Goldman Sachs Makes $3.4 Billion Profit in 2nd Quarter

1. 0

   pgrundyposted 14 years ago

   Here's the news link:
   
   http://dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/ … n-quarter/
   
   BTW today is Bastille Day. Anyone up for dropping by Goldman Sachs just to say hey?
   
   Happy Bastille Day Goldman Sachs!

   replyreport
   1. 72

      Hauntyposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      OMG! May I...?

      replyreport
2. 61

   Teresa McGurkposted 14 years ago

   I'll bring the tumbrels round and we'll set up Madame la Guillotine?

   replyreport
   1. 80

      Tom Cornettposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      I'll bring Twinkies and pretzels!

      replyreport
3. 0

   pgrundyposted 14 years ago

   Fabulous!
   
   I'll bring my knitting!

   replyreport
4. 59

   Eric Graudinsposted 14 years ago

   I wonder what sort of accounting rules they are using?
   I'm sure that they're nothing like the ones I learned.
   
   Anyway, that's great. I'm sure that their first priority will be to pay back the 13 billion AIG bailout money that the government gave them.

   replyreport
   1. 83

      Jewelsposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Was wondering about that myself!

      replyreport
   2. 66

      Mike Craggsposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      As I understand it they have paid back $10 billion to the government and another $500 million, or thereabouts in fees, and the $3.4 billion is what is left over.

      replyreport
   3. 62

      nicompposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      I think they already did.
      
      http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090715/ts … 0715022140
      
      http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid= … refer=home
      
      http://www.nbcmiami.com/news/business/G … -TARP.html
      
      http://www.reuters.com/article/politics … QZ20090414
      
      http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and- … r-goldman/

      replyreport
      1. 59

         Eric Graudinsposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Yes, apparently they paid back the $10 B in TARP funds.
         
         If I recall correctly, they also received $13 billion from the government AIG bailout funds, which were "necessary" because none of the highly paid financial wizards could foresee that lending money to people with stuff all income would result in loan defaults.
         
         All the big financial firms did really stupid things, then got their mates in the government to pay for their mistakes. And are giving themselves a huge round of bonuses again.
         
         The whole financial system stinks like like a cesspit. And most people just stick another closepeg on their nose and say "I can't smell a thing.'
         
         I've been going on about the Daily Reckoning too. do yourselves a favour and read it. And Have a look at the film IOUSA if you get a chance.
         
         @Pam. When I was studying economics, the explanation of the fractional reserve method of "money creation" struck me as a the biggest con job that I had ever heard of. I still hold this view.
         
         cheers, Eric G.

         replyreport
         1. 79

            earnestshubposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            I read the Daily Reckoning too Eric. Good slant on a lot of it.

            replyreport
         2. 0

            pgrundyposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            "@Pam. When I was studying economics, the explanation of the fractional reserve method of "money creation" struck me as a the biggest con job that I had ever heard of. I still hold this view.
            
            cheers, Eric G."
            
            
            
            We are so doomed. I wonder how long it will take?
            
            I say by fall 2010.
            
            September 9th, 2010, the end of the world. (And fractional reserve banking. lol!)

            replyreport
5. 0

   pgrundyposted 14 years ago

   Eric, what I don't understand is why unemployed persons aren't showing up on their doorstep and hanging them out the window. Not that I condone that sort of thing, I just don't understand why that isn't happening.
   
   One thing I'll say for the French, they at least know what to do when this kind of crap goes down.

   replyreport
   1. 59

      Eric Graudinsposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Me neither.

      replyreport
6. 68

   ledefensetechposted 14 years ago

   Just wait, they'll be showing a loss next quarter.

   replyreport
7. 80

   LondonGirlposted 14 years ago

   I can knit, too, count me in.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      pgrundyposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      I think I better finally actually read "A Tale of Two Cities."
      
      That was one of those high school required books we all just pretended to read.
      
      I might need some pointers.

      replyreport
8. 80

   LondonGirlposted 14 years ago

   It's a great book, and generally I'm not a Dickens fan.
   
   Have a look at Teresa's fantastic hub on the book, you'll love it:
   
   http://hubpages.com/hub/Famous-First-Se … Two-Cities

   replyreport
9. 0

   pgrundyposted 14 years ago

   Thanks! I will.

   replyreport
10. 38

    toby26posted 14 years ago

    probably, it's time to buy some goldman sach's share?

    replyreport
    1. 68

       ledefensetechposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       If you want to lose money, sure.  Personally I'd be shorting Goldman Sachs right now.  They cooked their books so much this past quarter to turn a profit that they'll see a massive loss in the coming quarters.  Just wait and see.

       replyreport
11. 68

    ledefensetechposted 14 years ago

    I got this quote from "The Daily Reckoning":  "And now, from all we've been able to detect, a fundamental shift has
    occurred. People are no longer eager to go deeper and deeper into debt.
    Instead, they are eager to pay off debt...that is, to rid themselves of
    finance...and to get as far away from the financial sector as possible. Savings
    rates, for example, have gone from zero to 7% in just the last 12 months.
    
    But in the midst of this remarkable and historic change, we get news that at
    least a couple of the biggest firms in the financial sector – JPMorgan and
    Goldman Sachs – are making billions in profits:
    
    "Even as it weathers the worst economic downturn in decades, JPMorgan
    Chase said Thursday that it had made a $2.7 billion second-quarter profit as a
    result of stellar trading and investment banking results."
    
    This was essentially the same story we got from Goldman. Neither bank made
    its money the old fashioned way -- by lending to worthy projects; they made
    their dough by "trading" and "investment banking." In other words, they made
    billions from speculation.
    
    Anyone who takes this as evidence of a recovering economy should work for
    the government. Only a government economist or a mental defective (excuse
    us for being redundant) could believe that genuine prosperity can be built on a
    foundation of speculating by large financial institutions. You can see why by
    asking a simple question: whom were they trading against?
    
    Speculating is a zero-sum game. No matter who wins, the economy is not a bit
    better off; it has not a centime more in resources. Goldman and JPMorgan
    report earning, together, more than $6 billion. Who was on the other side of
    that trade?
    
    There is also something fishy about the whole thing. Trading is not only a
    zero-sum game, it's a game of chance. Traders lose money about as often as
    they make it. Of course, normally, the traders at the big banks have an
    advantage; they are not idiots. They make money by taking it away from the
    amateur traders, who are idiots. But what amateur traders put up $6 billion?
    
    Our guess: the fix is in. They are taking advantage of the feds' stimulus
    programs...and trading against the biggest patsy in the world, the U.S.
    taxpayer. How? We'll find out how, later..."
    
    Looks like Papa Obama's got some 'splanin to do.
    
    You also might consider this:  "Meanwhile, there is the news that China is back in business.
    
    "Government spending pushes GDP growth to 7.9% for 2nd quarter," reports
    the IHT, "...fueled by a large economic stimulus package and aggressive bank
    lending...a surprisingly strong showing during the global economic downturn...
    
    "...while most other major economies are contracting and suffering from the
    worst economic crisis in decades, China appears to have turned a corner...
    
    "Growth in the second quarter was driven by strong auto and property sales, a
    rebound in manufacturing and huge infrastructure spending, which was
    propping up global commodity prices."
    
    Further investigation reveals that bank lending and property speculation have
    gone wild. (More on this in today's essay, below...) And stocks in Shanghai
    are up 75% so far this year.
    
    Now, let's try to get this straight. The world is in a slump. China sells stuff to
    the world. And yet, China is booming.
    
    How could it be? Again, there's something fishy about it...as if the government
    were jiving the figures...as if the speculators had taken leave of their
    senses...and as if the whole thing were just the result of the same kind of
    misguided 'stimulus' that got us into trouble in the first place...
    
    The Richebacher Letter's Rob Parenteau agrees that something isn't quite
    right. "Ask anyone who's done business there. Keeping a double set of books in
    China isn't just common, it's considered 'good strategy.' You've also got under-
    regulated Chinese banks hiding as much as $500 billion in bad debts —
    China's own version of 'subprime' loans to small businesses and Asian
    property speculators.
    
    "On top of that, you've got a $40 billion tab left over from the Beijing
    Olympics... and a $140 billion tab for rebuilding Sichuan after their 2008
    earthquake."
    
    Boom...boom...ka-booooom! "
    
    The Daily Reckoning is a great newsletter.  You too can get all sorts of illuminating tips right here:  http://dailyreckoning.com/

    replyreport
12. 0

    pgrundyposted 14 years ago

    I think most people agree that something is very rotten here, regardless of party politics. Obama is too silent on this for comfort, and I don't think he is working on our behalf when in comes to financial policy--he's clearly working on behalf of the banks.
    
    I don't want to get into this thing of "well then Pam you have to buy my whole Libertarian schtick" because I don't. But I do want you to know that the left is very critical of Obama on this too. Everyone is critical except maybe Goldman, JPMorgan Chase, Citi, BOA, AIG...
    
    Krugman has written multiple columns sounding the alarm.
    
    I'm especially disgusted with this new catch-phrase "jobless recovery".
    
    That is bullshit for something but what? More money for banks? Or maybe, we think you're all so stupid you'll actually swallow this????

    replyreport
    1. 63

       Mishaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       I think that's the plan, exactly. It worked for more than a few hundred years already, why shouldn't it work now?

       replyreport
    2. 68

       ledefensetechposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       I know you don't buy the whole sthick, but I just wanted to illustrate the fact that I don't just get my ideas from one place, I actually have been reading things like The Daily Reckoning long before I found the Austrian School of Business.
       
       Actually I think politicians as a class think the masses are all stupid.  They have something of a point, but they stop feeling so superior when the torches and pitchforks come out.  I actually feel kinda sorry for Papa Obama.  He talked a good game and made is sound like he knew what was going on, but he really doesn't.  Rather than listen to his words I look at his actions.  His actions tell me he really doesn't get it.  Slowly I think other people are starting to wake up.
       
       As an aside Pam, I discovered a little gem about the gold standard a while back and I think it explains why you don't like the way the standard was abused in the 19th century.  But that's neither here nor there.

       replyreport
13. 0

    pgrundyposted 14 years ago

    You're just being provocative. I'll bet you tease your dog too.

    replyreport
14. 0

    pgrundyposted 14 years ago

    Oh the gold standard, we are so past that at this point I think! lol!
    
    Seriously, I feel less forgiving of Papa Barack. I am watching him and I am not happy. Of course, no President is Prince Charming President, I didn't expect he would meet my every dream and desire, but the financial part is the most important part of all and he appears to just be a whore for Wall Street. Not happy about that. Still think he was the best of the lot, but not happy at all about he's handling this.
    
    Politicians think the masses are stupid because the masses are stupid, but so are most politicians, and there's more of us than there are of them so at this point, I'd say they better watch their asses or they'll find them full of pitchfork punctures.

    replyreport
    1. 68

       ledefensetechposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       I know, but I've been reading about the French Revolution lately and what I've come to realize is that no matter the provocation, ideological revolutions are bloody and consume guilty and innocent alike.  I get the impression that was the inspiration for "The Second Coming" by Yeates.  In the end, most of our economic problems can be laid at the feet of fractional reserve banking.  We've spent over a century trying to overcome the weaknesses of such a system and have only made matters worse.  The only reason we have seen a rising standard of living so far is because of the effects of the industrial revolution.  So long as the productivity of people increases due to technological advances, the problems were masked.  Now that those advances have slowed and been diffused across the globe, we start to see the underlying foundation of our economic system is not as sound as we thought. 
       
       While there are several promising technologies on the horizon that might make our economic problems a moot point, it really is a race between developing them, and falling into an abyss.  I'm not sure which will occur first.

       replyreport
15. 0

    pgrundyposted 14 years ago

    Wow, I feel weird to say this, but I totally agree with you.
    
    (Oh no, it IS the end of the world!!!LOL!)
    
    Fractional reserve banking is insanity. I wrote a series of papers about all this for a client, and one of them was on the history of banking, and it's full of 'went okay for awhile, run out of town on a rail, went okay for awhile, run out of town on a rail' over trying to make money off of money. But the idea of just creating money out of thin air this way is kind of like money cancer, and we're in the final stages.
    
    Revolutions never make it all better. Almost always the new boss is worse than the old boss, and while the revolution is happening everybody dies.
    
    Not looking forward to that.

    replyreport
16. 63

    Mishaposted 14 years ago

    Ramen to that guys. At least we have something to agree on

    replyreport
17. 68

    ledefensetechposted 14 years ago

    Yeah, pity it takes what amounts to the end of the world to get reasonable people to agree on something. 

    replyreport
    1. 0

       pgrundyposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Oh, I think if we were in a pub instead of online we'd all be great friends.
       
       Everything sounds worse when you are on the internet.

       replyreport
18. 0

    pgrundyposted 14 years ago

    We still wouldn't agree on much though!

    replyreport
19. 63

    Mishaposted 14 years ago

    Give it some time. Not much, I think a year or so will put everything in place

    replyreport
20. 59

    Eric Graudinsposted 14 years ago

    Sparkling Jewell just posted a hub with a link to this video.
    
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NqGP3Oc5MOI
    
    It explains very clearly how Goldman Sachs has been involved in the process of bailout, TARP, etc.

    replyreport