Democrats look at Goldman lawsuit to spur new regulations
The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.
JAPAN NEWS AND DISCUSSION
-
U.N. Security Council blames Syrian gov't for Houla killings
( 1 )
-
U.S. drones kill 5 militants in Pakistan
( 2 )
-
NATO has fight on its hands in Afghanistan - Panetta
( 1 )
-
Iran may rethink 20% enrichment: spokesman
( 0 )
-
Egypt's uprising activists weigh Brotherhood vote
( 0 )
-
- ALT - Mie Prefecture - Yokkaichi City - June start
- NPO法人グローバル教育推進機構（GLAD), Mie
- Salary: ¥230,000 / Month For a full working month. Some months differ.
-
- Business Teaching Positions - Part-time - Kanto Region
- Interac, Tokyo
- Salary: ¥3,000 ~ ¥5,000 / Hour
-
- National Relief/Substitute Teacher - summer start
- Interac, Tokyo
- Salary: ¥275,000 ~ ¥300,000 / Month
Order by Time Order by Popularity
37 Comments
Login to comment
0
Egalityranny
"Democrats look at Goldman lawsuit to spur new regulations."
Yeah.
Two years after Obama accepted a whopping $ 994, 795 in campaign contributions from Goldman Sachs.
0
motogaijin
If we'd had tighter regulation, the global financial crisis would have never happened in the first place.
0
adaydream
Egalityranny how much did GS give McCain?
I'm hoping that there are republicans that aren't so bought by Wall Street that they won't see the light. Not to say that the legislation is fine just the way it is. The democrats need to open the door wider to suggestions.
Get this bi-partisan act together. < :-)
0
timorborder
Two years after Obama accepted a whopping $ 994, 795 in campaign contributions from Goldman Sachs.
Have to agree with that. Politicians (no matter the party) are always glad to receive donations from anybody. As long as the cash does have large traces of cocaine or bloodstains, all will be accepted.
That being said, however, something needs to be done to rein in those businesses that act either illegally or stupidly.
0
manfromamerica
Shouldn't the headline be:
"Democrats create bogus Goldman lawsuit to spur left-wing neo-communist agenda" ?
0
SushiSake3
Not surprisingly, the GOP trotted out the same tired old line they did for the healthcare bill - "We need to start over."
0
motogaijin
"Democrats create bogus Goldman lawsuit to spur left-wing neo-communist agenda" ?
No. This is Japan Today, not Fox "News" Channel.
0
adaydream
5 members of the SEC commission.
2 republicans voted against the investigation
2 democrats voted for the investigation.
1 independent voted for the investigation.
It's very apparent that the republicans want to gloss over this issue and not going after GS. < :-)
0
Badsey
So far nothing has been done --> so something is better than nothing. But Dem and Rep Libs need to get serious about these Ponzi (derivative) schemes or else no-one one will feel safe keeping any money in banks or stocks.
The financial terrorists have not proven to earn my trust yet.
0
GJDailleult
"Democrats create bogus Goldman lawsuit to spur left-wing neo-communist agenda" ?
You really haven't got the slightest clue what you are talking about do you. The Republican position is a farce and a disgrace. They think the idiots can't understand anything that is going on, so they can say anything to try and get some votes in November. It's called "fiddling while Rome burns".
But if you want to support accounting fraud, money laundering, organized crime, and the destruction of the USA, go ahead.
0
jruaustralia
Too much politics and not enough substance. Where's the Glass-Steagall Act in the article? What Democrats' are proposing amounts to nothing more than cosmetic changes. Forget about the so-called recurrences, things will still be the same. It'll be like proposing roads with too many bump signs but no enforced speed limits. Forget about it!
0
jruaustralia
That's a shill you're reprimanding. The poor fella probably thought Glenn BECK's the reincarnation of Barry GOLDWATER.
US had tighter regulations. I repeat, had... before.
0
sfjp330
Govenment has done a poor job of policing the abuses. There need to be more comprehensive regulations that will apply the rules and enforce them to the full. Too many firms on Wall Street have been able to count on casual oversight by regulatory agencies in Washington and there are so many of those regulators that the responsibility for oversight is scattered, unfocused and ineffective.
