunity for all”:
A Goldman Sachs International adviser defended compensation in the finance industry as his company plans a near-record year for pay, saying the spending will help boost the economy. “We have to tolerate the inequality as a way to achieve greater prosperity and opportunity for all,” Brian Griffiths, who was a special adviser to former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, said yesterday at a panel discussion hosted by St. Paul’s Cathedral in London.
At the same time that Wall Street’s pay has skyrocketed, pay cuts in other sectors “are occurring more frequently than at any time since the Great Depression.”
While record bonuses may indeed spur spending on million dollar apartments in New York City, the growth in Wall Street pay — and the growing share of national income that is going to the richest Americans — has not translated into shared prosperity. Consider, “back in 1985, the average annual salary for all workers across the country was actually a bit higher than the average [Wall Street] bonus ($19,000 to $13,970),” but “while the average bonus soared almost 14 times higher (by 2006), the average salary has essentially been stagnant since the mid-1980s.”
Goldman Sachs is able to make its current profits ($3.19 billion last quarter) — and thus pay huge bonuses — because of government programs aimed at reviving the economy, which allow the company to make “big bets using cheap dollars.” As Simon Nixon wrote, the profits “aren’t the due rewards for exceptional skill but gifts from taxpayers.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
So, why don’t they give me heaps of money so that they can prosper ?
October 21st, 2009 at 1:19 pmIncome inequality leads to prosperity for all!
War is peace!
Continual war is everlasting peace!
Long live Oceana!
October 21st, 2009 at 1:20 pmGoldman Sachs Analyst: Income ‘Inequality’ Will Lead To ‘Prosperity And Opportunity For All’
– - Socialist bastid! Uhhh I mean, comrade.
October 21st, 2009 at 1:21 pmTP, that’s a real nice graph chart. It might mean more if you explained what it depicts.
October 21st, 2009 at 1:22 pmHow, exactly, does income inequality provide prosperity and opportunity for all?
October 21st, 2009 at 1:22 pmThe Finance Industry and Auto Industry bailouts and now cries for higher compensation for executives seem to be lacking any sort of self knowledge of how much they have worked to make people not like them.
Auto Industry, to buy a new car you walk into the showroom where they have all the facts and do their best to keep any facts from you. They have set up an adversarial relationship. Now how many folks like their auto dealership ? And we are supposed to bankroll them.
Financial industry, they make money off of you. As a recent commercial puts it, the salesman says he makes money when you make money. But they don’t also tell you that they make money when you loose money. They don’t look after your best interests – and we are supposed to guarantee their lofty salaries.
October 21st, 2009 at 1:23 pmWe’ve been operating on that principle for decades.
It’s not working.
Because it can’t work. Never has, never will.
Call the man a liar and be done with it.
October 21st, 2009 at 1:26 pmHoodathunk says:
TP, that’s a real nice graph chart. It might mean more if you explained what it depicts.
– - Maybe you didn’t read the post or click on the links provided:
“Consider, “back in 1985, the average annual salary for all workers across the country was actually a bit higher than the average [Wall Street] bonus ($19,000 to $13,970),” but “while the average bonus soared almost 14 times higher (by 2006), the average salary has essentially been stagnant since the mid-1980s.”
I’m all about the helping.
October 21st, 2009 at 1:26 pmIf Goldman Sachs seriously wants greater prosperity “for all”, they’d do better by taking that $16.7 BILLION slated for bonuses and dumping it out of an airplane crossing the country.
F***ing lying thieves.
October 21st, 2009 at 1:27 pm“We have to tolerate the inequality as a way to achieve greater prosperity and opportunity for all,” Brian Griffiths, who was a special adviser to former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, said yesterday at a panel discussion hosted by St. Paul’s Cathedral in London.
____________________________________________________________
We’ve been getting this fairy tale from the right ever since Ronald Reagan was President. We’ve never gotten the promised prosperity and opportunity for all, but we sure have increased the gap between the rich and the poor in this country.
It would be one thing if all these well-compensated executives started businesses of their own and gave some people some jobs. Or if the $140 billion in compensation was spread out among ALL employees, including the peon workers who would probably spend a lot of that money in our economy.
But a lot of this money will just wind up in rich people’s off-shore bank accounts, where it does nothing to help our economy, nothing to provide opportunity to anyone, and even money made from this money cannot be taxed.
When are people going to quit believing this BS?
October 21st, 2009 at 1:28 pm.
Did Paulson’s secret meeting with Goldman Sachs break the law?
By Muriel Kane
Wednesday, October 21st, 2009
http://rawstory.com/2009/10/hank-paulsons-secret-2008-meeting-goldman-sachs-revealed/
.
October 21st, 2009 at 1:29 pmDang, he got it backwards again; prosperity and unchecked wealth for a few pimps on Wall Street and some hedge fund whores will result in ‘income equality’ for all. The pimps and whores will all be rich and off-shore and the rest of us will be broke and right here at home.
October 21st, 2009 at 1:30 pmOne of the things that has happened on Wall Street is that the bonuses that used to be doled out at year end have been added to the salary base to avoid the scrutiny of bonuses.
It’s sick. It’s criminal. And it needs to end.
October 21st, 2009 at 1:30 pm“We have to tolerate the inequality as a way to achieve greater prosperity and opportunity for all,”[...]
Nice try there Brian Griffiths, but I for one ain’t buying what you’re trying to sell.
October 21st, 2009 at 1:30 pmWell.
That about sums our current financial situation up pretty nicely, don’t it?
The whole notion of income inequality doesn’t bother me nearly as much as the reality that the people making millions in bonuses…are the same callous greed-mongers that oppose spending on welfare programs. It’s not so much that we have people making seven figure salaries, it’s that those who struggle to make 5 figures are left without an adequate social saftey net. There’s nothing wrong with wealth and everything wrong with placing it above compassion.
October 21st, 2009 at 1:32 pm“Some animals are more equal than others”
October 21st, 2009 at 1:32 pmActually when I first read the post the key was not visible. Now I see it.
October 21st, 2009 at 1:34 pmI wish our elected officials in Washington D.C. would help the average, hard working American for a few years instead of helping, protecting, and defending greedy Wall Street bankers and stock brokers all the time.
October 21st, 2009 at 1:35 pmAlright…who’s the nameless jackass who keeps voting comments down with responding to any? Show thyself, vain and cowardly troll.
October 21st, 2009 at 1:37 pm..that should’ve been “without responding to any”. damn.
October 21st, 2009 at 1:37 pmTrickle Down? LOL! That was discredited by economists decades ago! LOL!
October 21st, 2009 at 1:38 pmspoken like a true benefactor of a corrupt system.
October 21st, 2009 at 1:39 pmpo says:
spoken like a true benefactor of a corrupt system.
Benefactor or “cause”? GS has been behind every bubble for the past century.
October 21st, 2009 at 1:45 pmScrew these people. Round them up, put them on a desert island and see how long they can last. Or better yet, take their money (Technically our money). Let’s see how long these as*holes can survive on minimum wage.
October 21st, 2009 at 1:45 pmprinces and paupers, that’s the prosperity they want to see.
October 21st, 2009 at 1:47 pmOh come on…
They really DO think that the masses are stupid and gullible.
“…I have this pig, that we’ve put lipstick on…Wanna buy it?…”
October 21st, 2009 at 1:47 pmhe’s pissing on our head and saying “it’s rain!, it’s rain!”
October 21st, 2009 at 1:49 pmWhat’s that wet, smelly stuff trickling down on us?
October 21st, 2009 at 1:49 pmIt isn’t gold, Goldman Suchs!
OK so let me get this straight: prosperity for the few will lead to the prosperity for all.
Phase 1: Collect Underpants
October 21st, 2009 at 1:51 pmPhase 2: ?
Phase 3: Profit
These parasites add nothing to our economy. They trade made up shit to each other and make money off of each trade.
October 21st, 2009 at 1:52 pmIncome inequality leading to prosperity for all seems to mean that when you have enough ultra rich folks they will hire more nannies, gardens, chauffeurs, cooks, maids, butlers, pool boys, gate guards, etc. who can then support the consumerism of WalMart.
October 21st, 2009 at 1:52 pmRUC@30, You are being too kind. Parasites have a place in nature. These SOBs are just immoral. Just think how many people lost everything. And these guys honetly expect us to swallow this tripe?. I don’t know what’s worse. The money they are stealing or the fact they think Americans are that stupid.
October 21st, 2009 at 1:55 pmHooda @31 – you hit it right smack on the sweet spot.
October 21st, 2009 at 1:59 pmGS, you’re going down. One way or another.
Let’s get these bastards.
October 21st, 2009 at 2:00 pmMilton Friedman and Ronald Reagan are DEAD, and they were WRONG. Their economic myths need to DIE too.
October 21st, 2009 at 2:02 pm.
Too big to fail…
… But big enough to F’ everything up!
.
October 21st, 2009 at 2:05 pmIf these companies are too big to fail, if their collapse would equate to the collapse of the US, then it is time they got shrunk. The continued existence of the United States should not be in the hands of a handful of for-profit companies.
Especially when the government has no control or say in what they do. We screwed up when we let the profit for a few become more important than the good of the many.
October 21st, 2009 at 2:05 pmThe financial services industry has bottled up the regulatory laws that have been proposed. They do not want any regulations which is exactly what caused the market crash. These companies have gone right back to these risky investments. If they get into financial trouble again, they are betting they can blackmail the taxpayers into another bailout. They are wrong. No one will be able to help them because the public will not stand for it. The bailouts have stopped. All of these companies that are too big to fail are going to be allowed to fail.
October 21st, 2009 at 2:07 pmsaid yesterday at a panel discussion at St. Paul’s Cathedral in London.
If Jesus ever really did come back I suspect that he’d be PISSED.
October 21st, 2009 at 2:10 pmThis is “trickle down”.
Arguing that “extreme wealth in the hands of one person” will result in as much economic stimulus via purchasing as that same amount of wealth in the hands of many, is absolute nonsense.
October 21st, 2009 at 2:12 pmI think you’re right pags2 – No More Bailouts For You!
October 21st, 2009 at 2:12 pmJust how is it the Reaganites and their misanthropic offspring have managed to get the old, chicken in every pot, car in every garage, buy your own home American Dream I heard as a kid down to ‘Be glad, you get what trickles down!’
October 21st, 2009 at 2:18 pmOr worse they trade real stuff like oil to each other and add huge costs to what we’ll have to buy for their contributing nothing to the process. Much in the same way insurance companies add cost to health care while doing nothing for our welfare.
October 21st, 2009 at 2:19 pmVisit http://www.goldmansachs666.com/ for more info on the bastards.
October 21st, 2009 at 2:21 pmUm…it’s all a gift from tax payers.
October 21st, 2009 at 2:23 pm
Link for 45
http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2009/10/17/how-wall-street-is-making-its-billions/
October 21st, 2009 at 2:24 pmWhere are our cancervative bible thumpers to explain Goldman Sachs?
October 21st, 2009 at 2:25 pmyou know, when they did the bailout, they could have just given every American citizen about 2 million and let the clowns fold. Then only Wall Street would have gone down and the rest of us would be just fine.
October 21st, 2009 at 2:27 pmAnd yet the Fox News viewers still believe in supply side, trickle down Reaganomics. And they blame the little guy for ruining their lives. It wasn’t credit default swaps. It was the poor schmuck who was given a mortgage that he didn’t understand by a lender who was going to sell his bad debt to the highest bidder and never look back. Yeah that little guy was looking to invest all his savings into a home he was going to lose just to get his credit ruined so he could live in a crappy apartment the rest of his life.
October 21st, 2009 at 2:29 pmThis from a zombay that just got a fresh transfusion of the soylents green
October 21st, 2009 at 2:31 pmOr Hoodathunk they could have given every homeowner a years mortgage payment and free healthcare and they’d have saved money, property values would have started going back up and people would feel free to start spending some of their money and gotten the economy going again creating more jobs. And they would have spent much less.
October 21st, 2009 at 2:32 pmGoldman Sachs does not read the New Testament.
October 21st, 2009 at 2:33 pmShayne,
FOXPRAVDA always blames the adict…
… NEVER, EVER the pimp/pusher/distributor or dealer.
N E V E R!
October 21st, 2009 at 2:33 pmTrue, Shayne but then the haves (like the multimillionaire spewing heads at Faux) wouldn’t get to ‘trickle down’ on people.
October 21st, 2009 at 2:35 pmdixie,
October 21st, 2009 at 2:35 pmA time to be thankful for being meek, NO?
Shayne says:
And yet the Fox News viewers still believe in supply side, trickle down Reaganomics.
The Dems should be hammering the Republicans on Reaganomics. Greenspan who was appointed by Reagan admitted he was wrong about this economic theories. That is what Dems need to slam the Republicans with when they talk about less regulation and more tax cuts. The testimony was televised and would make great election ads for the Dems. I don’t understand why the Dems are letting the Republicans duck and dodge on the economic issues.
October 21st, 2009 at 2:37 pmI really hate to say this, but they were co-conspirators in the whole debacle. And the politicians from BOTH sides are loving what’s happening with all this reform talk. (Health and Business). Their coffers are being lined by lobbyists like never before.
October 21st, 2009 at 2:45 pmIts like saying “we are going to give all the monopoly money to one player so everyone else can prosper”
October 21st, 2009 at 2:46 pmTrickle down doesn’t work.. trickle up does.
If the poor get money.. they spend it – and it eventually ends up in these a$$holes bank accounts anyway.. but at least it works it’s way through the system first.. rather than just handing it to the spineless scum directly..
October 21st, 2009 at 2:48 pmThe Republicans understand trickle down. The overweight, middle aged, swollen prostate crowd experience it many times a day and they just want to share the experience.
October 21st, 2009 at 2:50 pmXisithrus says:
Its like saying “we are going to give all the monopoly money to one player so everyone else can prosper”
lol.. perfect description.
what? That doesn’t work? You’ll still have your boot.. I’ll still got my thimble.. what’s the problem?
October 21st, 2009 at 2:52 pm“We have to tolerate the inequality as a way to achieve greater prosperity and opportunity for all,”
As he sailed away on his yacht, hey, how ’bout . .
“LET THEM EAT CAKE”
October 21st, 2009 at 2:53 pm@ 22. po says: spoken like a true benefactor of a corrupt system. October 21st, 2009 at 1:39 pm
po, that should be ‘beneficiary’, not benefactor. Griffith is an apologist for a system from which he benefits.
October 21st, 2009 at 2:55 pmFeed a horse enough grain and eventually they shit out one or two oats.
October 21st, 2009 at 2:59 pmMycelium says:
I really hate to say this, but they were co-conspirators in the whole debacle.
I agree but still the Dems should not allow the Republicans to use Reaganomics as a campaign tool. The theory is discredited and the Republicans have lost credibility. This is the time to drive a stake through the heart of Reaganomics because they are trying to resurrect it. That will leave the Republicans with no economic platform to use in campaigns.
October 21st, 2009 at 3:17 pmNews just hit the wire that the Obama administration plans to order that the top earners at firms which received billions of dollars in government bailouts will see their cash payouts cut by an average of about 90 percent from last year. I watched the tape turn red as the trading floors were given their orders from the top. The masters of the universe are registering their displeasure, that’s for sure. Go to Yahoo! Finance and look at today’s chart for the S&P. It’s still plunging as I type.
October 21st, 2009 at 3:44 pm“aren’t the due rewards for exceptional skill but gifts from taxpayers.”
BULL SH!T
Trying to pull the old “Ronnie Raygun Trickle Down” on us, which only fools morons.
Morons, as in our trolls, who just lap up what ever trickles down their masters legs.
October 21st, 2009 at 3:48 pmSo when the HELL do I get my friggin’ PONY?????
October 21st, 2009 at 3:53 pmI can’t get over the graph.
The lines are about equal till the early 90s. Well, in the 90s, stocks were going like gangbusters, folks were making money and I could see a rationale for extra compensation.
But the compensation really went wild from 2001 to 2007. The market was, at best, flat in this period with periods of the market tanking. What was the rationale for extravagant bonuses during this period?
And what (or who) happened between 2001 and 2007 ?
October 21st, 2009 at 4:03 pmOk, so we have the greatest disparity since feudal times, so everyone should be prosperous, right?
Let’s look at the model for income disparity: third world nations. Their citizens should be doing quite well.
Hmmm…in third world countries, those with the greatest disparity, citizens are dying of starvation by the thousands. In our country, as disparity increased, so did the numbers of people living in poverty.
So, in the real world, as disparity increases, so too does the numbers of people living in dispair.
October 21st, 2009 at 4:07 pmBrian Griffiths can kiss my guillotine. It sounds about time for another “shortening”
October 21st, 2009 at 4:12 pmAh, cake tomorrow, and cake tomorrow, but never cake today.
Whenever someone says “We’ll all be rich,” run like hell.
October 21st, 2009 at 4:16 pmIf you took all the money in the world and divided up equally each human would get $9,000.00. That idea stinks if you have more than $9K to your name. … But, as Jean Paul Getty said, years ago, within 3 years the money would be back to the people that are most productive, innovative and hard working.
October 21st, 2009 at 4:43 pmBut, as Jean Paul Getty said, years ago, within 3 years the money would be back to the people that are most productive, innovative and hard working.
Read sneaky, conniving and greedy.
October 21st, 2009 at 5:04 pmThere will always be those who think they deserve and need more.
October 21st, 2009 at 5:07 pm#
kwsventures says:
If you took all the money in the world and divided up equally each human would get $9,000.00. That idea stinks if you have more than $9K to your name. … But, as Jean Paul Getty said, years ago, within 3 years the money would be back to the people that are most productive, innovative and hard working.
Bullsh&t! Before the big crash in september 08 there was 70 trillion dollar just being used for investments worldwide. Last time I checked there were lass than 7 billion people in the world. I dunno what kind of math you are doing but that is a helluva alot more than $9,000. Mind you that is just the money in investments.
October 21st, 2009 at 5:10 pmEnglish Teacher alert:
loose – rhymes with goose – decribes aaronk’s bowels.
lose – means not to win.
End of lesson.
October 21st, 2009 at 5:20 pmkwsventures says:
If you took all the money in the world and divided up equally each human would get $9,000.00.
Money? You mean “M3″? Money is just the value of assets quantified as hard cash for the purposes of short term transactions… It has little to do with “asset wealth”, which is what you’re attempting to conflate it as. Geez, no wonder you “conservatives” are such inept idiots with economic matters! ZZZzz….
kwsventures says:
That idea stinks if you have more than $9K to your name. … But, as Jean Paul Getty said, years ago, within 3 years the money would be back to the people that are most productive, innovative and hard working.
The idea that you inept fools think you have a right to exploit the poor out of a sense of “personal elitism” is exactly why you fascists should be put in prison for your crimes!
October 21st, 2009 at 6:07 pm* The United Nations Development Program (UNDP) reported in 1998 that the world’s 225 richest people now have a combined wealth of $1 trillion. That’s equal to the combined annual income of the world’s 2.5 billion poorests people.
October 21st, 2009 at 6:10 pm* The wealth of the three most well-to-do individuals now exceeds the combined GDP of the 48 least developed countries.
* While global GNP grew 40 percent between 1970 and 1985 (suggesting widening prosperity), the number of poor grew by 17 percent.
@ 69. MapleStreet says: I can’t get over the graph. The lines are about equal till the early 90s. Well, in the 90s, stocks were going like gangbusters, folks were making money and I could see a rationale for extra compensation. But the compensation really went wild from 2001 to 2007. The market was, at best, flat in this period with periods of the market tanking. What was the rationale for extravagant bonuses during this period? And what (or who) happened between 2001 and 2007 ? October 21st, 2009 at 4:03 pm
Well, The Shrub & Darth Cheney Consortium of Nonregulation of Markets happened, and that reinforced the decision taken late in the Clinton Waffle on Regulation Triangulation that over-the-counter derivative financial products, such as mortgage backed securities and credit default swaps, would NOT be regulated or overseen. There was no transparency to that market, there’s no required reportage, it’s done off the books, as far as the oversight and legal agencies, so you don’t see the enormous amount of money being poured into it. It was only reflected in things like executive compensation.
Well, we kind of found out how much of it was sour or worthless when that market collapsed in late 2007 and into 2008 and early 2009. But if you grub around, you might be able to find some OTC derivative trading data, and a graph of that would look similar to the “bonus” curve. Except for the crash at the end, of course. While OTC trading has gone flat or trended toward zero, compensation, including bonuses has rebounded in an increasing direction.
