• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Goldman Sachs sees bumper profit

tlmorg02

tlmorg02

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 27, 2007
Messages
3,347
Reaction score
1,078
Location
Louisville, Ky
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
BBC NEWS | Business | Goldman Sachs sees bumper profit

US bank Goldman Sachs reported a net profit of $3.44bn (£2.1bn) for April to June, beating analysts' forecasts.

Less volatility in stock markets, rises in global share prices and involvement in many firms' rights issues and takeovers had boosted profits, it said.

The bank said it had set aside $6.65bn for pay and bonuses in the quarter - an average of $226,000 per employee.

Goldman has recently paid off $10bn of government loans it had taken as part of a government bail-out programme.

Its results include a one-off charge of $426m related to the repayment of its government loan under the Troubled Asset Relief Programme (Tarp).
Click to expand...

Looks like all of the Republican assertions of Socialism and meaningless bailouts prove to be BS. Goldman Sachs is profitable now and even paying back the government. I would think that a socialist dictator would not allow a nationalized company to pay back the loans and become private again.;) Thoughts?
 
It wasn't long ago that you all were blaming Bush for the bailout of Wall Street. Now that there's success, Obama did it. Figures.
 
American said:
It wasn't long ago that you all were blaming Bush for the bailout of Wall Street. Now that there's success, Obama did it. Figures.
Click to expand...

Actually I think it will end up being both, but I still don't agree with the bailouts. I think it is a crap shoot that America can't afford to gamble with.
 
Well maybe, I don't general support it either, but everybody was saying you know?
 
American said:
It wasn't long ago that you all were blaming Bush for the bailout of Wall Street. Now that there's success, Obama did it. Figures.
Click to expand...

Both had a hand, and I never criticized Bush for it. Actually, as I reacall, his own party criticized him for it. I think it will work, and he and Obama, were both right. If you keep companies afloat long enough to get through hard times, there is no reason they can't pay you back and go on being profitable.
 
Success? For whom? Goldman got paid via AIG. They aren't paying those billions back. They got government guarantees and loans. All in addition to the 10 billion in capital.

HaHa, all the hard working citizens of this country got screwed. How do you think Goldman made this money? By taking on more risk. Makes sense. Since they own the Fed and Treasury. They know they will always be golden.
 
Last edited:
tlmorg02 said:
BBC NEWS | Business | Goldman Sachs sees bumper profit



Looks like all of the Republican assertions of Socialism and meaningless bailouts prove to be BS. Goldman Sachs is profitable now and even paying back the government. I would think that a socialist dictator would not allow a nationalized company to pay back the loans and become private again.;) Thoughts?
Click to expand...

This is a stimulating story indeed !!!!
 
tlmorg02 said:
BBC NEWS | Business | Goldman Sachs sees bumper profit



Looks like all of the Republican assertions of Socialism and meaningless bailouts prove to be BS. Goldman Sachs is profitable now and even paying back the government. I would think that a socialist dictator would not allow a nationalized company to pay back the loans and become private again.;) Thoughts?
Click to expand...

Same thing is being reported here, Government wants to give back the banks back to the private sector ASAP and some have paid some of the loan money.
 
Last edited:
Is it real profit or fake profit?

Fake profit in the difference between what the debt outstanding is worth and face value and can be booked as income (if negative).

No actual money was made. No actual profit at time of disclosure.
 
tlmorg02 said:
BBC NEWS | Business | Goldman Sachs sees bumper profit



Looks like all of the Republican assertions of Socialism and meaningless bailouts prove to be BS. Goldman Sachs is profitable now and even paying back the government. I would think that a socialist dictator would not allow a nationalized company to pay back the loans and become private again.;) Thoughts?
Click to expand...



You think that's a success?

You think taxpayer money floating a company so that that company makes a profit ....is a success?

Its like me robbing you of 10 dollars betting it all on number 36 at the roulette table and then bragging about how great an investment it was.
Hurrah!
:stop:



..think outside the box they want you in...
 
Triad said:
You think that's a success?

You think taxpayer money floating a company so that that company makes a profit ....is a success?

Its like me robbing you of 10 dollars betting it all on number 36 at the roulette table and then bragging about how great an investment it was.
Hurrah!
:stop:



..think outside the box they want you in...
Click to expand...

They are paying tax payers back, and in doing so a greater economic decline was prevented. Companies make profits off of the tax payers all the time, look at DoD spending.
 
tlmorg02 said:
They are paying tax payers back, and in doing so a greater economic decline was prevented. Companies make profits off of the tax payers all the time, look at DoD spending.
Click to expand...

No, they aren't completely paying taxpayers back. They received 13 billion in taxpayer money from AIG. They aren't paying that back.

