Dave_In_Norfolk Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/14/opinion/why-i-am-leaving-goldman-sachs.html?_r=1&hp'>http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/14/opinion/why-i-am-leaving-goldman-sachs.html?_r=1&hp To put the problem in the simplest terms, the interests of the client continue to be sidelined in the way the firm operates and thinks about making money. Goldman Sachs is one of the world’s largest and most important investment banks and it is too integral to global finance to continue to act this way. The firm has veered so far from the place I joined right out of college that I can no longer in good conscience say that I identify with what it stands for. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/14/opinion/why-i-am-leaving-goldman-sachs.html?_r=1&hp a ) Execute on the firm’s “axes,” which is Goldman-speak for persuading your clients to invest in the stocks or other products that we are trying to get rid of because they are not seen as having a lot of potential profit. Wow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/14/opinion/why-i-am-leaving-goldman-sachs.html?_r=1&hp a Wow God, you're an idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 I don't recall anyone saying Goldman Sachs or any other bank should run Social Security. There is an argument that individuals should have greater responsibility (and assume risk) for their own retirement planning To put the problem in the simplest terms, the interests of the client continue to be sidelined in the way the firm operates and thinks about making money Yes, because the Government workers pride themselves on their exemplary Customer Service Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 http://www.nytimes.c...hs.html?_r=1 a Wow What the !@#$ are you talking about? So Goldman is going to take over Social Security? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 Hehe, such an unmitigated moron. How about we at least describe the approach properly? "Let's turn the control of Social Security back over to the individual person, who is then FREE to manage it as they see fit, and take away control from the government turd, who cannot even beat the return of savings account". Since when has anybody suggested that we turn control of SSI over to anybody...but the customer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 Wasn't some years back when the drums were beating for SS to be privatized... Just imagine if the money men of the world got their grubby little hands on it... Well that is if people were too stupid enough to let them... We'd be up worse Shite's Creek without a paddle than what the dolts in DC are peddling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 Wasn't some years back when the drums were beating for SS to be privatized... Just imagine if the money men of the world got their grubby little hands on it... Well that is if people were too stupid enough to let them... We'd be up worse Shite's Creek without a paddle than what the dolts in DC are peddling. Two kinds of people in this country...people who are perpetual victims, and people who take responsibility for themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 Wasn't some years back when the drums were beating for SS to be privatized... Just imagine if the money men of the world got their grubby little hands on it... Well that is if people were too stupid enough to let them... We'd be up worse Shite's Creek without a paddle than what the dolts in DC are peddling. Yes, we wouldn't have all that money stashed away in the "SS lockbox". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 Wasn't some years back when the drums were beating for SS to be privatized... Just imagine if the money men of the world got their grubby little hands on it... Well that is if people were too stupid enough to let them... We'd be up worse Shite's Creek without a paddle than what the dolts in DC are peddling. Privatize is an inaccurate term AFAIK. Allowing the individual account-holder to manage their own money....is not the same as outsourcing the entire system to an investment bank and having them set policy. Or allowing them to buy it and we have another private bank doing public business. Or, do you not understand the difference? Even if it is completely outsourced to Goldman Sachs, and headed up by the most evil banker they have.... ....the plan is still predicated on the individual citizen making choices with their money, no different than a 401k....and only if they choose that. I've never heard of a plan that doesn't allow people to choose to keep things as they are. So the policy would be set by the individual, which is as it should be. God forbid we allowed people to actually add extra money to it...which they could get interest from, that would both fix the problem nearly instantly, and provide low interest loans to the government, which would serve as a cheaper source of money and reduce foreign borrowing. Hell, they might even be able to turn a profit and pay off some of the debt. I assure you: there is 0 danger in allowing some big bank(s) to maintain the system....especially if there are performance incentives attached. And, really, why does it have to be a bank? IBM could do that job easily, and for far cheaper, then the current SSA. You could make it even cheaper by simply allowing IBM to subcontract various pieces of it, like reporting, printing and mail, phone applications, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 Wasn't some years back when the drums were beating for SS to be privatized... Just imagine if the money men of the world got their grubby little hands on it... Well that is if people were too stupid enough to let them... We'd be up worse Shite's Creek without a paddle than what the dolts in DC are peddling. Really? Let me ask you a question. How many years did you have until retirement a couple of years ago? How many today? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 <br />Yes, we wouldn't have all that money stashed away in the "SS lockbox".<br /><br /><br /><br /> Ha! That is what I was thinking too! THEN again, we would have been busting into that lockbox faster than you can say Ronald Reagan lives! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 <br /><br /><br /> Ha! That is what I was thinking too! THEN again, we would have been busting into that lockbox faster than you can say Ronald Reagan lives! Would you break into a vault knowing it was empty? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 <br />Really? Let me ask you a question. How many years did you have until retirement a couple of years ago? How many today?<br /><br /><br /><br /> Me? They will work my azz till I am dead... That was the same grim reality I have been always staring at. Somebody has to pay for your Boomer's azz! Truthfully, the number has always been at least 58.5 years old. Screw SS, I have not banked on it (SS) my whole working life (I am 44 now) since I was 15. Again, I figured I'd have the Boomer's feeble azz to be staring at. Always figured it (SS) was "throw away" given the year I was born. <br />Would you break into a vault knowing it was empty?<br /><br /><br /><br /> You asking me or Geraldo Rivera? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 <br /><br /><br /> Me? They will work my azz till I am dead... That was the same grim reality I have been always staring at. Somebody has to pay for your Boomer's azz! Truthfully, the number has always been at least 58.5 years old. Screw SS, I have not banked on it (SS) my whole working life (I am 44 now) since I was 15. Again, I figured I'd have the Boomer's feeble azz to be staring at. Always figured it (SS) was "throw away" given the year I was born. If you had the ability to save that SS money and invested it do you have any idea how much more you'd have than you're going to get from SS? Put $5000 a year into a simple balanced fund for 35 years and you'd be getting over $8,000 a month. Yeah, privitization of SS is a bad idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Miner Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 If you had the ability to save that SS money and invested it do you have any idea how much more you'd have than you're going to get from SS? Put $5000 a year into a simple balanced fund for 35 years and you'd be getting over $8,000 a month. Yeah, privitization of SS is a bad idea. Hell I'd do a 50/50 split with the gov't and they could just do whatever the hell they wanted with the half they get. They don't even have to give it back to me in any form of a retirement fund. Spend it on Chevy Volts, or JSF's or whatever the hell they want. Just let me have 50% to invest how I want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 <br />If you had the ability to save that SS money and invested it do you have any idea how much more you'd have than you're going to get from SS?<br /><br />Put $5000 a year into a simple balanced fund for 35 years and you'd be getting over $8,000 a month. Yeah, privitization of SS is a bad idea. <img src='http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' /><br /><br /><br /><br /> Yo, Phucktard... That would have really helped out my grandfather born in 1904 and deceased in '78. It is not all about YOU or me... You !@#$ing douchebag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 (edited) Wasn't some years back when the drums were beating for SS to be privatized... Just imagine if the money men of the world got their grubby little hands on it... Well that is if people were too stupid enough to let them... We'd be up worse Shite's Creek without a paddle than what the dolts in DC are peddling. Dude, you couldn't be further from the truth. If you are lets say around 60 years old, and lets say by the time you were 18 you began earning a wage. And lets say you had a parallel Universed Eric along side you and you both contributed equally to two seperate funds, one the current system and the other a fund indexed to the stock market, you would have ALOT more money in your S.S account than you currently have today. Just sayin' Edited March 16, 2012 by Magox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 <br /><br /><br /> Yo, Phucktard... That would have really helped out my grandfather born in 1904 and deceased in '78. It is not all about YOU or me... You !@#$ing douchebag. How would that not have helped your grandfather? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 <br /><br /><br /> Yo, Phucktard... That would have really helped out my grandfather born in 1904 and deceased in '78. It is not all about YOU or me... You !@#$ing douchebag. I don't know what's more annoying....the 3 "big return" closing tags in every one of your posts = "<br />" which indicates that either your browser is crap....or you are somehow pasting this by accident in every post.... ....or the fact that you don't understand any of the logical and straightforward facts that you have been confronted with in this thread. Right now, I gotta go with the "<br />"s, even though the blithering you've done here is quite awful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts