Goldman Sachs

jackspratt wrote:I note the 4 of the 5 current commissioners were appointed by Bush - but that is probably not important when you are looking for an angle on Obama.

jackspratt wrote:
- the Huffington Post seems to assume credibility, even for arch conservatives, when it prints something that suits their (the conservative's) arguements.

WBU ALUM wrote:While off topic, I feel compelled to respond to personal attacks.

It would be wise to look at what is contained in sources and not the actual source. In the Huffington Post (which everyone knows is a far-left-leaning organization) article that I questioned, it contained no data that can support "saved or created jobs" anywhere in the world and there is disagreement on many fronts as to whether a stimulus is working in the US (which was the topic at that time). "Saved or created jobs" cannot be measured, and no one has ever even been able to explain how it is measured. However, campaign records of politicians open to the public is usually considered to be hard data, unless one just doesn't believe anything from anyone.

Certain posters seem more concerned with individual posters than with the topic under discussion.

If I post a conservative source, the source is discredited regardless of what facts are contained in the story. If I post a liberal source, I am subject to personal attacks.

I find it humorous that the information provided in my posts was not questioned, which was the whole point of my posting it.

Lastly, I am not going to defend any politician who breaks the law if there is evidence "beyond a reasonable doubt", which is what is required for a conviction in a court of law in the US. As I have stated before, I am not a Democrat, nor Republican or Independent. I simply believe in the US Constitution and principles of free enterprise. Politicians who promote those governing and economic principles are the ones I support.

WBU ALUM wrote:Certain posters seem more concerned with individual posters than with the topic under discussion.

As Goldman Sachs faced arguably one of its most challenging quarter in decades -- on several fronts, from SEC charges and lagging profits to financial regulatory reform and renewed scrutiny of all its activities -- the firm increased its spending on lobbying by almost 40% in the second quarter of 2010 and has already spent almost as much in the first half of this year as it did in all of 2009.

In its most recent lobbying report filed last night, Goldman spent $1.58 million to influence Congress and the White House on a host of issues including Wall Street reform -- specifically derivatives regulation, bank tax and financial risk management -- the much-debated unemployment benefits extension, municipal finance, small business funding, climate change legislation and transportation funding.

Forty years ago, we put a man on the moon, but we can't get Lobbyist out of Washington...

there should be a non deductible 90% surtax applied to all lobbying done by banks, oil companies, defense contractors, airlines, and all their affiliates. Only exemptions are non profit groups.

New Wave of Whistleblowers Could Become Millionaires

Under little-noticed new provisions of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street reform law, whistleblowers like Markopolos who alerted the SEC to Bernard Madoff's Ponzi scheme will for the first time be entitled to collect between 10- and- 30 percent of the money recovered by the government.

And that could turn a new wave of whistleblowers, those insiders with proof of financial wrongdoing on Wall Street, into millionaires.

"If the law works, whistleblowers should be rewarded with millions of dollars," said Stephen Kohn, executive director of the National Whistleblowers Center. "Those whistleblowers will save investors billions and billions of dollars."

And the promise of so much money changing hands has plaintiff's lawyers chomping at the bit. On July 23rd, Kohn's center held a briefing for lawyers seeking to understand how to bring the new cases. One attorney familiar with the law says he already has cases in the pipeline ready to go now that the new law has passed.

The new law will allow whistleblowers who bring "original information" to the Securities and Exchange Commission or the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to remain anonymous— even to the government. Working with an attorney as an intermediary, insiders with information about fraud can bring allegations to the government without fear that the government will somehow reveal their identity.

The new provision comes into law even as the SEC has become more aggressive in awarding tipsters.

On July 23, the commission announced the award of $1 million to Glen Kaiser and Karen Kaiser of Southbury, Conn., who provided information and documents that were crucial to the SEC's insider trading case against Pequot Capital. That award, which was the largest paid by the SEC for information in an insider trading case, was paid out under earlier authority.

Experts familiar with the new Dodd-Frank provisions expect that the dollar awards paid to informants in insider trading, securities and commodities fraud cases will grow much higher than $1 million.

In the Pequot case, whistleblower Karen Kaiser is the ex-wife of David Zilkha, a Microsoft employee who took a job offer from Pequot. Kaiser and her new husband found a key email between Zilkha and another Microsoft employee.

Experts don't expect the next wave of whistleblowers to consist entirely of ex-wives, but they do expect that people very close to the fraud will now have enormous financial incentives to go to the government.

"It won't take very many whistleblowers in the large brokerage houses to win their cases," said Kohn, "in order for people to get the message that anyone sitting in that room with you may become a multimillionaire by turning in your fraud. The beauty of this law is essentially it uses greed to fight greed."

Original article (which contains links to further articles): http://classic.cnbc.com/id/38416207