Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Government Won't Prosecute Goldman Sachs

Posted 2 years ago on Aug. 10, 2012, 2:21 a.m. EST by niphtrique (323) from Sneek, FR
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

The Justice Department said Thursday it won't prosecute Wall Street firm Goldman Sachs or its employees in a financial fraud probe.

http://news.yahoo.com/government-wont-prosecute-goldman-sachs-probe-234811092.html

This may not be coincidence. A List of Goldman Sachs People in the Obama Government:

http://my.firedoglake.com/fflambeau/2010/04/27/a-list-of-goldman-sachs-people-in-the-obama-government-names-attached-to-the-giant-squids-tentacles/

It does not surpise me. Voting in the US has no meaning at all. Do not think that Romney will do better than Obama.

Why do millions of people not vote?

http://occupywallst.org/forum/why-do-millions-of-people-not-vote/

Seems a bizarre question to me.

Why do millions of people still vote?

That seems more appropriate.

48 Comments

48 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by JackHall (413) 2 years ago

This is the meaning of too big to fail. It also means too big to prosecute. They've created monsters.

Max Keiser on Too Big to Fail http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qiaax9GHFL0&list=PL57A38F2F2E292781&feature=view_all

[-] 2 points by 1971 (154) 2 years ago

They won't bite the hand that feeds them. This is why we must stop the sale of politicians. We live in a banana republic.

[-] 2 points by Neuwurldodr (744) 2 years ago

Well, I for one do not look for much in the prosecution of any of the heads of wall street, their cronies, or their friends in the White House aka government..

Truly, if one knows history, the making of this nation and all the Treaties entered into by most European Nations with the United States of America, one would understand why they have to be careful regarding the prosecuting of their own kind and peoples..
Sorry folks, the average Joe Blow just ain't their priority, never has been and never will be! http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-07-31/sec-loses-lawsuit-against-ex-citigroup-official-brian-stoker Until it hurts the big guys pockets....."shrug shoulders everyone"

[-] 1 points by Cocreator (306) 2 years ago

let the people prosecute all these crooked banksters,Citizens Arrest Committee,Citizens Audit Committee

[-] 1 points by niphtrique (323) from Sneek, FR 2 years ago

Fraud caused the Great Depression and the current financial crisis, and the economy will never recover until fraud is prosecuted.

Fraud is the business model adopted by the giant banks.

The Obama administration has made it official policy not to prosecute fraud. Indeed, the “watchdogs” in D.C. are so corrupt that they are as easily bribed as a policeman in a third world banana republic.

The mouthpieces in Wall Street and D.C. pretend that financial fraud (like Libor) is a “victimless crime“.

But the World Bank notes that the financial crisis – you know, the one caused by financial fraud – has driven between 64 and 100 million people into destitution.

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/08/bankster-fraud-is-not-a-victimless-crime-it-has-driven-100-million-into-poverty-killing-millions.html#comment-59399

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

certain people borrow money from the FED at low interest then loan out that money 10 rimes over at higher interest

that is not illegal or fraud

but these people determine what projects they will fund

[-] 1 points by enough (589) 2 years ago

Sergei Aleynikov allegedly stole computer code from Goldman when he left the company a few years ago. The U.S. Justice Department saw fit to prosecute Sergei Aleynikov for a second time. Apparently, it's O.K. for Goldman to steal from honest investors, but it is not O.K. for anyone to steal from Goldman.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/09/sergey-aleynikov-goldman-programmer_n_1760958.html

[-] 1 points by niphtrique (323) from Sneek, FR 2 years ago

Thieves are in control of the government.

That is why the current system is FUBAR.

There is no way it can be repaired.

It has to be replaced.

[-] 1 points by DebtNEUTRALITY (23) 2 years ago

Why not support causes that will help main street, causes like Debt Neutrality. http://www.change.org/petitions/congress-create-debt-neutrality-rights-for-paying-down-credit-cards-student-loans

[-] 1 points by niphtrique (323) from Sneek, FR 2 years ago

We can look for a debt relief but there is a systemic issue behind it.

