Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Barak Obama #1 campaign contributor = Goldman Sachs.......Mit Romney #1 campaign contributor = Goldman Sachs

Posted 12 years ago on Oct. 22, 2011, 10 a.m. EST by abmebratu (349) from Washington, DC
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Choose either one and Goldman Sachs rules bitches!!!! That's what you call influence and power.

32 Comments

32 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by ThomasKent (131) 11 years ago

The history of Wall St has been riddled with instability and intrigue from the beginning.

"The year was 1792, and Wall Street had just experienced its first crash, for which William Duer and a secret circle of New York grandees were mainly to blame. They had conspired to speculate on the bonds just issued by the newly created federal government. Soon they found themselves deeply overcommitted and forced to liquidate their holdings, causing the fledgling market to collapse and its manipulators to flee-in Duer's case to debtors' prison; for the more fortunate among them to safer havens out of state."

"Hamilton was a Revolutionary War hero and a founding father. But by the 1790s, he was also the man most widely suspected of harboring elitist sentiments dangerous to the democratic aspirations of the new nation. During the Constitutional debates he had argued on behalf of a lifetime presidency and imagined the Senate as a kind of House of Lords. In his capacity as President George Washington's secretary of the treasury, he had devised a plan for funding the national debt that had accumulated during the war and in the years afterward. The federal government would sell its own bonds to make good on the nearly worthless securities issued by the states and the Continental Congress during the Revolution. Hamilton assumed that the purchasers of these new securities would be merchants, bankers, and others of substantial means. By acquiring these bonds they would help establish the creditworthiness of the new nation. In turn, that would, Hamilton hypothesized, attract capital from home and abroad which would jump-start the commercial and industrial development of what was, after all, an underdeveloped country."

“As the Democratic-Republicans saw it, this was a plot to establish a financial aristocracy like the one ensconced in England. Looking across the ocean they could easily see how an incestuous relationship between the money men and the central government (in England, the monarchy; in America, presumably, the executive branch) threatened to make the government the exclusive preserve of the privileged. The great executive powers of France and Great Britain, so the anti-monarchists believed, floated on a vast sea of public debt. That funded debt had in turn engendered big banking institutions, well-oiled markets for money, new forms of investment, and a whole new class that traded in public securities. An alliance between this moneyed class and the Crown had overawed independent sources of political authority. According to Jefferson the real sin in Hamilton's design was that it would "prepare the way for a change from the present republican form of government to that of a monarchy of which the English constitution is to be the model"

"Jefferson and his allies were not against trade. But they envisioned an agrarian republic, not a commercial one, made up of independent middling farmers trading with Europe only for those necessities not produced at home. In this way the new nation would be immunized against the infection of urban luxury and squalor, the war of class against class, and the moral rot that they felt characterized the Old World. "

"All through the 1790s, publicists, pamphleteers, and politicians warned about bankers and speculators fattening on the public credit. Even President Washington, who in the end favored Hamilton's strategy, worried, and he queried the treasury secretary: Would not the new capital ultimately pose a threat to republican government by "a corrupt squadron of paper dealers"? Hamilton's plan was a bonanza for such people, an unholy alliance of aristocracy and money. These speculators had bought up the securities issued by the states and the Continental Congress at rock-bottom prices from their original holders: desperate veterans, farmers, and other ordinary folk. Under Hamilton's scheme these rich bond buyers could now redeem their once worthless paper at its full face value."

A Long View of Wall Street http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=95241895

In our third century our plight is even worse today as bankers and paper dealers (Goldman Sachs) have taken control of our government and we can't afford to buy it back.

Max Keiser on Superstitious Trading

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LGK4_ItBORc&feature=youtu.be

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by cJessgo (729) from Port Jervis, PA 11 years ago

Yep.

[-] 1 points by frogmanofborneo (602) from New York, NY 11 years ago

They say different. Are you certain? Do you have a link to your information? Ah, this is a very old post, isn't it.

http://www.ranker.com/list/the-largest-barack-obama-campaign-contributors-_2012_/pilgrimsprogressive

[-] 1 points by DeeManding (3) from Chicago, IL 11 years ago

gangster bangster it's all the same--US Justice Dept. couldn't prove that Goldman Sachs Group or any of its' employees committed fraud related to the mortgage crisis -- if it wasn't fraud then what was it?

