Tuesday, October 18, 2011

The “Invincible” Goldman Sachs Reports Larger Than Expected Loss

I have a pretty good track record on here with some very prescient calls for the finance industry over the years.   In other words, I don’t write about what I don’t understand.  For all of those people who think with their eyes, I hate to say I told you so.  Who else was writing so specifically that Goldman Sachs didn’t have a sustainable business model and that they could even fail at some point in their future?  And I wrote this when they were minting record profits and being highlighted on the cover of nearly every mainstream business periodical as invincibly brilliant.  Too many people outsource their thinking to others.  That most definitely includes the business press who sycophantically defers to the masters of the universe they are supposed to cover. 

With an economic model that does not encourage wealth creation but instead encourages wealth shifting, what happens when you have stolen all there is to steal?  

Goldman Sachs simply bribed (legally, of course) and manipulated (legally, of course) their way to rigging the economic rules to the game in their favor and now that game doesn’t work under the same manipulated rules.   So now Goldman has three choices.  1) Bribe and manipulate politicians to set new rigged rules they can manipulate for profit. 2) Go out of business.  or 3) Create a new and sustainable merit-based business model based on sustainable market demands.  I’ll be honest.  I don’t believe their management is smart enough or competent enough to successfully execute the third option.   I have never seen any such ability within the walls of Goldman Sachs.   And, frankly, with all eyes on Washington’s corruption, I don’t think they are going to get through any substantial legislation that benefits them for very long. 

Does Goldman Sachs really hire brilliant people as the mainstream press sycophantically reports?  Or do they hire people who got an "A” in a subject that was ultimately found out to be based on voodoo or junk science or ideology?  People who do well on standardized and rote tests.  In other words, people who have shown an ability to mimic or take direction that can be molded into learning a belief system that serves the corporate state?   Or do they hire prima donnas who have no problems effing over anyone they can if it means they will fill their own bank accounts to do it?  That seems to be what I saw in Senator Levin’s hearings.  

The ego is the only source of evil in this world.  The pursuit of money for money’s sake is driven by the ego’s desire for control.  The desire for control is driven by negative or destructive energy.  Negative energy could very well be termed evil.  It directly conflicts with the search for truth and connectedness.  An outcome of industriousness may be the accumulation of wealth based on virtue or merit but wealth is not the primary intent.  The primary intent of industriousness is the search for truth.  That truth could take many forms.  I want to feed my family.  I want to create a widget that serves society.  I want to create a product that benefits the planet.  I want to …. whatever.  But one cannot serve two masters - control and truth.    Goldman Sachs serves control.  Control is failing everywhere we look.  Why would they be any different?  With this earnings announcement, those who think with their eyes are finding out that they aren’t.  

Goldman Sachs isn’t a capitalist organization.  They are what Matt Taibbi said they were;  they are a great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity, relentlessly jamming its blood funnel into anything that smells like money.   Of course, their psychopathic or delusional CEO cited this as doing God’s work.   That’s not so far from truth depending on what god Goldman Sachs worships.  Goldman Sachs worships the god of money.

Who knows.  Maybe Goldman will surprise us and transform their business.  Maybe they can make lawn mowers or something.   If they actually made something of tangible value, I could then boycott their business if I wanted to make a statement of dissent against what I believe are clearly not virtuous business practices to put it mildly.  But until they actually make something of value, I guess we just demonstrate against them in whatever peaceful way we see fit.    

In closing, JP Morgan also just recorded their business results.  Its private equity business lost money as well.  That’s another business we said was going kaput back before the bubble popped.  This when CNBC was fawning all over those masters of the universe as well.   Mitt Romney accumulated his wealth in private equity when that wealth-shifting scheme paid dividends.   You could pretty much throw a turd against the wall and where ever it hit, that was where there was money to be made in private equity.  Were Mitt “I’ll do anything to be president” Romney to just be starting in the business today, he would most certainly never earn the massive sums of money he earned.  So, is his wealth a sign of economic brilliance or simply that he was in the right place at the right time in a morally-bankrupt business?  So, why the hell would anyone listen to what he has to say about the economy?  He helped dismantle it.   Listening to Romney simply assures more trickle-down neoliberalism.   Romney’s 59 point economic plan reads like a road map for more Wall Street stupidity

If we get money and authority out of politics, and we allow those who wish to serve community and society to participate in a process void of monied interests on a level playing field, we will have a completely different experience with our elected officials.  That is, a system that seeks truth rather than authority and control.  

The world is not as it seems.

Title link here.

posted by TimingLogic at 10:10 AM

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home