Comments on: Goldman Sachs datapoint of the day http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/04/24/goldman-sachs-datapoint-of-the-day/ A slice of lime in the soda Sun, 26 Oct 2014 19:05:02 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: Bruerr http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/04/24/goldman-sachs-datapoint-of-the-day/comment-page-1/#comment-1164 Sun, 03 May 2009 22:00:59 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/04/24/goldman-sachs-datapoint-of-the-day/#comment-1164 Correction: Where you have a blueprint for how to protect the American people, established into law, based on previous experience of dealing with Savings and Loan problems, and where you have experienced regulators involved in crafting that law, you have the benefit of hindsight.*

Hindsight was established in 1980s. This is what happens and laws were put in place to protect the government and its people from being exploited again.

With hindsight, comes responsibility and good stewardship. You cannot always get that from a stock broker, because stock brokers are sometimes programmed differently, by way of incentive and off record discussions. Not all stock brokers are this way, but many are. There should be a clear division between brokerage firms and government funds. Right now, that divisions is awash in trading platforms and automated liquidity experiments, derivatives and toxic debts being put off on the American tax payer – without consequence to sub-level executives who signed their companies into that debt.

This can lead to confusion. Where confusion sets in you have to go back to the law.

After so much indulgence, there is only the law. The weightier provisions of the law, take precedence, after so many narrow violations materialize.

]]>
By: Bruerr http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/04/24/goldman-sachs-datapoint-of-the-day/comment-page-1/#comment-1163 Sun, 03 May 2009 21:46:55 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/04/24/goldman-sachs-datapoint-of-the-day/#comment-1163 U.S. Code, Title 12, Chapter 16, § 1831o. Prompt corrective action.

At weightier provisions of the law (in above post and below the term shall** is to denote a mandate):

(i) Restricting activities of critically undercapitalized institutions
To carry out the purpose of this section, the Corporation shall**, by regulation or order—
(1) restrict the activities of any critically undercapitalized insured depository institution; and
(2) at a minimum (emphasis added), prohibit any such institution from doing any of the
following without the Corporation’s prior written approval:
(A) Entering into any material transaction other than in the usual course of
business…

(B) Extending credit for any highly leveraged transaction.

(C) Amending the institution’s charter or bylaws, except to the extent necessary
to carry out any other requirement of any law, regulation, or order.

(D) Making any material change in accounting methods.
(E) Engaging in any covered transaction (as defined in
section 371c (b) of this title).
F) Paying excessive compensation or bonuses.
(G) Paying interest on new or renewed liabilities at a rate that would increase the
institution’s weighted average cost of funds to a level significantly exceeding
the prevailing rates of interest on insured deposits in the institution’s normal
market areas.

See sweet heart deal given to Warren Buffet and not to the tax payer fund. Goldman taking funds from the U.S. tax payer, via FDIC, then turned around and in violation of law, giving Buffet terms which required them to pay interest on a new liability, at a rate that would increase the Goldman’s weighted average cost.

This is the most minor of all infractions. The one that is easiest to forgive, but a violation of law all the same.

Where you have a blueprint for how to protect the American people, established into law, based on previous experience of dealing with Savings and Loan problems, and where you have experienced regulators involved in crafting that law, you have the benefit of after-sight.

This is what happens and laws are put in place to protect the government and its people from being exploited again.

Where you have officers acting with some measure of mockery for the established law, you have also, college brats with no respect for the efforts of those who came before. Brat type financial advisers indulging in “experiment” type solutions. Their paid advisors, acting in compensation committees, trying to act official about bonus pay being a legal obligation and that the Federal Government must take a back seat to such contracts.

You have a myriad of unproven solutions.

You also have a law that is being violated like someone’s daughter, on the alter of bad credit and derivative ideas.

There you can see a mythical character, such as Cerberus, ravaging without consequence or stealing virtue away from that which was once good or powerful.

Trespassing against the law is one thing. But where you have multiple counts, it becomes blatant and egregious in its intent to offend or injure.

Where this is true, it is called flaunting the law.