The fundamental problem is interest on money. Interest is an allowance for risk, so banning interest would end problematic debt levels as there are no lenders willing to make people go too far into debt. It will also solve the issue of student loans as every payment reduces the principal.

[-] 1 points by DebtNEUTRALITY (23) 2 years ago

I think we are in agreement? I think of interest rates in a slightly different way. Interest rates equals growth. The best returns on an interest bearing venture involves creating a new pathway that once created will allow people to access venues they could not previously access.

Once the venture is completed and the new revenue stream is assured, charging an interest rate charge on a loan is a no brainer.

Let's not forget that the government is giving out interest free loans to the banks, so certain loans can be made interest free. In essence, the government is handing out tools that when used properly allows for the user to generate wealth so they can then pay back more in taxes.

[-] 1 points by niphtrique (323) from Sneek, FR 2 years ago

Interest itself is the core cause of economic crisis. I repeat myself and it may be boring for people who have read it before, but interest on money is the main reason why you have economic crises and why you have a top 1% that owns nearly everything.

Interest causes wealth to concentrate as the poor pay interest to the rich. Interest can therefore be seen as a tax on poverty to the benefit of the rich. The following example demonstrates this and also that interest on money is unsustainable and leads to crisis:

If someone brought a 1/10 oz gold coin to the bank in the year 1 AD, and the money remained there until the year 2000 AD, collecting a yearly interest of 4%, the amount of gold in the account would have been 3.6 * 10^31 kilogramme of gold weighing 6,000,000 times the complete mass of the Earth.

If interest is charged on a limited scale or over a short timeframe then those problems do not surface. Interest is an insidious process. Over time it is inescapable that it reduces large numbers of people to a state of servitude to the money lenders. This is a long term development that transcends the life span of a human. Interest is the main reason why a number of civilisations have failed and why Western civilisation is about to fail. Therefore all interest is usury and the current financial system is a usury financial system.

There are solutions to end the problem of interest.

[-] 2 points by DebtNEUTRALITY (23) 2 years ago

I don't mind interest rate charges when the money loaned out actually creates a true, new economic opportunity for society. The theory being that the interest rate charged pales in comparison to building something that when completed will increase economic efficiency in one manner or another.

But we are for the most part past that part in the development of an oil based western civilization economy. Interest rate charges need to be suspended on all consumer debt so people can start to develop their own backyard energy products.

I hope you can help spread the word about the Debt Neutrality petition. "I claim Debt Neutrality" can become a battle cry that is not polarizing since it is not demanding a handout and a person cannot be accused of wanting something for nothing since they already have been paying interest on their consumer debts. http://www.change.org/petitions/congress-create-debt-neutrality-rights-for-paying-down-credit-cards-student-loans

The Debt neutrality blog www.debtneutrality.blogspot.com is proving to be a fascinating follow of how the media reports about consumer debt all over the globe. The spin used by each country is remarkably different.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by niphtrique (323) from Sneek, FR 2 years ago

Yawn.

There is enough proof that Goldman Sachs is a bunch of lying and stealing criminals.

And if the law is not good enough then you change the law so those criminals will rot in jail.

You need a revolution to get rid of both parties, to get a referendum so the people can make the laws.

[-] 1 points by Neuwurldodr (744) 2 years ago

I agree....it's just like a marriage, regardless of all the "undisputed" documentation, or evidence, or hidden knowledge of wrongdoing...A husband or a wife is not legally obligated to testify against their spouse. Now, how many think these government agencies, politicians, Wall Street conglomerates, Bankers and other corporate entities are not in bed together, literally speaking?
If you understood the set up of this country you would know that my post was not an over exaggeration. These are not conspiracy theories my friend, these are planned M O's, starting with the European domination of other countries, over here and onward. That is why one needs to understand the documents that were signed in agreement by these counties with America at its inception. They do not teach this in our public schools because then we would understand how we are being indoctrinated! I cannot understand how anyone cannot see or observe this.