[-] 1 points by Krankie (140) 12 years ago

I think that is called hedging your bets. And who better than GS to know all about hedging! :-)

But the sad reality is that this is just another example of the fact that both sides are bought and paid for my Corporate America. At the end of the day, they don't care who wins, just as long as the winner remembers who is their paymaster.

[-] 1 points by enough (587) 12 years ago

No question about it. Both presidential candidates sold us out. Goldman and the rest of the Wall Street banks own our government, which has become a de facto plutocracy. Make no mistake. Bernanke and Geithner are Wall Street flunkies and these two run our economy. Obama appointed them and senators from both parties approved them. Our elected representatives don't think we understand how they place Wall Street over Main Street at every turn. We are just supposed to suffer the consequences of unbridled greed and the betrayal of our trust by our elected representatives.

[-] 1 points by MaryandGary (1) 12 years ago

As long as you contribute to a 401K, etc - wall street will be in control. Save your money and buy real estate or invest your money in yourself (open a small business). Don't let someone else control your money.

[-] 1 points by number2 (914) 12 years ago

Public enemy number 1

[-] 1 points by number2 (914) 12 years ago

We need to have a run on goldman, sell their stocks, send them in to bankruptcy and deport them out of the country.

[-] 1 points by April (3196) 12 years ago

Corruption is 100% bi-partisan. Plus, Goldman is REALLY good at hedging their bets.
The last time they did that, WE all crashed.

[-] 1 points by abmebratu (349) from Washington, DC 12 years ago

How right you are my friend. This is what the American people have failed to learn. What is it going to take to educate people.

[-] 1 points by April (3196) 12 years ago

Protesting. Lots of it. We have got to cut through all of the other diversions to get this message across. Ending corruption and equal representation in government. I wish the movement would go more public and official with this.

[-] 1 points by abmebratu (349) from Washington, DC 12 years ago

No candidate is gonna get a dollar from me.

[-] 1 points by larryathome (161) from Red Bank, NJ 12 years ago

Guess Goldman was disappointed with Dodd-Frank so they want the candidate that will repeal any protections for the consumer. Expected from a company that takes bets against its own clients.

[-] 1 points by bootsy3000 (180) 12 years ago

ACtually, the University of California was Obama's biggest campaign contributor. They gave about half a million more than Goldman. http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cid=N00009638

[-] 1 points by abmebratu (349) from Washington, DC 12 years ago

This was last year

[-] 1 points by reddy2 (256) 12 years ago

Why didn't the University of California relieve some student debts if it had cash to splash?

California is bankrupt and still the cronyism continues.

[-] 1 points by tahsali (13) 12 years ago

Who owns Goldman sacs, Schwatz, Lehman Brothers, Oppenheimer, etc, etc. Think really hard. Ask the right questions. Don't let presumed authority of the past dictate your decision. That is what you were taught. Think for yourself. Look around and observe for yourself. What do you see? Who has the money? Who is in control of the banks, media, universities? Who has the high positions in your company, university, and government????? Think, think, think, think, you'll get it. Names: Stein, Levine, Rosenberg, Swartz, Bromberg, Bloomberg, etc, etc. Is there a pattern?

[-] 1 points by stray (219) from Philadelphia, PA 12 years ago

Its like having to choose between a giant douche and a turd sandwich...

[-] 1 points by sarahpalinfan2012 (7) from Genova, Liguria 12 years ago

OWSforObama... can't believe s/he would show their face in this thread...

[-] 1 points by abmebratu (349) from Washington, DC 12 years ago

This is the quintessential American Democracy.

[-] 0 points by abmebratu (349) from Washington, DC 12 years ago

This is the choice we get this presidential election

[-] 0 points by OWSForObama (151) 12 years ago

Romney is a Moron.. Need I say more?

[-] 1 points by emeflag (88) from Flagstaff, AZ 12 years ago

I could care less if Romney is a Mormon. What I do care about is he is a Moron.

[-] 1 points by OWSForObama (151) 12 years ago

That's what I said, you Mormon! :)

[-] 1 points by emeflag (88) from Flagstaff, AZ 12 years ago

Apologies .... I saw Moron.... but read Mormon... I think it was the upper case M that had me thinking otherwise.

[-] 1 points by abmebratu (349) from Washington, DC 12 years ago

who cares. None are running the country anyways, Goldman Sachs+corporate power is the real president in both cases

[-] 0 points by happybanker (766) 12 years ago

Heads I win, tails you lose!