The firms on the Street and the hedge funds, etc, are continuing to pay whatever they can in bonuses and compensation because they can; greed trumps common sense and these guys haven’t had anything to stop the greed cycle for two or three generations of executive turnover, so barring a total collapse or some sort of regulatory clampdown or stockholder/stakeholder revolt, there’s little likelihood of the insanely excessive bonus activity being brought to a stop.
The OTC crap is likely to take off again too. There’s too much money to be taken from wealthy idiots, and more than enough greed to fuel fraud and other methods of getting it. And the government of our great nation doesn’t show any public impetus toward regulating that market. (It’s going to be hard enough to get them to regulate the health insurance market.)
October 21st, 2009 at 6:33 pm@ 76. Xanaphia says: “# kwsventures says: If you took all the money in the world and divided up equally each human would get $9,000.00. That idea stinks if you have more than $9K to your name. … But, as Jean Paul Getty said, years ago, within 3 years the money would be back to the people that are most productive, innovative and hard working.” Bullsh&t! Before the big crash in september 08 there was 70 trillion dollar just being used for investments worldwide. Last time I checked there were lass than 7 billion people in the world. I dunno what kind of math you are doing but that is a helluva alot more than $9,000. Mind you that is just the money in investments. October 21st, 2009 at 5:10 pm
Xanaphia, not really. $70 Trillion is $70 X 10 to the twelfth and 7 Billion is 7 X 10 to the nineth, so that comes out to about $10,000/capita, and it’s a tad more if the population is less than 7 Gigasouls. Say it’s somewhat north of $10K/person, more in the $11K to $12K range. Of course, maybe “helluva” quantifies at the 25% to 30% greater level for you; I just think of that as “more” – ‘helluva’ quantifies for me at around double.
KWSventroid – Dood, when ya gonna let Dixie Blood and myself know whether you’re Willis Seymour of KWS Ventures in FL or tweeter jock strap and biznez opportunist Kurt Walters? You ought to get another usrname if you’re not Kurt ’cause he’s using it on Twitter.
October 21st, 2009 at 6:50 pmthis is one of those “only in America” things I simply love..
can you imagine a banker taking home an obscene salary making a comment like this in any other modern democracy in the world and be taken seriously?? what a bunch of clowns…
October 21st, 2009 at 7:08 pmNote to Maple Street–with deference to virtual pebble–the way the bonuses went up was that wall street firms got better at making shit up and selling it to each other.
October 21st, 2009 at 8:02 pmYeah, yeah, complete redistribution of wealth is bad, so all redistribution of wealth is bad. Terrific logical principle.
It’s the same old idiocy from the free market right: start out with an argument of wealth as connected to virtue, and wham! switch right over to wealth as ‘whatever you can get by whatever means.’
It’s just plain nihilism.
October 21st, 2009 at 8:18 pmXanaphia, not really. $70 Trillion is $70 X 10 to the twelfth and 7 Billion is 7 X 10 to the nineth, so that comes out to about $10,000/capita, and it’s a tad more if the population is less than 7 Gigasouls. Say it’s somewhat north of $10K/person, more in the $11K to $12K range. Of course, maybe “helluva” quantifies at the 25% to 30% greater level for you; I just think of that as “more” – ‘helluva’ quantifies for me at around double.
October 21st, 2009 at 10:51 pmYeah sorry, English major here, not very good at math. But I was only including investment money. If we distribute that to people on top of their regular pay, like a bonus, that would be a huge deal for most people.
“Brian Griffiths, who was a special adviser to former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher,…”
Thatcher was really an expert in stealing from the many (hard working) and giving to the few (sitting on their butts and playing with money). The vast majority of Britains really suffered during the 80’s. I lived there for 12 years and could see it on a lot of levels.
Speaking of trillions of dollars invested:
I saw a really good Frontline documentary called “The Warning” about Alan Greenspan, Larry Summers, Robert Rubin, and Arthur Levitt preventing any regulation of the derivatives market. The warning came from Brooksley Born, the head of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission in 1998.
Frontline said the Over-The-Counter derivatives market was $595 Trillion in 2007. They even repeated this figure because they thought noone would believe it. And I even googled it because it is so hard to believe.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/warning/view/
October 21st, 2009 at 10:52 pm@ 83. bandit09 says: Note to Maple Street–with deference to virtual pebble–the way the bonuses went up was that wall street firms got better at making shit up and selling it to each other. October 21st, 2009 at 8:02 pm
Ya got a vote up on that from me, bandit. Much more succinct and to the point. All I would add is that they were selling it to the peasants off the street too via hedge fund investments, etc.
October 22nd, 2009 at 12:51 am@ 86. Keith …
Yes, that was an excellent exposition of the first phase of the OTC crazy. It’s well worth watching. A couple of magazines have had pretty good coverage of the issue, too.
October 22nd, 2009 at 12:54 am@ 85. Xanaphia … Indeed it would. A small chunk of change like that would be significant to me. Of course, it’s only small in relation to chunks of money that seem to be floating around without much of a big deal being made over it, now.
For instance, I live in NM and our state just discovered a $600 Million hole in the state budget for the fiscal year. Seems big, but then again, maybe not so much, given the holes that are 1000 to 2000 times that size in the Federal deficit due to various bailouts. At some point, the value, the number is simply so staggering that it might as well be nonsense.
October 22nd, 2009 at 1:04 amIs my math correct? Goldman is setting aside more of its income to compensate a handful of executives than it is reporting as profit to be paid to stockholders? [$16.7 billion/3 quarters = $5.57 billion in bonuses per quarter VERSUS $3.19 profits available for dividends to shareholders.]
That seems like a gross failure of fiduciary duty to shareholders bordering on criminal pilfering! Isn’t our government a major stakeholder? Where the hell are the shareholders?!
October 22nd, 2009 at 12:09 pmWe have to tolerate the inequality as a way to achieve greater prosperity and opportunity for all, says ”Brian Griffiths, who was a special adviser to former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher
Spoken like a true Chicago School Freidman economic robot. Still buying the trickle down, Reagonomic, Dikensian lie.
October 22nd, 2009 at 1:02 pm81. Virtual Pebble and 83. Bandit 09
Couldn’t agree more. But also emphasis that in January 2001 a Shrub with a committment to lowering regulation became president.
I even had my retirement fund representative pushing consumer versions of CDSwaps. Then as the market performed poorly, somehow they managed to keep circulating worthless investments in a way which their bonuses went up astronoically, even as they were lining up asking the govt for relief.
October 22nd, 2009 at 4:50 pmAuto Industry bailouts and now cries for higher compensation for executives seem to be lacking any sort of self knowledge of how much they have worked to make people not like them. estetik Auto Industry, to buy a new car you walk into the showroom where they have all the facts and do their best to keep any facts from you estetik burun ameliyati. They have set up an adversarial relationship. Now how many folks like their auto dealership gögüs büyütme? And we are supposed to bankroll them. Financial industry, they make money off of you estetik gögüs ameliyatlari. As a recent commercial puts it, the salesman says he makes money when you make money gögüs küçültme. But they don’t also tell you that they make money when you loose money vajina daraltma. The Shrub & Darth Cheney Consortium of Nonregulation of Markets happened, and lazer epilasyon fiyatlari that reinforced the decision taken late in the Clinton Waffle on Regulation Triangulation that over-the- karin germe ameliyatlari counter derivative financial products, such as mortgage backed securities and credit default swaps, would NOT be regulated or overseen plastik cerrahi. There was no transparency to that market, there’s no required reportage karin estetigi, it’s done off the books, as far as the oversight and legal agencies, so you don’t see the enormous amount of money being poured into it saç nakli. It was only reflected in things like executive compensation gögüs büyütme. Well, we kind of found out how much of it was sour or worthless when that market collapsed in late 2007 and into 2008 and early 2009 gögüs diklestirme. But if you grub around, you might be able to find some OTC derivative trading data gögüs küçültme, and a graph of that would look similar to the “bonus” curve. Except for the crash at the end, of course vajina daraltma ameliyati. While OTC trading has gone flat or trended toward zero, compensation, including bonuses has rebounded in an increasing direction gögüs estetigi.
October 28th, 2009 at 5:05 am