Forum Post: Goldman Sachs threatens OWS credit union bank.
Posted 12 years ago on Oct. 25, 2011, 1:55 p.m. EST by abmebratu
(349)
from Washington, DC
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Goldman Sachs has threatened to to transfer credit union funds, worth about 1 billion dollars, if credit union does not shut down OWS bank account. I think we need to devise another banking system for OWS. A system that cannot be threatened by the likes of Goldman Sachs. The ironic part is that Goldman is a shadow bank that took billions of public funds; thanks to our socialism for the rich program in this country, yet they are threatening we the people after we bail them out.....This is the ultimate form of blackmail. An affront to the American people. Even terrorists don't despise us this badly.
http://www.democracynow.org/ Play the video that appears on the front page of the link then forward to the 39th minute of the video
Where are you getting "transfer 1 billion dollars"?
The story involves a 5000 dollar donation that GS backed out of due to the credit union supporting OWS.
That isnt all...
Check how long GS Shyt has been going on... http://investors4justice.net/goldman-sachs.php
I have shown the way to cut their nuts off entirely but as of yet few want to listen and follow http://occupywallst.org/forum/ows-objective-1-fractional-reserve-lending-is-a-cr/
The democracy now link is BS. It doesn't matter how much you love to blame it all in GS, they already did pay the bailout money that was given to them: http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/jul/23/goldman-sachs-repays-government?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487
Now, since we are blaming actors into this mess, why don't we blame Clinton (or should we say "Democrats"?) for deregulating the banks and giving them a free ride? Or why don't we blame Bush Jr. (or should we say "Republicans") for forcing the banks to give mortgages to roughly 50% of the people who would have not gotten an approval rate? Or better yet, should we blame ourselves instead, for buying houses too expensive for our income, hence putting us in a situation on which we would never be able to fully pay what we bought?
The problem is not "the banks" or "the government" or "the people". It is a mixture of the three; and as long as we don't accept that we, the 99%, are also part of the problem, all we are doing in random noise that will achieve nothing. We need a change of culture in all the three actors already mentioned. That includes Goldman Sachs, and that includes us.
But please, pretty please, stop blaming Goldman Sachs for things they haven't done and start acting objectively. It is like if we were going to start blaming ourselves as the only responsible for the crisis since, after all, it was US (the 99%) who were unable to pay our debts who triggered the crisis.
Banks paid back TAPR money which was issued after a bailout of 2 trillion dollars in toxic debt was transferred to the US national debt!! John Stossel was explaining that to Bill Orielly, but Bill seemed to be out to touch and unable to understand it.
Bank CEOs and employees walked off with $80 billion - 10% of the $800 billion TARP funds!
The fractional reserve system is criminal, do yourself a favour and figure it out! http://occupywallst.org/forum/ows-objective-1-fractional-reserve-lending-is-a-cr/
I am not saying it was moral or not. Those were the terms of the loan they got, and they paid it. It was legal under the term of the contract that the republican president (Bush) and the democratic congress gave them. I didn't like it then, I don't like it now, but I am not going to accuse GS of threatening Credit Unions for the sake of it.
I am saying that bank earnings from usury interest through Fractional Reserve Lending IS IMMORAL! ! ! http://occupywallst.org/forum/ows-objective-1-fractional-reserve-lending-is-a-cr/
Otherwise, from the WALL STREET JOURNAL - http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203914304576628873340076918.html
Five Groups Who Should be Mad at Wall Street by BRETT ARENDS
"5. Anyone investing in banks You have to laugh when people slam "greedy" Bank of America. Have you seen the stock price lately? For stockholders, this is a nonprofit. The only ones making money are the management and staff.
It's the same at all the other banks. In the past five years, public filings show, the employees of Goldman Sachs have pocketed $80 billion in pay and benefits, including bonuses and other goodies. Over the same period, stockholders have lost $25 billion."
It's not just about paying back bailout money. Just like any investor the public should have a stake in the company for its dollars. Goldman got about 170 billion from us, so in theory the public should have that much in Goldman Sachs shares. I mean don't you believe in the free market?? Why do we have socialism for the big dogs and capitalism for me and you??