[-] 1 points by niphtrique (323) from Sneek, FR 2 years ago

I think you are right to a certain extent. New World Order itself is not just a conspiracy theory. This is what I have written on the issue:

http://www.naturalmoney.org/changeover.html

It also addresses some conspiracy theories and their background.

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by niphtrique (323) from Sneek, FR 2 years ago

Blah blah blah.

You should read the work of Matt Taibbi. If the evidence is not enough for procecution then you should change the law.

If the government does not change the law then you need a revolution to fix the problem.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by niphtrique (323) from Sneek, FR 2 years ago

I have backed up my claims but I do not expect that you have read everything on the website. I do not write this without justification.

We have many problems in Europe too, but politicians are not bought like in the US. Anyway banking criminals also get away with their crimes in Europe so it does not seem to make that much difference on this particular issue.

I also see that what you observe about the Republicans. They act in a destructive way and do a disservice to their country, see:

http://edition.cnn.com/2012/05/14/opinion/frum-mann-ornstein/index.html

The problem is that you have a winner takes all system, resulting in a two party system. It is more easy to control by oligarchs than a proportional representation multi party system.

I can tell you who I am but you would not believe it. But you can read on the website to see what Natural Money is all about.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by niphtrique (323) from Sneek, FR 2 years ago

"But there are stats generated by the server that I can access."

You can get access to the stats of visitors? Tell me how you do that because they are password protected. Please use PM.

Anyway most providers give you stats about access to your website. I want to know if there is any real traffic. 50% or so is just webbots.

The stats are not that important to me so if others can see them then I may as well remove them. I really am not interested in who is visiting the website.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by niphtrique (323) from Sneek, FR 2 years ago

My claims were not related to your identity but to the subject of this thread, e.g. the system being FUBAR.

That you did not read much of the website can be derived from your answer (you did not make the impression of being informed) and probability in general (most people do not read much of it and I do not need the stats to figure that out).

Maybe you are paranoid, which in itself is a good thing with a system being FUBAR, but it is better not to jump to conclusions.

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 2 years ago

In Zendogs mind, Obama can do no wrong. It's pointless arguing with him. Goldman Sachs stands for everything OWS is against, yet he defends the Obama administration while they again fail to prosecute a single one of the pivotal players in the economic meltdown.

[-] 1 points by niphtrique (323) from Sneek, FR 2 years ago

OWS is about ending the rule of Wall Street. I have something that can accomplish that, but I have trouble spreading the message.

It may be too complicated or too controversial, but I know that if I get the opportunity to do the initial experiment then it will work.

If it works then people will gather around this idea and we can end the rule of Wall Street. But until someone picks it up, it seems pointless trying.

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by niphtrique (323) from Sneek, FR 2 years ago

My point is that the system if FUBAR. There is ample evidence for this assertion.

Goldman Sachs are criminals that should be behind bars. So you start with this as a goal and then you look for a way to get there. The evidence is abundant and you can change the law, remove corrupt judges and prosecutors so they will get behind bars for what they did.

A solution should be found outside the current system (big banks and big government). Democrats and Republicans do not see that.

You cannot get it right within the current system (buying politicians, banker control over government, but most of all: charging interest on money).

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

The system is corrupted. Politicians are bought off. I think though this admin would have prosecuted Goldman but the 1% plutocrats gave rigged the system so that their illegal activity was not provable.

the law must be changed. It won;t change while repubs and enough spineless dems are in power.

Elect progressives. Conservative policies ARE the problem.

[-] 1 points by Builder (4202) 2 years ago

Even when there is a "prosecution", it really only amounts to a pleasing sound-byte for the sake of appearances.