Where you have top officials flaunting and violating the law over and over, you have a corporate mindset of elitism, persons who believe they are not accountable to the law, because they believe they are the best qualified to manage wealth, and as such, that the laws that regulate lesser human activity, do not pertain to them. They therefore seek to take wealth from others, to annex it unto themselves. Eventually they start to go lower and lower in their method of dishonesty and stealing. As this mentality becomes more embolden, you see a quality of fortitude dropping off to the side, like a wolf who emerges from the garments of a sheep. Once in striking distance, the cloak is no longer needed, and a lawless pattern behavior manifests with a fierce level of precision. Over-reaching and indulgence, no different than terrorists trying to grab at money that does not belong to them.

In terrorist third world countries, you see tyrants trying to force debt obligations on those who did not sign into the debt. Trying to receive medical and dental benefits from the debt they enjoined and having a party-like life style similar to executives who are paid like rock stars … not inviting the common to their spas or corporate weight rooms. Yet when their debt comes due, expecting the common to go along, like sheep, when they say “we are all in this together.”

As their debt obligations become manifest to all, what you end up with is top officials repeatedly and routinely violating the law, as a habit. They are no longer conscious of the violation, it is more a routine they have come to depend on.

Eventually the law is trampled. Which is what we have in the U.S Code.

You end up with a worthless press corp, who does not ask anyone about the weightier provisions of the law meant to protect Americans from abuse from overly indulgent financial institutions and firms, their subsidiaries.

Until finally the law does not protect. It fails in its original function. The press protects mainly those who advertise the most. The judicial community is absentee, because their best clients are the bankers and corporations who pass their debt onto the common. And you have a president that was made by Goldman Sachs, who can do nothing to protect even his own country from their financial aggression.

Before him, another president ruined by Goldman Sachs, who could do nothing to protect even his own country from their financial grabbing and over-reaching.

It really is quite apparent. The law is being violated and flaunted. The law is being used as the blue-print for how to steal money from a large government.

Money that does not belong to people, who are pattern violators of U.S. Code. Money that does not belong to financial terrorists.

Some of the companies in receiving the money, are so badly managed that their leaders are like puppets of another entity, like a foreign government or brokerage arm of Goldman Sachs.

There is only the law after so much indulgence. The weightier provisions of the law, after confusion multiplies from so many violations.

What America needs is a President who understand justice and how to govern unruly financial entities; financial entities that are accustomed to a lawless compass bearing. A president who understands it is not in our charter to negotiate with financial terrorists. Nor is it written anywhere, that we negotiate with financial terrorists, but any other terrorists is subject to a non-negotiation clause.

]]>
By: Bruerr http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/04/24/goldman-sachs-datapoint-of-the-day/comment-page-1/#comment-1162 Sun, 03 May 2009 20:23:10 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/04/24/goldman-sachs-datapoint-of-the-day/#comment-1162 U.S. Code, Title 12, Chapter 16, § 1831o. Prompt corrective action.

At weightier provisions of the law (in above post and below the term shall** is to denote a mandate):

(i) Restricting activities of critically undercapitalized institutions
To carry out the purpose of this section, the Corporation shall**, by regulation or order—
(1) restrict the activities of any critically undercapitalized insured depository institution; and
(2) at a minimum (emphasis added), prohibit any such institution from doing any of the
following without the Corporation’s prior written approval:
(A) Entering into any material transaction other than in the usual course of
business…

(B) Extending credit for any highly leveraged transaction.

(C) Amending the institution’s charter or bylaws, except to the extent necessary
to carry out any other requirement of any law, regulation, or order.

(D) Making any material change in accounting methods.
(E) Engaging in any covered transaction (as defined in
section 371c (b) of this title).
F) Paying excessive compensation or bonuses.

Recall if you will, the nameless beneficiaries of Merrill Lynch who have received substantial bonus and payouts and have since resigned; will resign in the next 2 to 24 months and gain employment with other firms.

Cerberus perhaps? Perhaps one of Goldman’s subsidiaries or ‘client’ firms.

Okay, now think about executive pay that was originally intended to reward profitable corporate performance, during the glory years from 2003-2006.

How many billions of dollars, and the U.S. tax payer wrangled by the arm in the last year, to pay for the debt obligations these same executives signed their corporations into?

It would be one thing if we were consulted as to whether or not we should enter into a debt obligation, for the
benefit of a firm like Goldman Sachs or Merrill Lynch. But we were never consulted. We did not sign our names to the contract.

The low level executives receiving all these caviar-and-champaign-laden bonuses, are the ones who consulted each other, reviewed the risk reports and SIGNED their names and their corporations into the debts.

That we are keeping these executives and board members on, inside those same corporations is heinously-conducive to more of the same. It is idiocy. Utter mad men, cravenly mad men and women at the helm of these vessels.

“Too large to fail?”

This is a fraud in speech, and dishonesty in language from the mouth of Hank Paulson and later incorporated in the speeches of Ben Bernanke, a puppet whose voice squeaks from all the guile he is exposed to.

No firm is “too big to fail,” unless you need that firm to stay in place long enough to pass money through it, and continue a dishonest practice, or a practice that is dependent on pattern-dishonesty and sequential violation of the law.

In accordance with regulatory law, bonuses and large “glory year” type executive pay is mandated to be halted with dividends, the moment the Federal Reserve moves to a firm that is undercapitalized; or suspected of being close to that line of whether or not they are undercapitalized.

It is the law.

As mentioned before, there is no secondary-obligation to pay shareholder dividends, or bonus, after the government realizes a firm is undercapitalitzed. The weightier provision or intent of the law is to stop paying dividends and bonus pay immediately.

This is a first action. In other words, it is better to stop paying dividends/bonuses and find out later the firm can afford to resume that activity. Not the other way around.

So as is written into this law, the prudent thing is to stop the payment of dividends and bonuses, immediately.

A blue print for disaster, as learned from the Savings and Loan debacle, is that an insured firm in financial trouble, continues to pay large bonuses to the people who engineered the problem. This is a huge no-no. Ben Bernanke and Hank Paulson knew this and so does most everyone in the regulation of banks. Dividends are no-go (period) when a company is in danger of being undercapitalized. Bonus pay is a no-go as well.

First casualties of a financial war, dealing with undercapitalized firms: Dividends. Second casualty: Bonus pay. Third casualty. The officers of that company. This includes the board of directors.

The firm itself, cannot argue in favor of bonus pay. It is not optional, and not how prior cases were handled; when it is found a firm is undercapitalized.

There is no place for the firm to produce some measured documentation saying contracts prior to receiving government funds, support , assurance or guarantee, take precedence and the government must take a back seat.

As mentioned above, the government is driving the undercapitalized firm. And they are in the front seat by default.

Prior to Bernanke, effective and efficient Federal Reserve Chiefs and Leaders used the power and force of the Federal Reserve to bring this to bear. And this force was mightily dealt to serve as deterrent to those on the fence of other companies being over-leveraged, poorly managed, or undercapitalized.

The power and force of the Federal Reserve was intended to be used authoritatively and with absolution. The remission of financial sins, comes with a price. And dividends are first to go; boards of directors and large bonus pay are next on the list of many things to be cut. Effective, immediately.

Indulgent bonus pay (for negative performance or marginal performance) and overly indulgent executive pay, across the board, are by mandate, in line to go after dividends are stopped.

Many people understand this: The hand of authority comes down heavy if at all, but especially on the failing bank or financial institution. Otherwise there will be a proliferation of failure, at great expense to the tax payer.

]]>
By: Bruerr http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/04/24/goldman-sachs-datapoint-of-the-day/comment-page-1/#comment-1161 Sun, 03 May 2009 19:42:02 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/04/24/goldman-sachs-datapoint-of-the-day/#comment-1161 (more)

U.S. Code, Title 12, Chapter 16, § 1831o. Prompt corrective action.

At weightier provisions of the law (in above post and below the term shall** is to denote a mandate):

(i) Restricting activities of critically undercapitalized institutions
To carry out the purpose of this section, the Corporation shall**, by regulation or order—
(1) restrict the activities of any critically undercapitalized insured depository institution; and
(2) at a minimum (emphasis added), prohibit any such institution from doing any of the
following without the Corporation’s prior written approval:
(A) Entering into any material transaction other than in the usual course of
business…

(B) Extending credit for any highly leveraged transaction.

(C) Amending the institution’s charter or bylaws …

(D) Making any material change in accounting methods.
(E) Engaging in any covered transaction (as defined in
section 371c (b) of this title).

This is too big an area to explore here. But suffice to say, covered transactions are primary tier transactions, where ownership is transferred to another entity out of U.S. jurisdiction. This includes assets in a firm, that have benefitted directly from funds taken out of a fund intended to protect U.S. tax payer deposits; such money going into an American company, and then funnelled out to foreign firms.

Covered transaction often results in a transaction where a foreign person or entity comes to own assets of a U.S. Business enterprise, or comes to control those assets. of a U.S. business (while it is in a receivership status – getting tax payer money).

Such transactions do not include feeding a black box, funds, which are distributed to various exchanges. Tier one investments do not include funneling money into an automated trading system while simultaneously violating U.S. Code, at several levels.

Covered transaction deal with transferring ownership of a U.S. Business, to a foreign entity or person, which could result in foreign control of any person engaged in interstate commerce in the United States.

As you can see violating this law, as well as other laws, can lead to a method, of confusing many press corps and reporters alike. If you can confuse the press reporting on the activity of the Treasury, you can easily confuse the American tax payer and their congressional representatives.

The more violations, in law, piled on top of each other, the more difficult it is for the common American to hold their representatives accountable. The more tangled the mess of regulation, the easier it is to under-source regulation. When all these things come together in the perfect storm, the more likely fraudulent actors are to come and go (as like the revolving door of Bush’s Treasury department) while maintaining plausible deniability.

As you might conclude, the first error is in allowing top officials (trusted officers of the Federal Reserve and Treasury) to act in violation of the weightier provisions of the U.S. Code. which was first designed to protect American from bad banks and CEOs, and can also be applied later, to protect America from financial terrorists.

The main method is to not negotiate with financial terrorists and to follow the important tenets of the law. Conversely, if you want to plunder a once great country, and its sheepish population, the blue print is to violate laws one right after another, in the order they are presented.

Violate them with indulgence and with impunity.

With impunity, that is, with exemption from punishment or loss. That means the actors, the most trusted actors have no skin in the game. They are using other people’s money and money intended for other purposes.

]]>
By: Bruerr http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/04/24/goldman-sachs-datapoint-of-the-day/comment-page-1/#comment-1160 Sun, 03 May 2009 19:07:53 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/04/24/goldman-sachs-datapoint-of-the-day/#comment-1160 U.S. Code, Title 12, Chapter 16, § 1831o. Prompt corrective action.

At weightier provisions of the law (in above post and below the term shall** is to denote a mandate):

(i) Restricting activities of critically undercapitalized institutions
To carry out the purpose of this section, the Corporation shall**, by regulation or order—
(1) restrict the activities of any critically undercapitalized insured depository institution; and
(2) at a minimum (emphasis added), prohibit any such institution from doing any of the
following without the Corporation’s prior written approval:
(A) Entering into any material transaction other than in the usual course of
business…

(B) Extending credit for any highly leveraged transaction.

(C) Amending the institution’s charter or bylaws, except to the extent necessary
to carry out any other requirement of any law, regulation, or order.

(D) Making any material change in accounting methods.

Dont look now, but nobody did anything wrong. Violation of any standing law? If the law does not have merit in a crisis then, it must be a bad law. However, such debate does not change the fact, it is presently, THE STANDING LAW.

Lets see, during the recent stock market rally, or prior to the rally, was a material change in accounting methods suggested and acted upon?

Lets looks at it a different way: Prior to the recent low on the S&P500, did anyone suggest or enact a material change in accounting methods?

Who has benefited from such a material change, if such a violation in law has occurred?

Did this violation of law, where true, did it occur in midstream, when many banks are taking funds out of the FDIC? The same fund intended to protect deposits of common Americans?

If this fund is exhausted, will the American consumer’s deposits be protected? Or will investment firms like Goldman be left holding all the chips?

Perhaps some laws written to protect Americans from predators, are to be easily violated and flaunted.

If I were a terrorist organization, I might also act in the same type of accounting changes, to conceal and confuse. For it is easier to exploit an intended victim if they are confused. How best to confuse, than to first violate their laws and act like you are an honest broker who would never violate their laws.

Yet there it is in black and white: The law.

And who is violating the law.

Who is seeking to violate the law further and who is flaunting the violations, stacking the violations one on top of the other, like it was a college prank they learned how to play in the 80s. Like stacking violations back to back on top of each other, is a recipe for how to steal money from a large fund.

]]>
By: Bruerr http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/04/24/goldman-sachs-datapoint-of-the-day/comment-page-1/#comment-1159 Sun, 03 May 2009 18:46:34 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/04/24/goldman-sachs-datapoint-of-the-day/#comment-1159 U.S. Code, Title 12, Chapter 16, § 1831o. Prompt corrective action.

At weightier provisions of the law (in above post and below the term shall** is to denote a mandate):

(i) Restricting activities of critically undercapitalized institutions
To carry out the purpose of this section, the Corporation shall**, by regulation or order—
(1) restrict the activities of any critically undercapitalized insured depository institution; and
(2) at a minimum (emphasis added), prohibit any such institution from doing any of the
following without the Corporation’s prior written approval:
(A) Entering into any material transaction other than in the usual course of
business…

(B) Extending credit for any highly leveraged transaction.

See present Treasury’s plan to involved private investors to buy bundles of mortgages, backed by incentives offered by our government; also known as dunce-in-the-corner. Dunce in the corner government seeks to give incentive to private firms by offering to guarantee their investment and leverage their own investment in a type of partnership, involving purchase of mortgage backed securities.

This whole chirade is so that firms like Goldman and JpMorgan, can continue to pay dividends in violation of the weightier provisions of the law. Presently the time has lapsed in which the mandate was to go forth, directing these many firms to stop paying dividends. Cold turkey. The mandate is simple: If you are turkey, you cannot pay dividends. If you are not a turkey but are acting in concert with turkeys, you cannot pay dividends. You cannot be enjoined with turkeys and continue to leverage U.S. Taxpayer funds or fund designed to insure U.S. deposits, and use that like a turkey with a small brain, and continue to pay out dividends. All turkeys of the financial world and this includes large banks whom broker Paulson said are “too big to fail,” cannot pay dividends and draw funds from Federal Depository Insurance Corporation, at the same time. That is cardinal sin #1.

Of course, they violated that law first.

Now with the program to give incentive to private investors to play with uncle Sam’s trouser pockets, Geithner is seeking to violate the established law at (B) above.

Seeking to leverage money that is not intended, nor has it ever been intended, to be used in brokering leveraged investment deals. EVER.

The law was written to protect Americans from fraudulent and dishonest actors. Keeping them out of leveraged investments and from guaranteeing leveraged investment, is one of the methods to protecting America and its government from dishonesty in financial matters.

Leveraged investment, is off the table. But Turbo tax evader Timothy Geithner, under tutelage of Hank Paulson, wants you to close your eyes and go to sleep here.

As such, flaunting the law (again). His compass has be set to find a violation of the law, violate it, flaunt it, and pretend not to be violating it.

Denial.

Soon he will be moving onto his promotion: Resigning under some technicality, and moving on to another firm in the circle of nobody did anything wrong here.

]]>
By: Bruerr http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/04/24/goldman-sachs-datapoint-of-the-day/comment-page-1/#comment-1158 Sun, 03 May 2009 18:21:30 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/04/24/goldman-sachs-datapoint-of-the-day/#comment-1158 U.S. Code, Title 12, Chapter 16, § 1831o. Prompt corrective action.