Unfortunately, those were not the terms on which the loan was offered. We can go and ask Bush and the Congress back then as to why they acted the way they did. I don't like it, but trying to rewrite history is not going to change things.
Similarly, I don't like that a hefty percentage of people in this country bought houses that were well beyond their spending capabilities, ended up getting foreclosures, and forced the collapse of a system for which the housing market was one of its cornerstones. I don't go around blaming people for being irresponsible selfish bastards and not taking responsibility for their actions and reflecting the blame on someone else.
As I said before, there are three actors in this game. The government, the banks, and us (99%). If we don't take full responsibility in the mess, and keep reflecting towards the government and banks, we will never get out of this situation.
Just sayin' though...
Whatever happens we have a systemic problem in this country. I think most people are beginning to admit this fact, which is just as well, because this problem is not a problem of greed with few bankers and politicians. The problem emanates form a system that overemphasis greed and eliminates all oversight.....We need a "New Deal"?? Let's have some spine in our political system again.
What's BS about it?
The democracy link claims that GS has to give 5k to Credit Unions since they have to repay the bailout debt. They already did pay the bailout debt. In 2009. With interests. They no longer have to give any money to anyone by following payments from that debt (since that debt is now, nonexistent). Henceforth, the claim from the link is false. Pure BS at its best. Sensationalist press at its worst! All that GS did this time was to withdraw their name from a charity event because OWS was going to be honored. How that implies that "GS Threatens OWS Credit Union Bank" still is beyond me, specially when, by law, they don't have to pay the governemnt a single penny anymore as part of the bailout they got.
Yea, op has the facts wrong.
But Goldman's obligation to support community institutions doesn't come from bailout funds.
They are now both a commercial bank & an investment bank and are subject to the Community Reinvestment Act. One way they and other institutions in ny comply with that is by funding community banks like L.E.S.C.U.
Now that particular 5K donation itself is not a requirement, they can fund who & what they want to as long as they comply with the CRA.
But it does demonstrate that they're pulling strings or pressuring others not to support OWS.
http://www.democracynow.org/2011/10/25/goldman_sachs_v_occupy_wall_street
I was just going to post this. So crazy.
http://www.democracynow.org/ Play the video that appears on the front page of the link then forward to the 39th minute of the video
please supply a link or proof of this. if this be the case then they have violated everything this country was based on in one swoop.
http://www.democracynow.org/
Play the video that appears on the front page of the link then forward to the 39th minute of the video
verification, by link, perhaps?
http://www.democracynow.org/ Play the video that appears on the front page of the link then forward to the 39th minute of the video
Right here:
http://www.democracynow.org/2011/10/25/from_tahrir_to_wall_street_egyptian
Starts at around 34 minutes.
You can download the entire vid or mp3 audio of it by clicking 'more formats' under the player
tnx
What is your source for this info?
Post a link or otherwise it is B.S.
Its true, research the repeal of Glass Steagall Occupy DC. That was 10 years ago, so 2 seconds to google it will get you all you need to know about it. Citigroup and Robert Rubin had much to do with it too.
I know all about it. I lived through those days and I opposed removing the firewall between commercial and investment banks.
Citigroup might give you swanky job, then. ;)
No it's real
http://www.democracynow.org/ Play the video that appears on the front page of the link then forward to the 39th minute of the video
Sorry. Democracy Now is NOT a valid source.
The OP has the facts wrong about the DemocracyNow story.
But the DemocracyNow story is not wrong and it is a valid source for the actual story.
What happened was that Goldman pledged 5K to Lower East Side and then took the "donation" back after LES backed OWS. These "donations" are something that is required of Goldman as terms of federal money they get. They're required to give funding support to community institutions.
So, the OP has several facts wrong but as I said DemocracyNow is not wrong. Here are two other sources for the story, Wall St Journal okay for you?
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203752604576645480987452682.html
http://www.investmentnews.com/article/20111025/FREE/111029964
Yes, the WSJ is a better and more responsible source.
The lie about Goldman forcing a transfer of one billion in funds if the credit union didn't close the OWS account came from where? The original poster or Democracy Now?
From the OP. I watched the Democracy Now story, it only talks about the 5K donation for the dinner.
I'm not sure where he's getting "move 1 billion" in funds.
Thanks for clearing this up.