A hundred million dollars "fine" for a ten billion dollar profit seems like a great way to do business. There's sure to be more of the same coming.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

Agreed. The laws have been rigged to allow mainly fines, and caps those fines in some way so that the profit from the crime is tenfold more than any fine and it just becomes the cost of doing business. IF they get caught, IF they get prosecuted. IF they get indicted.

Disgusting

[-] 1 points by niphtrique (323) from Sneek, FR 2 years ago

I think you would find many people on both sides of the political spectrum that want to see the problems fixed.

They only do not agree on the solution itself because both sides are stuck in their own failed agendas.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

One party passed fin reform, and plans stronger regulations. The other watered it down, continues to delay it's implementation, and has promised to repeal it.

[-] 1 points by niphtrique (323) from Sneek, FR 2 years ago

I did not talk about political parties but about people.

The "stronger regulations" are spineless to begin with as the Goldman Sachs case demonstrates.

If it becomes a reps versus dems or cons versus progs issue then it will go nowhere.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

The weak laws regarding fin crimes have their roots in conservative minimal regulation policies.

Progs would seek real penalties so it IS a con vs prog issue. & the only way WE will get nowhere is if we pretend this reality doesn't exist.

What "people" did you "talk about"?

[-] 1 points by niphtrique (323) from Sneek, FR 2 years ago

I think it is not and I will explain why. The economic problems we face now revive the controversy of Capitalism versus Socialism. Both economic systems have their limitations. Supporters of Capitalism will argue that the problems are caused by government intervention in the markets. Proponents of Socialism will argue that the problems are caused by too little regulation of the markets. Both arguments seem reasonable but they conflict. The spread of poverty caused by the failure of the money system creates the need for new ways of thinking.

The real cause of the problems lies in the nature of our money system in which interest on money is charged. Interest causes wealth to concentrate as the poor pay interest to the rich. Interest can therefore be seen as a tax on poverty to the benefit of the rich. The following example demonstrates this and also that interest on money is unsustainable and leads to crisis:

If someone brought a 1/10 oz gold coin to the bank in the year 1 AD, and the money remained there until the year 2000 AD, collecting a yearly interest of 4%, the amount of gold in the account would have been 3.6 * 10^31 kilogramme of gold weighing 6,000,000 times the complete mass of the Earth.

If interest is charged on a limited scale or over a short timeframe then those problems do not surface. Interest is an insidious process. Over time it is inescapable that it reduces large numbers of people to a state of servitude to the money lenders. This is a long term development that transcends the life span of a human. Interest is the main reason why a number of civilisations have failed and why Western civilisation is about to fail. Therefore all interest is usury and the current financial system is a usury financial system. Interest is also the cause of inflation as more and more money has to be created to keep the economy going. To get an understanding of the issue, you can view the documentary "Money as Debt" on our current money system. More:

http://www.naturalmoney.org/full-theory.html

More regulation probably will not solve the problems. Money goes there where it is least regulated. Imposing regulation will lead to capital flight. There are solutions that will work but then you have to go out of the left/right paradigm, go rational, research history and other countries and select the best solutions.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

I agree that interest hurts the 99% and benefits the 1%. We should regulate the amount they can charge. Eliminating all interest is probably not doable. I might be able to support that though if it was presented along with a broader plan. I certainly don''t think it is our only pronlem.

And I also don't think we or anyone else can "go out of the right/left paridigm". The Right Left paradigm is the polictical spectrum, which is simply a means to illustrate to basic approaches to governing people.

That has not been rescinded. The 2 approaches are either consideration for your fellow man/woman (LEFT), or you care only for yourself (RIGHT).

So if your goal is to convince people that left/right doesn't exist your gonna have a hard time.

And you say "more regulation will not solve the problems" You cite "capital flight". So then we could expect that less regulation might bring money into our economy? Is that right?

[-] 1 points by niphtrique (323) from Sneek, FR 2 years ago

In reply to your previous point about my view on regulation. You can have less regulation but then there should be less reason to regulate.

If the economy provides jobs for everyone and there are no recessions then you do need less welfare and you have less need for unions.

Big government [as it currently is] is caused by the downsides of Capitalism. Big government is a consequence of Capitalism for the following reasons:

  • Many people want to be protected from the adverse consequences of Capitalism, such as unemployment, exploitation and the destruction of nature. They expect the government to do this.
  • Big corporations see profit opportunities in big government as they can use the government to increase their profits.
[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

I think less regulation leads to corps destroying the environment in their narrow minded search for ever more profit. It also leads to exploiting workers for the same reason. No unions would lead to the same worker exploitation.

The people should be more powerful than business. (money outta politics) If unions existed everywhere than govt wouldn't have get involved. If people were organized in their efforts to protectair, water, food we wouldn't need govt to do that. Some of us think our govt is "for the people" and so we seek to address the issues through our givt.

Nothing wrong with that. Except that the corps 1% plutocrats have stolen the peoples govt, and rigged it to benefit themselves at the expense of the people.

So we gotta get rid of that problem which has its roots in conservative policies that favor less regulations, anti union, anti svces for the poor, & working class.

Peace, Elect Progressives, Republicans ARE the problem

[-] 1 points by niphtrique (323) from Sneek, FR 2 years ago

I do not think most people on the right only care for themselves. If we assume that there is a natural world order in which humans thrive then there are two principles:

  • People care for each other.
  • People are capable of managing themselves.

You cannot care for others if you are not capable of managing yourself. It is sad to see so many people being dependent on welfare while the top 1% is insanely rich.

In the Netherlands the situation is less polarised. Unions work with employers for a common purpose and right wing parties cooperate with left wing parties on a regular basis. The problem with a two party system is that it seems to polarise things and solutions remain out of sight.

If there is a solution that will work out well for most small businesses and most employees then you have a different situation and the lines will be redrawn.

This is possible.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

R/L are just terms we use to describe human behavior. I support Left (Socialist, liberal, Anarchist, communist).Who support policies that help the 99%. I do not support the Right (conservative, libertarian, fascism) who proudly push the "survival of the fittest" policies the benefit the 1% plutocrats.

You didn't say if you supported less regulation? Do you?

Peace

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

we are broke and owe money to other people

we don't like that

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 2 years ago

instead of preaching for people to not vote why don't you just suggest they vote for candidates outside of the status quo?

there are more than 2 options on the ballot in november. And don't forget about congress. People need to pay attention and vote in the primaries if they want better options in the main categories.

[-] 2 points by niphtrique (323) from Sneek, FR 2 years ago

There is a solution and its main components are:

  • Proportional representation (like in many European nations) so you will have a multi party system.
  • Voting for parties (ideas) should replace voting for candidates as candidates need campaign money to get elected (which corrupts the system). The finances of parties are more easy to regulate.
  • A referendum law making it possible to make laws and repeal government decisions.

This cannot be realised within the current political system. The US political system is FUBAR (Fucked Up Beyond All Repair). Therefore it has to be overturned completely. Most US politicians belong in jail anyway because of treason (putting Israel first) so this could be a great opportunity to bring criminals (bankers, lobbyists, politicians, oligarchs) to justice.

The current power structure depends on the financial system so it can be toppled in this way:

http://www.naturalmoney.org/proposal.html

Starting with a clean slate you can crowdsource a new constitution and wipe out the debt overhang.

I am serious about it: there is no way that the self serving corrupt order can solve your problems.

[-] 1 points by Shule (2212) 2 years ago

I have yet to read it detail, but the natualmoney.org web site looks interesting.

I agree our current economic-political system is FUBAR, but it will be a long time before it goes down. There is simply too much inertia. Nevertheless, we can start weening ourselves from it, isolating ourselves-at least in part- from its effects, and start building a new concurrent system, of which natural money may be a part, to which we can move over into. This does not have to start as a group effort, but is something we can all start as individuals simply by making life style changes. We can educate others to do the same, all the while we also do our best at tearing down the old system through nonviolent guerrilla actions.....