Furthermore, they are taking huge risks to make this profit. If that risk turns sour. It will be the taxpayer that will take the loss, not Goldman. Many in the industry are voicing concern for Goldman. The few banks that have tried to follow Goldman's risky investing have been smashed by losses. To be sure, Goldman has skill in trading. However, the fact remains that they should be out of business. Their business model failed. Taxpayers rescued them. They still owe taxpayer's at least 13 billion. They are risking another collapse.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/15/business/15goldman.html?em
As well as receiving federal assistance last fall under the government’s Troubled Asset Relief Program, Goldman, along with other banks, has benefited from a government program that allows it to issue debt cheaply with the backing of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. In addition, it received money from the government’s bailout of the American International Group, being paid 100 cents on the dollar for its $13 billion counterparty exposure to the insurer.
Click to expand...
 
AndrewC said:
No, they aren't completely paying taxpayers back. They received 13 billion in taxpayer money from AIG. They aren't paying that back.

Furthermore, they are taking huge risks to make this profit. If that risk turns sour. It will be the taxpayer that will take the loss, not Goldman. Many in the industry are voicing concern for Goldman. The few banks that have tried to follow Goldman's risky investing have been smashed by losses. To be sure, Goldman has skill in trading. However, the fact remains that they should be out of business. Their business model failed. Taxpayers rescued them. They still owe taxpayer's at least 13 billion. They are risking another collapse.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/15/business/15goldman.html?em
Click to expand...

You make very good points, but had we allowed Sachs to go under, there would have been another chain reaction of bank downward spirals, as Sachs has integration with many banking firms, as well as brokerage houses. I never asserted that it was ideal to save them, nor savory to the people. But if in doing so the country can avoid further recession, then it may have been worth it.
 
Why is sachs the only company to make a profit? What about the others?
 
tlmorg02 said:
BBC NEWS | Business | Goldman Sachs sees bumper profit



Looks like all of the Republican assertions of Socialism and meaningless bailouts prove to be BS. Goldman Sachs is profitable now and even paying back the government. I would think that a socialist dictator would not allow a nationalized company to pay back the loans and become private again.;) Thoughts?
Click to expand...




Awesome. So when will Obama give back that control aspect the government took?
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
Awesome. So when will Obama give back that control aspect the government took?
Click to expand...

When the money is repaid. Actually, from the article, they already have it back, as they are scheduling bonuses for top performers. This was their reason for beginning to pay back the loans. This allows them to give the bonuses, that those under government control cannot give.
 
tlmorg02 said:
When the money is repaid. Actually, from the article, they already have it back, as they are scheduling bonuses for top performers. This was their reason for beginning to pay back the loans. This allows them to give the bonuses, that those under government control cannot give.
Click to expand...





Actually, the Government still owns, market assets that they can call on any time, still in control.
 
tlmorg02 said:
There not going to keep it. Rev, I didn't take you for the conspiracy theorist type.:(
Click to expand...




It's not a conspiracy, if the Government own calls or whatever, why would they cash it in now?

Its not a conspiracy now is it?
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
It's not a conspiracy, if the Government own calls or whatever, why would they cash it in now?

Its not a conspiracy now is it?
Click to expand...

I don't understand what your asking here. There are already ten banks, including JP Morgan Chase, that have repaid loans and the government has rescinded it's authority. Why would it not do so with Sachs?
 
tlmorg02 said:
Looks like all of the Republican assertions of Socialism and meaningless bailouts prove to be BS. Goldman Sachs is profitable now and even paying back the government. I would think that a socialist dictator would not allow a nationalized company to pay back the loans and become private again.;) Thoughts?
Click to expand...
Does this include the missing month? Goldman redid their fiscal year and made their worst month (December) disappear.
 
tlmorg02 said:
BBC NEWS | Business | Goldman Sachs sees bumper profit



Looks like all of the Republican assertions of Socialism and meaningless bailouts prove to be BS. Goldman Sachs is profitable now and even paying back the government. I would think that a socialist dictator would not allow a nationalized company to pay back the loans and become private again.;) Thoughts?
Click to expand...
goldman sachs decided to return the money when the Govt started taking an active part in running companies, you know, limiting bonuses etc....
 
celticlord said:
Does this include the missing month? Goldman redid their fiscal year and made their worst month (December) disappear.
Click to expand...

Here's what the article says:

Six months ago, Goldman reported its first quarterly loss since going public in 1999, after being battered by the economic crisis.

But it then surprised Wall Street by reporting a $1.8bn profit for the first three months of the year, despite the financial crisis.

And the bank said it had benefitted from higher volumes of trading in shares, while seeing record revenues from currency and commodities trading during the second quarter.
Click to expand...
 
tlmorg02 said:
I don't understand what your asking here. There are already ten banks, including JP Morgan Chase, that have repaid loans and the government has rescinded it's authority. Why would it not do so with Sachs?
Click to expand...




I gotta find it, I was watching the news last night and they were talking about that just being paid back does not change the game now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom