tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3758330678390419129.post7207423727432234581..comments2024-02-13T02:39:22.756-05:00Comments on EconomicPolicyJournal.com: Understanding Wall StreetRobert Wenzelhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14296920597416905488noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3758330678390419129.post-4238168828802190252010-04-19T10:58:07.874-04:002010-04-19T10:58:07.874-04:00Hi Bob -
The ZH post doesn't show that. It sa...Hi Bob -<br /><br />The ZH post doesn't show that. It says that an analysis that uncovered everything would have to have been very extensive..and it WASN'T easy to discover. <br />ZH substantiates what I said - which is that they were taken in by the ratings agencies.<br /><br />WHICH IS WHY THERE IS RATINGS FRAUD IN ALL THIS AND SELECTIVELY TARGETING GOLDMAN WITHOUT ALSO TARGETING MOODYLILA RAJIVAnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3758330678390419129.post-37178150533071267862010-04-19T07:49:52.262-04:002010-04-19T07:49:52.262-04:00@annonymous
If Goldman was knowingly ripping peop...@annonymous<br /><br />If Goldman was knowingly ripping people off with these deals, then why was Goldman long the Paulson deal, which resulted in their losing $90 million?<br /><br />Second, the ZeroHedge post shows how a proper analysis from the facts would have highlighted the problems with the CDO's. So if enough disclosure is made to understand how dangerous, these CDO's were, where Robert Wenzelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12653378186315529211noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3758330678390419129.post-325396964728611132010-04-19T02:03:12.549-04:002010-04-19T02:03:12.549-04:00Perhaps you should swing over by ZeroHedge.com and...Perhaps you should swing over by ZeroHedge.com and read their take on Goldman's crimes.<br /><br />http://www.zerohedge.com/article/guest-post-goldmans-blueprint-dumping-toxic-assets-how-these-cdos-were-designed-failAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3758330678390419129.post-48993361861302950592010-04-19T00:05:05.683-04:002010-04-19T00:05:05.683-04:00@Lila
ACA shouldn't have even asked. That'...@Lila<br /><br />ACA shouldn't have even asked. That's at least a violation of an ethical code. There is no investment firm in the world that would have relied on their "independent" evaluation if it was based on who was buying.<br /><br />As for Goldman getting the $90 million back some other way, there is no proof and you could say that about most business transactions. Robert Wenzelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12653378186315529211noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3758330678390419129.post-21140199248620832512010-04-18T22:16:42.278-04:002010-04-18T22:16:42.278-04:00OK...I'll buy that...I didn't see the 90 m...OK...I'll buy that...I didn't see the 90 million figure.<br /><br />It's not a question of ACA's giving evaluations only when Paulson is on board. It's that they were TOLD, when they specifically asked,that Paulson was an equity investor. They are entitled to use whatever criteria they want to come to their decision, and if they thought <br />that Paulson's position was Lila Rajivahttp://www.mindbodypolitic.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3758330678390419129.post-68331450691076884332010-04-18T21:38:02.558-04:002010-04-18T21:38:02.558-04:00@Lila
What does Paulson being long or short the d...@Lila<br /><br />What does Paulson being long or short the deal have anything to do with ACA's independent evaluation? Do they only give independent evaluations when Paulson isn't involved? Further, as Henry Blodget points out, Paulson was a nobody before the real estate crash. His views on the market would have carried no weight.<br /><br /><br />Goldman Sachs didn't buy "just Robert Wenzelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12653378186315529211noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3758330678390419129.post-49792430544438522322010-04-18T19:57:37.692-04:002010-04-18T19:57:37.692-04:00The case focuses on the firm America loves to hate...The case focuses on the firm America loves to hate, Goldman Sachs and a hedge fund manager, one that cashed in big in the meltdown. <br /><br />Who's not involved? Private equity, the group getting a virtual free pass in the Dodd bill. <br /><br />This civil lawsuit pushes Obama's reform memes. Rahm and company (Jim Messina) worked their campaign style magic on a last ditch health PEU Report/State of the Divisionhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10269683860174947542noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3758330678390419129.post-92135001734759823902010-04-18T17:43:23.384-04:002010-04-18T17:43:23.384-04:00Bob -
ACA accepted the rating by Moody's..
an...Bob -<br /><br />ACA accepted the rating by Moody's..<br />and believed that Paulson was not long the deal...Goldman deliberately lied about that.<br />ACA thought Paulson was LONG and Goldman made them think that.<br /><br />They might have bought some of the stuff to get ACA to believe that too.<br />Read the emails<br /><br />Khuzemi is bringing a civil suit for other reasons than that theLila Rajivahttp://www.mindbodypolitic.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3758330678390419129.post-18797579134857718352010-04-18T16:51:08.543-04:002010-04-18T16:51:08.543-04:00The other indication the government's case isn...The other indication the government's case isn't strong is they filed a civil suit. The burden of proof is much lower than in a criminal case.PEU Report/State of the Divisionhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10269683860174947542noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3758330678390419129.post-25814801490709738012010-04-18T16:44:10.655-04:002010-04-18T16:44:10.655-04:00Wenzel - well said. Sadly this excellent understan...Wenzel - well said. Sadly this excellent understanding of the market is not widely held and so government power will continue to grown while the real crime is ignored. But Wenzel certainly did his part to explain the problem.Efinancialnoreply@blogger.com