July 15, 2009

Goldman Sachs In the News

Well, it seems like Matt Taibbi's piece about Goldman Sachs is stirring up a *lot* of dust. (BTW: Full article is finally online here.)

Eliot Spitzer thought Taibbi's piece was quite good and raised the right questions about whether Goldman's good fortune means good news for the regular economy. Spitzer notes that Goldman Sachs and all banks are benefiting hidden subsidies from the American taxpayers, but that Goldman Sachs good fortune doesn't appear to be doing anything for creating real jobs for Americans. When Goldman Sachs pays out billions in bonuses, do you think Americans will cheer? That simple question ought be keeping Obama's financial experts up at nights.

One other Taibbi tidbit: when Goldman Sach's traitor stole the crown jewels (the algorithms used by GS for program trading), Goldman Sachs issued this warning:

Assistant U.S. Attorney Joseph Facciponti stood up in court and let loose a whopper. “The bank has raised the possibility that there is a danger that somebody who knew how to use this program could use it to manipulate markets in unfair ways,” he said.

As Taibbi says, having Goldman Sachs acknowledge that this theft could lead to market manipulation, one isn't a fool to wonder how Goldman Sachs was using this program before it was stolen. Especially when they have have the disclaimer: "You acknowledge that we may monitor your use of the Services for our own purposes (and not for your benefit). " (emphasis mine)

Finally, Billmon, my brilliant econo-man, expects Taibbi's head to explode when he reads about Goldman Sachs record profits, brought by you and me!

Posted by Mary at July 15, 2009 01:05 AM | Economy | Technorati links |

John Goodman is the president of the National Center for Policy Analysis and he wrote this!!.

This is from the Joint Economic Committee minority report. Congress is considering legislation that would:

Raise the top two income tax brackets from 33% and 35% to statutory marginal rates of 36% and 39.6%;
Bring back the “hidden tax increases” of PEP (the Personal Exemption Phaseout) and Pease (the limitation on itemized deductions), which raise the effective marginal rates in the top two brackets to 41% for a family of four; and
Create a graduated surtax of 2%, 3% or 5.4% as part of “health reform,” which would raise the marginal tax rate for a family of four in the top two brackets to a range from 43.3% to 46.2%.
Additionally, income distributed as wages to a small business owner would be subject to an extra 2.9% Medicare tax.
All combined, small business owners could be subject to marginal tax rates as high as 49% and data from the Joint Committee on Taxation shows that at least 55% of the revenue raised by increasing the top two rates would come from small business income.
This would not include an average 7% in state and local taxes. It would also not include the House health bill’s wage tax of up to 8% on businesses that do not offer health insurance or do not pay for enough of their employees’ coverage or the 2.5% income tax on individuals who have not purchased health insurance.

Posted by: Medical insurance at July 24, 2009 04:21 PM