0
Badsey
Most SEC regulators eventually work for Wall Street firms. =Very few stay at the SEC -7 years average maybe. 70K year SEC ---> 700K
0
jruaustralia
"Too many firms on Wall Street have been able to count on casual oversight by regulatory agencies in Washington,'' McCain said. "And there are so many of those regulators that the responsibility for oversight is scattered, unfocused and ineffective.''
LINK http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2008/09/16/mccainblastswallstreetsrec.html
0
jruaustralia
**Ave tenure for SEC Chair 2.8 yrs. Ave tenure of lawyers working for the agency= 2.5 (1999). **
You're right badsey, they tend to have a brief career at the SEC and jump for greener pastures too fast........
0
sfjp330
jruaustralia at 08:46 AM JST - 21st April. What Democrats' are proposing amounts to nothing more than cosmetic changes. Forget about the so-called recurrences, things will still be the same. It'll be like proposing roads with too many bump signs but no enforced speed limits. Forget about it!
You actually believe this? What a joke. Start of a lawsuit against Goldman means business is not as usual and this might only the beginning and will affect other areas. There are bump signs but the govenment awareness and the consequences has magnified and if they get caught, they can no longer hide like before and pay a heavy price. What did Republicans do during Bush? No accountability of anything to the point where we are today?
0
Egalityranny
Some real fine Kabuki here: Bloomberg is reporting that "Goldman Sachs and its employees and family members gave $5.9 million to candidates in the 2007-2008 election cycle, the Washington-based center’s data shows. Three-quarters of that went to Democrats, the non-partisan group said."
And WH "spokesperson" Robert Gibbs has said President Obama will not return the 1 million dollars in donations his campaign received from Goldman Sachs employees.
Change!
0
jruaustralia
You actually believe this? What a joke.
Do I need to link the original source, no? LOL
0
hworta269
The finance "reform" bill would let the president take over and liquidate any financial firm on his whim and fire everyone and the shareholders and investors lose all their money. WTF is that even about. It forces banks to pay in to another slush fund as if our current government doesnt have enough of those already. This bill amounts to giving the president the power over the entire American financial system with no oversight, accountability checks or balances.
And wallstreet did not create the financial crises, they did help it get bad though through buying in to government forced home loans and loan investment based products. Yeah it was congress forcing the banks to give home loans to people who never would have qualified.
This SEC case is a sham, they have called someone to testify that actually ruins their case that Goldman lied to their investors and all that jazz. And this suit just happened to come out when the financial reform bill was due to be brought up in the Senate. Without missing a cue the Democrats said this suit should change Republicans minds about the deformity bill and the exact same day the SEC announced the suite the whitehouse paid google to put their link to their page about the bill at the top of the search for Goldman Sachs SEC but I guess those are all just happened to happen at the exact same time.
0
sfjp330
jruaustralia at 08:46 AM JST - 21st April. What Democrats' are proposing amounts to nothing more than cosmetic changes. Forget about the so-called recurrences, things will still be the same.
Huhh? "things will be the same"?? Then why did Charles Schwab agreed to pay $200 million to resolve a federal class action lawsuit filed by investors who say the financial holding company misled them over the safety of mortgage-backed securities? Sho..
0
jruaustralia
You really are a fruitcake aren't yah? My orig. comment was re. Glass-Steagall Act. Without similar provisions all these things are just sham.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass%E2%80%93Steagall_Act
0
sfjp330
jruaustralia at 07:48 AM JST - 23rd April. My orig. comment was re. Glass-Steagall Act. Without similar provisions all these things are just sham.
Huhh? That is not true. You really believe that? They HAVE similar provision, why don't you check out facts. White house is going more toward that direction, and they will continue to make adjustment. Currently, Obama's proposal does not separated commercial and investment banking but it might change soon. Sho..
0
sfjp330
Obama's current version of Glass-Seagall Act. Here is a link.
http://www.financial-planning.com/news/Obama-Glass-Steagall-2665573-1.html
0
jruaustralia
Sigh. Unfortunately making laws and regulations isn't like copy+pasting. Perhaps, you yourself isn't so sure after all, no?
0
sfjp330
Perhaps, you yourself isn't so sure after all, no?
With all the problem from previous adminstration, I am sure they will change drastically to minimize bad behavior. You have to give confidence to investors.
0
jruaustralia
The Act was repealed during the Clinton administration, replaced by the Financial Modernization Act, not GW. You're confusing the Bush-Paulson 'bailouts' with that of the abolishment of Glass-Steagall Act, no?
0
adaydream
jruaustralia, yep you're right. The republican congress put them together and Clinton signed it on his way out of office. It was put together by Phil Graham, remember one of McCain's advisers till he was fired for making fun of people losing money in stocks and their homes. < :-)
0
Badsey
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/sec-pornography-employees-spent-hours-surfing-porn-sites/story?id=10452544
If we can keep the SEC (100-200K a year) officers off the porn sites for most of the day -I'm sure they can find time to actually do their jobs. =This is a broken system that needs to be rebuilt.
Another SEC accountant used his SEC-issued computer to upload his own sexually explicit videos onto porn websites he joined.
And another SEC accountant attempted to access porn sites 16,000 times in a single month.
In one case, the report noted, an employee tried hundreds of times to access pornographic sites and was denied access. When he used a flash drive, he successfully bypassed the filter to visit a "significant number" of porn sites.
The employee also said he deliberately disabled a filter in Google to access inappropriate sites. After management informed him that he would lose his job, the employee resigned.
A similar SEC report for October 2008 to March 2009 said that a regional supervisor in Los Angeles accessed and attempted to access pornographic and sexually explicit Web sites up to twice a day from his SEC computer during work hours.
-it is hard to even make stuff like this up, but Obama is too busy ramming thru a new tax ponzi scheme.
0
adaydream
You're right Badsey, but this was going on strong and unchecked before Obama became president. I'm not condoning it at all. But what you might need to understand is this was a few individuals, not the 100s of SEC personnel.
The SEC needs to be churned up pretty good. Wall Street people know and understand that they need to be regulated. < :-)
0
Badsey
You need to wake-up ADD. Obama-Bush-Clinton+ are all part of the same system = nothing has changed. =Obama is not the problem =the system is the problem and should be questioned.
You are dealing with a huge criminal enterprise here. Criminals surround themselves with criminals just like the pedophiles in the churches. 1 bad apple surrounds himself with a barrel of bad apples.
0
adaydream
I agree there are problems. They have been here every since the SEC war created, I'm sure. But to change the who system, huh?
How would you go about that? What changes would you make? What new regulations need to be fixed? < :-)
0
Badsey
Whenever you change anything you really need to worry about what could possibly take its' place (which could be far worse). =Reason why marxist "change" is usually bad.
I would place the SEC into "moral bankruptcy" until I could build a complete system to replace it. =Oversight by outside 3rd party financial regulators I guess. Maybe all regulators should be 3rd party and not consigned to a specific entity.
All these accounts should be payable to a verifiable percentage. (e.g. gold, silver, commodities). Not the less than 1% we have now. Gold market is maybe the worst example of this paper trading.
0
lostrune2
I just find it funny that some people, who didn't support to bail out the financial institutions but rather let them go under, now think that these same institutions are being punished too much.
0
jruaustralia
Hah! if only we could bank on trust...
The problem is both enforcement and oversight. Previous efforts for greater transparency were derailed with the usual scaremongering-- from top US economic advisors including Greenspan, that any efforts to control the market is bad. Without detailed oversight rules then enforcing the law will be more hazy.
The gold market reacts on many things. You can't place vague value on the gold market, with the price of gold inflating or deflating according to secondary factors.
You might find it dubious but that's the fact when it comes to gold trading.
0
jruaustralia
And unfortunately the trolls are now running amok. Of course there has been some high level cover up. Not that it mattered anyway since public money (through super funds) enjoyed the same highs and lows as established MMCs.
You just have to love how indignant people could be at times when they realize they are actually losing money, but indifferent when they know they're going to reap huge rewards. Tu ché.
Back to top