Goldman Sachs: One of Ten Member Banks of The Federal Reserve

I speak often of The Rothschild family and very often quote Meyer Rothschild as saying, "Let me control the money of a nation and I care not who makes its laws".  It was he who first uttered the words, "New World Order".

I have also believed that The Federal Reserve - a privately owned company - rules our country by virtue of Rothschild's saying quoted above.  There was a book written by Eustice Mullins many years ago, The Secrets of the Federal Reserve, in which he exposes the Rothschild's, their connections to JP Morgan, the Bush (as in former Presidents) family, the Rockefeller's and others of our wealthy elite.  The book is available to view on line.  Simply google The Secrets of the Federal Reserve.  If you have difficulty finding it, email me at info@gold666.org and I will happily send you the link.

I recently came across this article, The Sunday Times gains unprecedented access to the world's most powerful, and most secretive, investment bank and felt it important enough to republish here as was reported by Destination Yisra'el.  It is eye opening.

Here it is:

I'm doing 'God's work'. Meet Mr Goldman Sachs

Lloyd Blankfein: chairman and CEO

The Sunday Times gains unprecedented access to the world's most powerful, and most secretive, investment bank

Sunday Times Online – “Number 85 Broad Street, a dull, rust-coloured office block in lower Manhattan, doesn’t look like a place to stop and stare, and that’s just the way the people who work there like it. The men and women who arrive in the watery dawn sunshine, dressed in Wall Street black, clutching black briefcases and BlackBerrys, are very, very private. They walk quickly from their black Lincoln town cars to the lobby, past, well, nothing, really. There’s no name plate on the building, no sign on the front desk and the armed policeman stationed outside isn’t saying who works there. There’s a good reason for the secrecy. Number 85 Broad Street, New York, NY 10004, is where the money is. All of it.

It’s the site of the best cash-making machine that global capitalism has ever produced, and, some say, a political force more powerful than governments. The people who work behind the brass-trim glass doors make more money than some countries do. They are the rainmakers’ rainmakers, the biggest swinging dicks in the financial jungle. Their assets total $1 trillion, their annual revenues run into the tens of billions, and their profits are in the billions, which they distribute liberally among themselves. Average pay this recessionary year for the 30,000 staff is expected to be a record $700,000. Top earners will get tens of millions, several hundred thousand times more than a cleaner at the firm. When they have finished getting "filthy rich by 40", as the company saying goes, these alpha dogs don’t put their feet up. They parachute into some of the most senior political posts in the US and beyond, prompting accusations that they "rule the world". Number 85 Broad Street is the home of Goldman Sachs.

The world’s most successful investment bank likes to hide behind the tidal wave of money that it generates and sends crashing over Manhattan, the City of London and most of the world’s other financial capitals. But now the dark knights of banking are being forced, blinking, into the cold light of day. The public, politicians and the press blame bankers’ reckless trading for the credit crunch and, as the most successful bank still standing, Goldman is their prime target. Here, politicians and commentators compete to denounce Goldman in ever more robust terms — "robber barons", "economic vandals", "vulture capitalists". Vince Cable, the Lib Dem Treasury spokesman, contrasts the bank’s recent record results — profits of $3.2 billion in the last quarter alone — and its planned bumper bonus payments with what has happened to ordinary people’s jobs and incomes in 2009.

It’s even worse in the US. There, Rolling Stone magazine ran a story that described Goldman as "a great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity, relentlessly jamming its blood funnel into anything that smells like money". In his latest documentary, Capitalism: A Love Story, Michael Moore drives up to 85 Broad Street in an armoured Brinks money van, leaps out carrying a sack with a giant dollar sign on it, looks up at the building and yells: "We’re here to get the money back for the American people!"

Goldman’s reputation is suddenly as toxic as the credit default swaps and other inexplicably exotic financial instruments it used to buy with glee. That’s bad for the one thing it values more than anything else: business. Being the prime target for popular and political outrage could put Goldman first in line for draconian new regulation. So it has, reluctantly, decided that the time has come to speak out, to fight its corner. That’s how, on one of those bright autumnal New York mornings when anything seems possible — even an invitation to break bread with the masters of the universe — I find myself walking past the security guard who held up Michael Moore and into the building with no name.

"Aha! You catch us plotting in real time," says Lloyd Blankfein, breaking away from a cabal of senior executives discussing his trip to Washington the previous day. Blankfein, 55, Goldman’s chairman and chief executive, is wearing a grey suit with a jaunty Hermès tie with little red bicycles on it. In his hand, he’s carrying one of those cups of coffee that look bigger than the human stomach. Maybe it’s the caffeine, maybe it’s the tie — a birthday present from his daughter — but he’s in a remarkably jolly mood for a man everyone seems to hate. "It’s like a safari here," he jokes. "You’ve come in to look at the animals."

Blankfein may be Wall Street’s Sun God, but, with the economic outlook stormy, he doesn’t want to advertise it, so the merest hint of a status symbol or — horror! — ostentation is airbrushed out of his life, publicly, at least. Take his office on the 30th floor. The chairs are the same ones that were there when he became CEO three years ago. There are none of the $87,000 handmade rugs or $5,000 wastepaper baskets of Wall Street lore. There’s no sign of irrational exuberance. Only coffee, that arrives cold. It sets just the right tone for the job in hand. The grand wizard of Wall Street is steeling himself for the hardest sell of his life: he’s here to argue for good ol’ capitalism, for investment banks and for Goldman Sachs.

Luckily for him and his firm, he’s a damn good salesman. He starts with a little humility. He understands that "people are pissed off, mad, and bent out of shape" at bankers’ actions. Goldman played its part in the meltdown that almost destroyed the global financial system. It, like most other banks, lent too much money, made its first quarterly loss for more than a decade last year and ended up taking bail-out cash from Washington. "I know I could slit my wrists and people would cheer," he says. But then, he slowly begins to argue the case for modern banking. "We’re very important," he says, abandoning self-flagellation. "We help companies to grow by helping them to raise capital. Companies that grow create wealth. This, in turn, allows people to have jobs that create more growth and more wealth. It’s a virtuous cycle." To drive home his point, he makes a remarkably bold claim. "We have a social purpose."

Social purpose? Those who have lost their jobs or seen their pay slashed thanks to bankers who flogged dodgy mortgages and dreamt up investments so complex not even they understood them, would gladly tell him where to stick his social purpose. But the problem is, Blankfein is a good advertisement for wealth creation. His own. He is no scion of privilege, dispensing plummy-voiced homilies to raw capitalism from his 30th-floor eyrie. Born in a tough neighbourhood in the Bronx, the son of a postal worker and a receptionist, he was the first in his family to go to college and used financial aid to go to Harvard.

Even though he proudly pays himself more in a year than most of us could ever dream of — $68m in 2007 alone, a record for any Wall Street CEO, to add to the more than $500m of Goldman stock he owns — he insists he’s still "a blue-collar guy".

But what about the charge sheet? Bankers brought the world to the brink of bankruptcy and instead of doing the decent thing and jumping out of the nearest window, they turned up cap in hand to governments to hoover up taxpayers’ money to save their skin. Now, just one year on, they are carrying on as if nothing has happened, gambling, and winning, handsomely, with our cash. Goldman’s profits in the second quarter were a record $3.4 billion. Most of the money is being made in trading in bonds, currencies and commodities.

Goldman is coining it again for two reasons. First, global markets are booming — up 50% from the credit-crunch lows, as new money, much of it from governments, has gushed into the financial system. Second, with Lehman Brothers and Bear Stearns off the street, Merrill Lynch a crippled shadow of its former self, and neither Citigroup nor UBS the forces of old, Goldman has a bigger slice of a growing pie. "We didn’t f*** up like the other guys. We’ve still got a balance sheet. So, now we’ve got a bigger and richer pot to piss in," is how one Goldman banker puts it. Small wonder the bank is on course to set aside over $20 billion for salaries and bonuses.

By John Arlidge – Sunday Times OnLine – November 8, 2009

According to the prophets of Israel, “G-d’s work”, will in the long run not come from the banking headquarters of Goldman Sachs, but from the Throne of the Almighty One.  Over the millenniums though, there have been those who sought to ascend to the throne of G-d and challenge His sovereign rule.  According to BibleSearchers investigative report on the global economic war that began on Rosh Hashanah 2008 sub-titled, “The Federal Reserve in a Global Economic War for World Domination”, we read:

BibleSearchers Reflections - “Power”, “Greed” and “Control” are the three themes that drive the passions of globalists seeking to control the whole earth.  These three elements together are a toxic brew that ends up abrogating personal and human rights, plus eradicating any allegiance to the Creator of the Universe.  Almost every historian, in every era of human history has documented and verified historically rivals vying for power and position. They plot their strategies to achieve their preconceived opinions of what it will take to bring to them ultimate control. Today, power factions are vying for power today, like they have done in every era of world history.  And the God of Israel laughs at them with derision. 

 Psalms 2:1-6 – “Why do the nations rage, and the people plot (conspire) a vain thing?  The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the Lord and against His Anointed (Messiah), saying, ‘Let us break their bonds in pieces and cast away their cord from us.  He who sits in the heavens shall laugh; the Lord shall hold them in derision.  Then He shall speak to them in His wrath, and distress them in His deep displeasure: ‘Yet I have set My King on My holy hill of Zion.”

Yet, there is one exception; this is the first time in world history since the days of Nimrod of Old during the Age of the Tower of Babel that a global imperial power is seeking control of every nation, tongue, and people. The wars that are being conducted around the globe are not played out on the military battlefields or with nuclear missiles flying overhead.

These wars are “Ecological Wars” destroying the ecological foundation of human life with genetic altered grains, disappearing bees, dying bats, threats of exotic viruses, massive floods in the farmlands of the Mississippi River, progressive droughts on every continent, massive monsoons, typhoons wiping out hundreds of thousands of rice farmers and destroying the third largest rice producing crop in the world.  These wars are also “Economic Wars” that are played out in the boardrooms of the most powerful banks of the world as the economic power of the “International Bankers”, or those in allegiance as the Rothschild World Banking Dynasty is pitted against the European “Blue-Blooded” Royal Bankers.

It is hard to understand all the players, for we only know them in part for they live and exist in the shadows, hating and despising every moment in the “limelight” of public exposure.  According to insiders, one of the powerful consortiums that are ruling the world are the European Banks that are ruled and owned by Britain’s Queen Elizabeth, and House of Orange that is ruled by Netherland’s Queen Beatrix. Together they control the largest bank in the world, Switzerland’s UBS, with its banking associates, the United Kingdom’s HSBC (Hong Kong Banking Corporation) and the Netherland’s ING (International Netherland Group). Each of the latter two is ranked in the top ten banks upon this globe. 

Yet, in opposition to the global power of the British-Netherlands banking consortium are the Frankfurt Germany and American consortium of banks with the Federal Reserve System vying also for global financial control.  These are reputedly controlled by the Rothschild Rockefeller interests who started the American Federal Reserve System back in 1913.  The ten member banks of the Federal Reserve System reputedly include six banks in Europe and four banks in New York.  Of most interest these banks are located in only seven cities in the world.

· Rothschild Bank of London,

· Warburg Bank of Hamburg,

· Rothschild Bank of Berlin,

· Lehman Brothers of New York,

· Lazard Brothers of Paris,

· Kuhn Loeb Bank of New York,

· Israel Moses Seif Banks of Italy,

· Goldman, Sachs of New York,

· Warburg Bank of Amsterdam,

· Chase Manhattan Bank of New York.

What do all of these banks have in common?  They are reputedly owned by the Rothschild Dynasty. Are we witnessing the prophetic Economic One World Order that will arise at the end of days called “Mystery Babylon the Great” with “seven banking heads”?  Are the “ten horns” the “rulers” over “ten global trading unions” (European Union, North American Union, Eurasian Union, etc) that will be sitting on “seven mountains” around the world?  Are these “seven mountains” the international banking centers of: London, Hamberg, Berlin, Italy, New York, Paris, and Amsterdam? 

the NY Times and Reuters Agrees With Me

 Editor's Note:  As published in www.goldmanSachs666.com
In the post I wrote last Wednesday, November 18th, titled "Goldman Sachs Story Of The Day - I'm Sorry", I said much the same that The New York Times editorial did as reported by Reuters. Reuters article "NY Times to Goldman Sachs: Pay u to cut public debt" had this to say:

A New York Times editorial slammed Goldman Sachs for its role in the financial crisis and said that instead of paying big bonuses to its employees it should make a multibillion-dollar gift to help reduce the U.S. national debt.

The editorial, published November 21, attacked Goldman for everything from its top executive's failure to apologize properly for his investment bank's part in creating the crisis as well as Goldman's awarding of bonuses related to profits that the paper said were boosted by a government bailout. (emphasis added)

In my post I said, "We apologize", that's it? This does not seem like a real heartfelt apology." and "...I just don't think Lord Blankfein gets it".

The Times:  The Times sniffed at Goldman CEO Lloyd Blankfein's acknowledgment last week that his bank "participated in things that were clearly wrong," saying that he was not specific about what the company had done wrong and his remarks did not "come close to an apology."

In terms of the amount of money pledged to help small business, The Times said,

The paper described Goldman's pledge earlier this week of $500 million over five years to help small businesses as "crumbs from its table," saying it should do much more.

In a related comment, I said, "...and you offer up such a small amount in comparison, it does not seem genuine." In a recent reply to anther's comment I said, " their offer was a "mere pittance of a morsel" (not redundant)".

The Times: "The money will be welcomed by recipients, but if Goldman wants to make a meaningful contribution, it would have to be in the billions (emphasis added) and aimed more directly at taxpayers," the Times said."

Larry's Post: "What would have made a somewhat more believable statement would have been 10% of the estimated bonus pool - $3 billion 600 hundred million dollars ($3,600,000,000). That would make a ripple at least.

Larry's Post: "...somehow get a taxpayer bailout for AIG (also in the news today...see News Links below) from which they further enriched themselves at 100 cents on the dollar."

The Times: In another story published in the Times on Saturday, Gretchen Morgenson quotes Janet Tavakoli, an expert in derivatives at consulting firm Tavakoli Structured Finance, who urged Goldman to repay money from the AIG bailout, saying Goldman should be forced to take back toxic collateralized debt obligations, or CDOs, which had been insured with AIG. (emphasis added)

No, I am not comparing myself to The New York Times, Reuters or Janet Tavakoli. I am pointing out that we here at GoldmanSachs666 see through the GS BS as do those I quote here.

In recent days I have been contacted by several reporters doing stories on Goldman's image. One reporter asked me, "what can they (GS) do to improve their image?" I responded with "their image is not the problem, greed is their problem. Their (GS) greed overshadows and overpowers their (GS) ability to do right".

The issue is also not limiting salaries and executive pay or the destruction of Capitalism. The issue is how do we go about treating companies and their executives when they enrich themselves with "lii gotten" profits. Better said as profits derived from illegal activities, fraud,and manipulation within the highest levels of our government (influence peddling). In other words - words the major media do not want to use - it is an ongoing criminal enterprise and should be investigated under RICO.

Our entire banking system has bilked trillions of dollars from everyone around the world. It pales in comparison to what Madoff did (which I still don't believe he did without the help and support of Wall Street and some of our Government Agencies and Government officials).

This is and has been as organized a crime as organized crime ever was. But let's not make allegations. I believe there is enough reason and cause for our Attorney General to institute an investigation and let the American people know the findings. Let's start with the phony AAA ratings from the three major raitng services whose word is "gospel" to investors. Why did they do it? Who asked them to do it? How much did they get paid to do it?

But then again, perhaps the "power" of GS is so strong and its' influence with our Treasury Secretary, former Treasury Secretary, the previous Treasury Secretaries who advise our President so great that this will never happen.

Goldman Sachs is being called out by everyone. The people, the press and politicians. We can't all be wroing, can we?

News and Links Worth Reading

TMC Editor's Note:  I publish News and Links daily in www.GoldmanSachs666.com.  Today's links I thought were all interesting enought to share with our readers here.  We here at TMC FORUM continue to feel the outrage over what has happened to America and its' people.  We continue to be outraged by taxpayer dollars saving, supporting and aiding personal and corporate gain.  

There is a connection between Goldman Sachs and the U.S. Government.  They have and have had "their" people in important places for years now.  They sat at Secretary of the Treasury - yes, more then one - they sit next to the President now as an adviser.  They hold positions throughout the government and are highly influential.  Can anyone begin to see the picture yet?

Today's links are very good, especially the AP story about them taking the garbage out.  While in itself, volunteering on a holiday is a good thing and certainly good PR for GS to BS some more. I do congratulate the employees - all 300 of them - for taking the time to give of themselves.  

I hope - as they look around the room of those they are serving - that they begin to understand how some of those billions they are making corporate wise and personally can truly be better served by serving those in need.   

It would not be ironic at all if they meet some former Wall Streeters who didn't make it as they have.  I hope they look into the eyes of these people and see the pain and most of all hunger.  

What they are going to see is a picture of America, the richest nations still on earth with millions of starving, homeless people many of whom fell from grace as a result of "what they (GS) did wrong" 

The number of meals is 10 times as many as last year and come at a time when more and more Americans are struggling to put food on the table.

Great Performances' CEO, Liz Neumark, will help out in the Bronx with her 14-year-old son. Her elite catering company's first such effort was last year, serving 1,000 meals

"These were regular, ordinary people, just like us, who were hungry," she said. "And you think, 'there but for the grace of God."

 Imagine from 1,000 to 10,000 - a  true sign of the times

More than 49 million Americans — one in seven households — struggled to put enough food on the table in 2008. That's the highest rate since the federal Department of Agriculture began tracking food security in 1995.

This - Goldman Sachs - is a by product of "what you did terribly wrong". Look into their eyes, see the hunger, the pain and frustration.

To the 300 volunteers, let your managers and executives know what you have witnessed.  As we enter the holiday season perhaps you can rethink how you can begin to repay America - not by eliminating or renaming "Christmas parties" but by using the money you all have earned at the cost of 10,000 you will be cleaning up after.  Happy Holiday?
Read the full story...Goldman Sachs to take out garbage at Thanksgiving...click on the link

Today's Links:

Goldman Sachs, Shareholders Just Can't Get Along | BNET Financial ...
By Alain Sherter
Goldman Sachs's employee compensation

Goldman Sachs Execs Skirt Christmas Party Ban
By The Huffington Post News Editors
At Goldman Sachs, tis the season of giving. Not only is the firm lavishing huge bonuses on its employees, but its executives are finding ways around the company's ban on Christmas parties - by calling them "dinners."

Goldman Sachs to take out garbage at Thanksgiving
The Associated Press
Three hundred employees of Goldman Sachs Group Inc., Wall Street's richest firm, have volunteered for the holiday feast and will be tasked with taking out ...

The Media is Wrong about Goldman Sachs, AIG
Atlantic Online
Goldman Sachs Group Inc could have suffered dramatic losses if the federal government had not intervened to prop up American International Group Inc ...

      GS666 Editor’s Note:  This story I do not get at all.  All three –GS, AIG, U.S. Government other bankers - walked hand in hand in creating this disaster, yes but where is the media wrong?

Goldman Sachs: Here's What Makes Us Awesome (GS)
By John Carney
Lloyd Blankfein delivered a presentation about Goldman Sachs last week in which he explained what Goldman Sachs is and what its plans for expansion are. His comments were made at the Bank of America Merrill Lynch banking and financial ...

Dear Reader, We Cannot Criticize Goldman Sachs. Instead, We Admire ...
By Daily Reckoning
The Lloyd's Prayer Our Chairman, who art at Goldman Blanfein be thy name The rally's come God's work be done On earth as there's no fear of.
     GS666 Editor's Note:  This comment is worth reading even if you don't read the entire atricle:

Goldman has its former operatives in key posts throughout the government. It knows what the government is doing; it has a fair idea of what the government will do next. In trading US government securities, the biggest business in the financial world, this “insider” knowledge is no doubt a handy thing to have. It doesn’t hurt either that the Fed is making money available to Goldman at practically no cost. Nor, that the Fed is buying its mortgage backed securities - perhaps even ones that would be hard to unload on the private market.

Goldman Sachs' $500 Million Mea Culpa
Huffington Post (blog)
It's truly touching that Goldman Sachs' CEO Lloyd Blankfein, who recently said that his too-big-to-fail, Fed-backed holding company is doing "God's work," ...

Some Goldman Sachs Shareholders Want a Bigger Piece of the Pie
StreetInsider.com (subscription)
Some of the biggest shareholders of Goldman Sachs (NYSE: GS) have asked the firm, which is set to deliver $20 billion in bonuses, to pass more of the ...
     GS666 Editor's Note:  Finally the stockholders are beginning to wake up.  Don't they know they are the ones that own the company and can control its operation?

UPDATE 2-Investors ask Goldman to be less greedy-WSJ
Reuters
ZURICH, Nov 20 (Reuters) - Big shareholders at Goldman Sachs (GS.N) have asked the US bank, on track to deliver $20 billion in bonuses, to pass more profit ...
     GS666 Editor's Note:  That's like asking a shark not to bite.

Professor Buffett Tutors Goldman
TheStreet.com
However, not ones to miss out on a profit, it is likely that the new initiative will bag both Goldman Sachs and Professor Buffett a nice profit. ...

Big Goldman Sachs (GS) Shareholders Fight Bonuses
24/7 Wall St. (blog)
A number of large Goldman Sachs (NYSE:GS) shareholders would like to see the firm's profits in their pockets and not in the bank accounts of the Goldman ...

Goldman's extreme makeover: If bank has heart, it should forgo state, city ...
New York Daily News
The top man at Goldman Sachs has embarked on a campaign to restore the image of the world's richest bank as it gets richer and richer after having ...
     GS666 Editor's Note:  Some good stuff in this one.

Some Shareholders Want Goldman to Cut Back on Bonuses
Wall Street Journal
By SUSANNE CRAIG Some of the largest shareholders in Goldman Sachs Group Inc. have urged the Wall Street firm to reduce the size of its bonus pool, ...

Q&A: Why Eric Dezenhall Thinks Goldman Sachs' Apology May Be a ...
By Jim Edwards
Goldman Sachs (GS) apologized for its role in the financial crisis this week and announced it would invest $500 million in small businesses as a mea c.
     GS666 Editor's Note:  See my comment in this post.

Goldman Sachs apologized for the financial crisis
By admin
The head of Goldman Sachs “regrets” and about his interview with Sunday Times, where he said that banks “are doing God's work.” This phrase has caused a new wave of criticism of the company. Mr. Blankfeyn said he was joking. ...

Goldman's Sachs-Cloth and Ashes Tour Continues
New York Magazine
In response to public backlash against them, Goldman Sachs has been going out of its way to apologize for how well they have performed post-crisis. ...

Goldman Sachs Story Of The Day - I'm Sorry

Editors Note:  As written and published in www.GoldmanSachs666.com

For the past few weeks all the talk and buzz about Goldman Sachs was about Blankfein's comment on doing God's work.  This week we have a new story that will probably fill the blogs and headlines of the media - Lloyd Blankfein's apology for the role his company played in the housing crisis.  Of course, the housing crisis or mortgage meltdown, as it was referred to, evolved into a full blown international financial crisis never before seen.

CBS MoneyWatch.com, reporter Ilyce Glink quotes CEO Blankfen as saying,
“We participated in things that were clearly wrong and have reason to regret,” Blankfein reportedly said, adding “we apologize.”

 Read Ms. Glink's full article...click here

"We aplogize", that's it?  This does not seem like a real heartfelt apology.  The real important part of his statement is where he admits that "things they did were clearly wrong"  Clearly, they were wrong.  Ask other countries, retirement plan administrators. cities, counties and those millions of Americans who are unemployed.  They will all tell you that "things they did were clearly wrong". 

I just don't think Lord Blankfein gets it.  They were the kingpins in the Wall Street Cartel.  They managed to save themselves, let some of their brothers like Lehman Brothers  fail and somehow get a taxpayer bailout for AIG (also in the news today...see News Links below) from which they further enriched themselves at 100 cents on the dollar.

America, we need not continue to support those who do not support us.  Folks, they knew what they were doing and they knew what the consequences would be.  One thing that cannot be said about Goldman is that they are not dumb.  Indeed, they are very intelligent and good at what they do.  They knew!

So how sorry are they?  Ilyce Glick says,

...Goldman Sachs is ready to kiss and make up. It’s offered to put up a total $100 million per year over five years to help give small business owners better access to capital and business education. The company will contribute $200 million (over five years) for business and management education and $300 million (again, over five years) to provide loans and philanthropic support to increase access to capital for small business owners.

 Yes, $500 million does sound like a lot but you must put it into perspective.  If - as she says - they are now talking about bonuses of up to $36 billion then the good faith gesture of $500 million represents only 1.38 percent of the bonus pool. When you are talking billions of dollars - that's 9 zeros ($36,000.000,000) - and you offer up such a small amount in comparison, it does not seem genuine. 

What would have made a somewhat more believable statement would have been 10% of the estimated bonus pool - $3 billion 600 hundred million dollars ($3,600,000,000).  That would make a ripple at least.

To add insult to injury the $500 million is going to be spread out over years and different allocations.

• $100 million per year over five years to help give small business owners better access to capital and business education.  That's just $20 , million per year.
  

• $200 million over five years for business and management education   That's just $40 million per year
  

• $300 million over five years to provide loans and philanthropic support to increase access 
• to capital for small business owners. That's just $60 million per year.

Source: Ilyce Glink, CBS MoneyWatch.com

Now their apology is only worth $120 million per year.  Over the next five years their bonuses alone could total $180 billion if it stays at the same  level.

Some apology for being a kingpin in bringing down the world's economy, leaving millions of their fellow citizens unemployed, foreclosed on and in poverty.  Give me a break!  How dumb do you think we are,  Lord Blankfein? "Clearly" you are at fault and "clearly" you should be working diligently at making amends and righting the wrongs you did not  insulting us by rubbing our noses in manure as you ride your lavish mechanical camels off into the dessert sunset.

Last but not least by any stretch of the imagination, this proposed apology offering will most probably come from company revenues not their own bonus money. 

If you were indeed doing God's work as you have claimed, then would you not apply this philosophy - "Give and ye shall receive".   By the way, is the god you refer to The Almighty Dollar?


Goldman Sachs and their brother Wall Street bankers have accomplished the greatest transference of wealth in the history of the world.  They have left many broke and destitute through their actions and like the Lords and Rulers of the past, they throw back a few morsels to the rest of us peasants.

More on this outrage in the future.

For more views and commentary by Larry Rubinoff go to: www.GoldmanSachs666.com

The Financialization of America...Not To The Benefit of Americans

 Editor's Note:  As written for and published in GoldmanSachs666.comwww.GoldmanSachs666.com.

I just came across an op ed in the New York Times written by Paul Krugman published in July, 2009.  While this article is several months old, his words are as relevant today as they were in Jully.

The American economy remains in dire straits, with one worker in six unemployed or underemployed. Yet Goldman Sachs just reported record quarterly profits — and it’s preparing to hand out huge bonuses, comparable to what it was paying before the crisis. What does this contrast tell us?

Of course we now that unemployment has soared even higher since July and Goldman reported an even larger profit for the next quarter after this article was published. 

Many of us have been asking or should be asking the question, "What does this contrast tell us?"

Here are his well stated answers:

First, it tells us that Goldman is very good at what it does. Unfortunately, what it does is bad for America.

A very interesting statement, "what it does is bad for America".  Indeed it is.  As I see it, what it does so well it does at the expense of America as a whole and its people more specifically.

Second, it shows that Wall Street’s bad habits — above all, the system of compensation that helped cause the financial crisis — have not gone away.

Wall Street's bad habits - greed - have not only continued but have escalated.  So powerful have they become that in my opinion they truly believe "they rule the world".  Do they?

Third, it shows that by rescuing the financial system without reforming it, Washington has done nothing to protect us from a new crisis, and, in fact, has made another crisis more likely.

Here Mr. Krugman says it all.  "Washington has done nothing to protect us from a new crisis..."   In fact, one could argue that the crisis has escalated to a new level.  I am not sure that we truly even rescured the financial system.  What we have done is eliminated competition on Wall Street.  Enlarged those already "too big to fail" banks into even bigger "we can never let them fail" banks.  We have further aided in monopolizing the industry and any anti-trust regulations that may still be on the books and viable.

We have created more inefficiency that cannot provide any viable level of customer service.  Cusomer Service - what's that?  History has already proven that the larger and more diverse a company grows the less it can operate efficiently.  This certainly would be a good topic for some upcoming Economist.

How has this growth in financialization affected us?  Krugman says,

Such growth would be fine if financialization really delivered on its promises — if financial firms made money by directing capital to its most productive uses, by developing innovative ways to spread and reduce risk. But can anyone, at this point, make those claims with a straight face? Financial firms, we now know, directed vast quantities of capital into the construction of unsellable houses and empty shopping malls. They increased risk rather than reducing it, and concentrated risk rather than spreading it. In effect, the industry was selling dangerous patent medicine to gullible consumers.

 Financialization to me is the concerted effort to transfer as much wealth our of the economy and into the coffers of those already in control of too much of our money.

By moving money around amongst themselves - by the push of a button - profits were created overnight yet the person pushing the button recieves huge amounts of salary and bounuses to do so.  I certainly hope that the "finger of unproductive profiteering" is heavily insured by Lloyd's of London.  Actually, that finger is probably insured by AIG to be certain.

Congress has failed us.  They listened not to the people - their constituants - but to those in postions of power with self interest in mind, body and soul amongst whom were Treasury Secretary Paulson, Chairman of the N.Y. Federal Reserve Bank Timothy Geithner and Chairman of The Federal Reserve - a private company whose power exceeds that of our President - Ben Bernanke.  They all answer to a higher power and I am not speaking of anyone in our government.

If you really examine the bailouts, you will see that they were never meant to rescue our economy or any of the people of America.  The notion that if we let some of these banks fail would destroy the world's economy is pure bunk.  There are just too many other banking players here and abroad that would have gladly picked up the slack   Especially from Goldman Slacks.

Read Paul Krugman's Full Article...click here

Dylan Ratigan Suggests A Bailoout Plan...For The People

 Dylan Ratigan does a great job in this article.  He wrote.

Bankers lent pretend money to home buyers to award themselves actual money in bonuses -- making home prices balloon and, in the process, bankrupting America's treasury, currency, the states, and many of its citizens.

Veterans: Lip Service, Bankers: Billions & America: Foreclosures - Here's The Fix  Read Full Article...click here

Bankers lent pretend money to home buyers to award themselves actual money in bonuses -- making home prices balloon and, in the process, bankrupting America's treasury, currency, the states, and many of its citizens.

What did these people do to deserve the handout?


How do you feel about a Wall Street Banker who has been renting an apartment here in New York and this year combined the bonus money he made on bundling new taxpayer-sponsored Fannie Mae CDS with a first-time home buyers tax credit gift from the taxpayers to buy the penthouse in his building?

Read Dylan's suggestion on how a bailout could work "for the people"....click here

Prediction Of More Bad To Come

I don't like being the bearer of bad news but I believe their is more bad news down the road for our ailing economy and the people of this country.  While the attitude of many - in places so high that it makes your nose bleed - is to report what I call "feel good" news.  News and reports that will make you think things are better and if you hear it enough you will begin to believe it.  Our government has been using this tactic for years now.

What I believe is in the best interest of the American people is the truth.  With the truth people can plan accordingly.  With false hopes of betterment, they might do things they will later regret.  The tendency is to spend more if you believe things are better and going to be even better.  If we have so called, bottomed out, then yahoo, let's spend again.

Spending in and of itself is not bad for the economy and can help in a recovery effort.  What is bad is that most spending does not occur with cash.  Spending is done with credit.  It is certainly enticing to obligate one's self to a future payment if that person is led to believe that they will be able to meet this future obligation.  Isn't that what got us into this mess to begin with? 

You cannot have a recover by spending more on credit.  You can't solve an economic crisis where everyone is over extended on credit by the use of more credit.

Therefore, it is vital that we know the truth.

"More Rough Times Ahead" was published in late September by RIS Media/ 

Despite recent signs of improvement, more rough times are ahead for the U.S. economy, according to several prominent experts in real estate and the economy who attended a recent forum at the Nixon Presidential Library.

Keep in mind that this was done well over a month ago but with the exception the indication that car sales increased (due to the cash for clunkers stimulous)  the other facts are still viable.
“You look at the numbers and everything points to the fact that we not only have bottomed, but things seem to be improving,” said Christopher Thornberg of Beacon Economics, citing increases in durable goods orders, exports and auto sales. He added, “When you think about the problems we’ve been through and what government has done, in many ways, they have, in fact, stabilized the economy. But you know what? They haven’t actually solved the underlying problems in the economy.”




Yes, the underlying problems of the economy.  Rising unemployment now up over 10%, increasing foreclosures, increasing credit card defaults and increasing commercial real estate defaults and new housing starts at its lowest level in decades are all underlying problems.

Until you have productivity, employment levels back to our previous averages and cash - not credit - flowing in our economy, there can be no recovery.

Obama promised us a stimulus that would provide millions and millions of dollars to repari our badly needed infrastructure.  He in fact said  that there are projects ready to go but for the lack of funding.  That sure was a great idea that certainly would have helped the economy rebound.  But, I have not seen any infrastructure work being performed on these "ready to go" projects.  Where did the funding go? 

While all of the panelists agreed that the economy will rebound in another two or three years, several pointed to tough economic conditions in the interim

Two or three years, not the 2010 recovery everyone seems to be talking about.  I now you can put 10 different economists into a room and get 10 different opinions. Affter all who can reallyl predict the future?  But the one thing we can do is look at the facts logically, analyze these facts logically and come to a logical conclusion - things are not going to get better for a while so prepare yourselves.

To date the only recovery I have seen is on Wall Street.  The reason for that as simple as I said above.  It takes cash to create a recover and Wall Street certainly got all of it.  I say, if that same amount of money were put out on the street, the infrastructure work begun, those and other jobs created, small business allowed to survive (unlike the "too big to fail" guys) we would begin to see an up tick.

Don't get the wool pulled over your eyes.  That has been happening all to much in our country for years.  The true figures of unemployment which takes into account those underemployed and off of the unemployment benefit roles total over 20%.  Ask the question, how can you have a jobless recovery that is meaningful?

Open your eyes adn see the reality of the real situation.  Take actions to allow your survival and take vocal action to change the way our system works.  Let's bring it back so that it works for the people not the "too big to fail" banksters.

Bring the Wall Street recovery down to Main Street. That is where the people live.

$13 Trilliond Dollars To Banks Outside of TARP

Tavis Smiley interviews ex Goldman Sachs executive Nomi Prins.  This link has a 9 minute video interview which is worth listening to.  She talks about "too big to fail" and the closeness of various people in government - past and present - to Wall Street, specifically Goldman Sachs.

She also talks about $13 trillion banks have received that we may never get paid back for.  All we hear about is the TARP funds which totaled $700 billion.  It seems that money just keeps flowing to Wall Street and the Banks yet money for the people's needs are always questioned as to "where are we going to get it" or "we are mortgaging our childrens future" or simplly, "we have a deficit now so we can't afford more".

There is trillions available for war and trillions available for banks but nothing to create jobs, to provide health care and support small business.  With starving children in this country you would think we could feed them as easily as we feed the banks.

Get more insight and more truth.

Goldman Whistleblower Nomi Prins Talks Banking Heist With Tavis Smiley - Home - The Daily Bail...click title to view.

Endorsers of significant change in banking

 Editor's Note:  Robdashu is a "guest writer" and contributor to the TMC FORUM.  He is amongst those that see the truth and is willing to speak out.  Look for more Guest Posts in the future.  

This post articulates the previous post

A Too Big Too Fail Apology From Former Citi Chairman

Alan Greenspan:

"If they're too big to fail, they're too big" - Alan finally recognizes the moral hazard of bailing out these risk-takers. They'll just do it again, expecting to be bailed out again.

Paul Volcker:

Volcker wants the splitting of commercial and investment banking back into separate entities; leave the risk-taking where it belongs - among those willing and able to take the risks; this still does not address the havoc that risky trading can bring to the system, and the unintended financial wounding of innocent bystanders. Still, a big step in the right direction.

Joseph Stiglitz:
(Nobel-prize winning economist)

The "too big to fail" banks have gotten even bigger since the crisis under Obama's guidance, and have not change their risky investment behavior. Stiglitz favors some kind of breakup of the mega-banks.

Paul Craig Roberts
(was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration)

Roberts compares the trading of financial derivatives like credit swaps to be tantamount to casino gambling. The bets on companies' financial positions open up all kinds of perverse incentives in this market.
Roberts article http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts10162009.html

Dominique Strauss-Kahn:
head of the International Monetary Fund,

":without a slimming down and restructuring of the banking system there can be no economic recovery":

"As long as the financial sector is not restructured, which means it has in some way to shrink, and some part of it has to just disappear," said Dominique Strauss-Kahn, Confidence has to be restored by recognition of all the losses [they have incurred]. Until this has been done confidence will not come back."

http://www.voanews.com/english/archive/2009-01/2009-01-26-voa62.cfm?moddate=2009-01-26

Simon Johnson, a professor at MIT’s Sloan School of Management, was the chief economist at the International Monetary Fund during 2007 and 2008.

A Too Big Too Fail Apology From Former Citi Chairman

History, it is said, is the greatest teacher. Yet many intelligent and knowledgeable people don’t seem to read history.

Corporate growth throughout the late 60’ the 70’s and into the 80’s flourished through Mergers and Acquisitions. Companies were gobbling up other companies in their own industries as well as other industries. The goal – to see how big they could get.

Paint companies were buying drug store companies, storage companies were buying hotel companies and companies were created just to buy up other companies like Great Western who bought Paramount Pictures and Associates Finance – a personal and auto loan company.

Throughout the 80’s Leveraged Buyouts was the rage. One company buying another company for virtually no money of their own, just using the assets of the target company to accomplish the purchase. The theory was that many of these companies who grew in previous years through Mergers and Acquisitions were worth more by selling off their pieces then they were keeping them whole. Contract to buy a company then sell off its subsidiaries to pay for the purchase.

What drove these Leveraged Buyouts in addition to the thirst for bigness, wealth and poser was the fact that many of them were “too big” and potential failure loomed. “Too Big” companies could not properly manage what they owned.

This fact drove many companies to sell off any subsidiaries that had that were not related to their “core” business. Bigger was not better.

With over 40 years of history, you would think that our highly paid corporate executives and especially our government would have learned the lesson as well. Instead, they embarked again on a known road to failure.

John Reed, former Chairman of Citi Bank was one who did not learn. He was obviously captured and captivated by the thought of GREATNESS. But now, out of the business world, looking at the crisis we are in which he helped to create, he humbly apologizes.

John Reed, Former Citigroup CEO, APOLOGIZES For Creating Monster Of A Bank The Huffington Post by Ryan McCarthy

Former Citigroup chairman and CEO, John Reed, has apologized to a Bloomberg reporter for his role in creating the ailing mega-bank, which has received $45 billion bailout funds and more than $300 billion in asset guarantees.
In other words, Reed, is essentially saying, sorry about that whole "too big to fail" thing.
Here's what Reed told Bloomberg:
"I'm sorry," Reed, 70, said in an interview yesterday. "These are people I love and care about. You could imagine emotionally it's not easy to see what's happened"...

He now proposes to curtail executive compensation and begin to break apart those “too big to fail” institutions. I think he read the history books too late.

Reed's apologia comes on the heels of his letter to the editor of the New York Times last week, in which he put forth his support for separating banks lending operations from their trading arms. In 1999 Congress repealed the 1933 Glass-Steagall Act, and opened the door for commercial banks to meld with trading houses.

When our economy was working well, we had usury laws that capped the interest rates that banks and finance companies could charge. At it height the maximum rate was 18%. Anything above that was considered “loan sharking”

When the economy was working well we had and enforced anti trust laws in effect limiting the ability of any one company to monopolize an industry and eliminate competition which in turn harmed the consumer = me and you.

When the economy was working well there were laws against price gouging. In fact, there still exist laws against price gouging, - the taking advantage of people by charging higher prices for needed commodities in times of trouble. Well, these are certainly times of trouble of most Americans yet we see price gouging almost everywhere – oil, food, insurance and most certainly in bank fees.

What is interesting to me however is that most of our current CEO’s and Congresspersons are old enough to remember “the way it was”. In other words, they are old enough to have witnessed first hand and participated in those earlier times I mention above. They didn’t’ even have to read any history books – THEY WERE THERE!

What we are actually experiencing is the need for greed, wealth and most of all power. These people know the history. Others in advisory positions to them know the history and certainly there are hundreds of business and economics professors in universities across this nation that knows.

They knew! They knew what the consequences of their actions would be but did not care. When you put billions of dollars into your pockets it is often difficult to determine right from wrong or even care.

We, the people, were also blinded by this. We were allowed a time of prosperity never before seen in our history. Everyone had virtually anything they wanted. Within the confines of your economic status and earnings, you could buy things you really couldn’t afford. Why, because those too big to fail guys knew if they diverted your attention you would not say or do anything about what they were doing.

They blinded us with the same form of greed they were using just a much lower level of it. They went for billions by allowing us to get thousands.

Break up the too big too fail

There are many who are in favor of breaking up those “too big to fail” institutions saying that if they are “too big to fail” they are simply just too big to exist. Two such proponents of breaking up the banks are former Fed Chairman Volker and current Chairwoman of the FDIC, Sheila Bair.

The banks would have you to believe that in order for them to be competitive globally they have to be as big – if not bigger then European and Asian banks. My question is competitive for whom? The large global institutions that are probably also “too big to fail?? This argument certainly does not apply to the American consumer.

I am one of those that believe that a mandated break up for anti-trust and monopoly reasons should occur. By concentrating almost half of our consumer banking in just four banks – Citi, JP Morgan, Bank of America and Wells Fargo – just does not work to the benefit of the consumer. It is only good for themselves and their enormous salaries and bonuses.

Competition, in basic economics, means that prices are held in check and also creates a more consumer conscious company. If you have no competition then why worry about good sound business practices and customer satisfaction? Two good examples of this would be your local or regional electric utility company. Have you tried to negotiate a better price with yours? Of course not – because there is no one else to go to.

Now, look at the cell phone industry. They are continually offering lower rate plans to gain more market share – a plus for the consumer. The consumer has a choice. But as I say that, the consolidations are occurring there as well. Verizon recently acquired Alltel, Sprint acquired Nextel, AT&T acquired Cingular and there are rumors out there that T Mobile and Sprint are working on joining forces.

Cable companies at one time also had no competition as each purchased the rights to an area in which no other cable company could operate. Remember those days before satellite? While single cable company operators still buy a franchise territory, the consumer does have the option of two other satellite companies. The result is a more cooperative, consumer friendly and lower cost services by all competitors.

The last case I will make for the breakup of “too big to fail” are the oil companies. If you are old enough – I am – to remember the old gas wars where the oil companies would lower gas prices almost on a daily basis to get more market share. Then they too realized that eliminating competition would work to their benefit and against the consumers. Oil companies began to merge. The Exxon merger with Mobil the biggest example of that. In addition, oil companies made agreements with each other as to territories. They agreed amongst themselves who would operate in what regions and gain the market share in that area. Competition was reduced greatly and we have all seen the results of that most recently.

There is a case for the breakup of the “too big to fail” banks.

One other item that should be considered in a break up argument is the idea of all banks limiting their business to consumer banking. They, as former Citi CEO, Reed, pointed out should not be in the insurance business nor should they be in the investment banking business. The latter having been recently reinvigorated when Congress agreed to giving investment banks such as Goldman Sachs, commercial banking status. Also, by the Fed’s prompting of allowing JP Morgan to purchase Bear Stearns and having Bank of America purchase Merrill Lynch.

It appears that whatever powers to be in our government are making a concentrated effort to limit competition to aid and abet “too big to fail” by aiding and abetting consumer destruction. I am not sure who and where those powers are but a look inside The Federal Reserve might give us an idea.

Mr. Reed, your apology comes somewhat too late. If you are sincere in your beliefs vocalized by your apology then you should use your power and influence to make the changes. What say you?