Numerian (Feb 15)  Posted by Michael Collins with permission of the author

From StevenD at Booman Tribune we get this interesting observation:

What part of my citation from this story is dripping with irony? Take your time, but it should be easy to spot without too much hard work.

The president will announce a series of measures to cut
down on excessive risk-taking as part of a revamp of the country's
financial regulatory system, a senior Obama official said on Wednesday.

The move could also help the White House tap into public rage over Wall
Street excess after Obama's Democratic Party was rebuffed by voters in
Massachusetts, who elected Republican Scott Brown to the U.S. senate.

"The proposal will include size and complexity limits specifically on
proprietary trading and the White House will work closely with the
House and Senate to work this into legislation," the official said.

Did you see it? I'm sure you did, but being the incurable know-it-all that I am, let me point it out for you anyway:

"[T]he White House will work closely with the House and Senate to work this into legislation."

I hope this doesn't mean that they will go about this the same way they
"worked closely with the House and Senate" to get a workable health
care reform bill passed. Because if that's the case all I can see is
another looming failure where certain Senators and Blue Dog Democrats
hijack the process and turn the financial reforms the administration
proposes into the same bowl of thin gruel that health care reform ended
up as, thanks to people like Bart Stupak, Joe Lieberman, Olympia Snowe
and Ben Nelson.

In what is completely and totally unrelated news that will never, NEVER EVER, have any impact on the information StevenD is talking about:

In a comment to a post by Rabbi Michael Lerner in Tikkun Daily, Kucinich Denounces Health Care Sell Out by House Dems, Jill Schmidt asked:

I don't get why insurance companies aren't for a bill that will get them 21 million more clients. If anyone out there gets it, please reply.

Jill poses an excellent question that is shared by hard-working, thoughtful Americans from coast to coast. Fortunately, Goldman Sachs revealed the answer in a perverse ten page report posted in its entirety by Huff-Po reporter Sam Stein. (Kudos to Sam for his excellent work!)

The answer also explains why we must continue to work with the Democrats who actually voted for a health care reform bill to end the tyranny of insurance corporations over our personal lives.

Today, McClatchy Newspapers added the how to the what Goldman did in its investment banking business.   Right after the 2008 election, Pro Publica
broke a story about Goldman urging key clients to dump California bonds
after Goldman had a big pay day from the state to sell the bonds in the
first place:

Hat tip to Firedoglake, for picking this up from MSNBC and The London Guardian:

In remarks that will fuel the row around excessive pay, Lord Griffiths, vice-chairman of Goldman Sachs International and a former adviser to Margaret Thatcher, said banks should not be ashamed of rewarding their staff.

Speaking to an audience at St Paul's Cathedral in London about morality in the marketplace last night, Griffiths said the British public should "tolerate the inequality as a way to achieve greater prosperity for all"

Read more

GIVE IT BACK GOLDMAN!

Wall Street Welfare Queen Average
Bonuses $1.0 Million Per Employee

A number of stories dealing with different forms of cyberwarfare have been floating around the last couple of days. Are they connected? Probably not. They are all interesting in their own right and in my opinion bear further investigation. What do you think?

LQD = Lazy Quote Diary

Matt Taibbi has been wading through the objections to his Rolling Stone article a few weeks ago detailing how Goldman Sachs has profited obscenely by using its political influence to help create, then prick, a series of financial bubbles over the past century. Taibbi's reply is very much worth reading, to see the depths to which defenders of the financial status quo will stoop, such as hurling the "anti-semitic" charge. But, here is the conclusion, which I consider the best part:

Last week ago, Institutional Risk Analytics interviewed Josh Rosner of Graham Fisher & Co and David Kotok of Cumberland Advisors, and the discussion is one of the most direct and revealing of the true political nature of the financial collapse I have yet seen.