<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Goldman may repay government funds but not ease U.S. grip</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/04/14/goldman-may-repay-government-funds-but-not-ease-us-grip/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/04/14/goldman-may-repay-government-funds-but-not-ease-us-grip/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 19 May 2013 03:03:38 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: gunlock</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/04/14/goldman-may-repay-government-funds-but-not-ease-us-grip/comment-page-1/#comment-13109</link>
		<dc:creator>gunlock</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Apr 2009 01:12:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=2969#comment-13109</guid>
		<description>Yeah of course GS is profitable. They recouped 100% on the CDS contracts thanks to the US govt while being hedged. So they make money on both side of the trade?! This is not a well run buisness, its a crony capitalism. They would be bankrupt without the US government bending over backward to accommodate their every need. I mean why didn&#039;t they let Lehman or Bear Sterns become a bank holding company when they faced bankrupcy??</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah of course GS is profitable. They recouped 100% on the CDS contracts thanks to the US govt while being hedged. So they make money on both side of the trade?! This is not a well run buisness, its a crony capitalism. They would be bankrupt without the US government bending over backward to accommodate their every need. I mean why didn&#8217;t they let Lehman or Bear Sterns become a bank holding company when they faced bankrupcy??</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: McChavelli</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/04/14/goldman-may-repay-government-funds-but-not-ease-us-grip/comment-page-1/#comment-12876</link>
		<dc:creator>McChavelli</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Apr 2009 18:03:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=2969#comment-12876</guid>
		<description>1. 2007 - 2008 Goldman Sachs buys CDS from AIG;

2. September - November 2008 - Goldman Sachs swallows $90 billion from the TARP funds, all taxpayers monies

3. CDS are payable to Goldman Sachs by end-December &amp; end March

4. March 2009 - Githner &amp; Co &#039;bails out&#039; AIG with an additional $30 billion of tax payer&#039;s monies&#039; (third bailout) 

5. March 2009 - $12.5 billion of tax payer&#039;s monies from the $170 billion are paid by AIG to Goldman Sachs).

Privatization of profits and debt socialization....nice....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>1. 2007 &#8211; 2008 Goldman Sachs buys CDS from AIG;</p>
<p>2. September &#8211; November 2008 &#8211; Goldman Sachs swallows $90 billion from the TARP funds, all taxpayers monies</p>
<p>3. CDS are payable to Goldman Sachs by end-December &amp; end March</p>
<p>4. March 2009 &#8211; Githner &amp; Co &#8216;bails out&#8217; AIG with an additional $30 billion of tax payer&#8217;s monies&#8217; (third bailout) </p>
<p>5. March 2009 &#8211; $12.5 billion of tax payer&#8217;s monies from the $170 billion are paid by AIG to Goldman Sachs).</p>
<p>Privatization of profits and debt socialization&#8230;.nice&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