At weightier provisions of the law (in above post and below the term shall** is to denote a mandate):

(i) Restricting activities of critically undercapitalized institutions
To carry out the purpose of this section, the Corporation shall**, by regulation or order—
(1) restrict the activities of any critically undercapitalized insured depository institution; and
(2) at a minimum (emphasis added), prohibit any such institution from doing any of the
following…:
(A) Entering into any material transaction other than in the usual course of
business…

(B) Extending credit for any highly leveraged transaction.
(C) Amending the institution’s charter or bylaws, except to the extent necessary
to carry out any other requirement of any law, regulation, or order.

See Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, and others seeking to change corporate charters in midstream. This was after congress and senate were threatened that if they did not help the large banks with tax-payer funding, the banks would assure a terrorist result: that the financial sector would implode, the NY sector of our country would be driven off a cliff or that the country would be dropped into a chasm of financial chaos. We were at the time, already pushed to the brink of financial chaos.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/21  /morgan-stanley-goldman-sa_n_128147.htm l

“The request for the change to bank holding companies was granted by a unanimous vote of the Fed’s board of governors during a late Sunday meeting in Washington.”

Note the names of the persons voting are not disclosed. This is @ bad investigative reporting, or purposeful reporting, designed to omit certain details that are important.

One could surmise the vote was taking over the phone by clerks acting for the Treasury. And it being a Sunday evening vote, that the voting parties were rushed and frazzled, compelled by brokers to cast their vote potentially under some duress.

“The change of status means both companies will come under the direct regulation of the Federal Reserve, which regulates the nation’s bank holding companies. The banking subsidiaries of the two institutions will face the stricter regulations that commercial banks are required to meet. Previously, the primary regulator for Goldman and Morgan Stanley was the Securities and Exchange Commission.”

This is a concept of stricter regulation is something of a lie, for if they faced stricter regulation, the clear legal mandate is for them to stop paying dividends. Effective Immediately. This is at applying the weightier provision of the law.

And on top of that mandate, they would not be able to enter into any “experimental liquidity” program as per (A) above.

@ Violating Standing Law and flaunting violating the law.

]]>
By: Bruerr http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/04/24/goldman-sachs-datapoint-of-the-day/comment-page-1/#comment-1157 Sun, 03 May 2009 17:58:30 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/04/24/goldman-sachs-datapoint-of-the-day/#comment-1157 See a circle of fraudulent actors that do not exist. But we know they are there, because our parents have lost a lot of money and so have we.

Back on point – the Law established to protect the American people and their government being flaunted and violated by Goldman, subsidiaries and ‘client’ firms.

]]>
By: Bruerr http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/04/24/goldman-sachs-datapoint-of-the-day/comment-page-1/#comment-1156 Sun, 03 May 2009 17:53:55 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/04/24/goldman-sachs-datapoint-of-the-day/#comment-1156 †The spirit of Mephistopheles is to always deny.

See Paulson and Bernanke, deny that they strong armed or threatened Ken Lewis into buying Merrill Lynch, when Lewis learned the value of the company had been materially false or had changed substantially since initiating or moving for the purchase.

See market manipulators.

See Cerberus

See Goldman

See brokers in the presidents Treasury cabinet.

]]>
By: Bruerr http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/04/24/goldman-sachs-datapoint-of-the-day/comment-page-1/#comment-1155 Sun, 03 May 2009 17:52:10 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/04/24/goldman-sachs-datapoint-of-the-day/#comment-1155 Correction: Aggressive violation of the law, pay for it later (if caught).

On October 19, 2006 (months after his resignation), John W. Snow, President George Bush’s second United States Secretary of the Treasury, was named chairman of Cerberus Capital Management, L.P.

Former U.S. Vice President Dan Quayle is also associated with Cerberus.

Founded in 1992, Cerberus is named for the mythological three-headed dog that guarded the gates of Hades.

See market manipulation. See no evil. Note, 666 recent March low S&P500. Market manipulators flaunting the law and having a bit of fun which they will ever deny†.

Fun = tom foolery in the technical sense: Fraud

A false representation of a matter of fact—whether by words or by conduct, by false or misleading allegations, or by concealment of what should have been disclosed—that deceives and is intended to deceive another so that the individual or government or press organizations will act upon it to her or his legal injury, or to the injury of the American commoner.

Fun.

]]>