Could 10:1 be the new leverage in US Forex? | Page 49 | Forex Factory

Options

Go to
Permalinks
Print Thread

Similar Threads

High leverage vs Low leverage 74 replies

Could Leverage Wipe Out My Account? 27 replies

High Leverage vs Low Leverage 21 replies

High Leverage vs Low Leverage 20 replies

how do forex brokers make leverage 0 replies

Attachments: Could 10:1 be the new leverage in US Forex?
Exit Attachments

Could 10:1 be the new leverage in US Forex?

  • #961
  • Edited 2:02pm May 1, 2010 12:20pm | Edited 2:02pm
Quoting tar
Gensler on bloomberg now

http://www.bloomberg.com/avp/avp.htm?clipSRC=LiveBTV
he is trying to insulate himself saying the first year he recused himself and later on he was only part of a team, spread the blame game...what a leader
"...if I knew then what I know now..." This guy is a broken record, well at least he didn't use the gas station example this time. LOL
and didn't Brooksley Born know then what you claim to just know now?? Is she a super genius or are you retarded, or just a political pawn for Goldman and WallStreet?
Bring back Brooksley Born she is and was ahead of the curve.

He becomes a stutterer when asked questions about Goldman.
  • #962
  • May 2, 2010 1:57am May 2, 2010 1:57am
Now, if we could please get criminal prosecutions going on the real crooks

http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/...o-of-110th.jpg
  • #963
  • May 2, 2010 11:27am May 2, 2010 11:27am
For all the vitrol tossed around in this thread and elsewhere about goldman, I still don't see how they did anything wrong. So they made a market for some bonds that declined in value. I sell widows and orphans currencies that I think will go down all the time. Most of the time they do. Does that mean I'm a social pariah and should be put in jail?

That seems like an incredibly stupid perspective for a member of forex factory to take, but I admit that I might have it all wrong.

Can one of the pitchfork weilders spell out what goldman did wrong and why we should be mad about it?
  • #964
  • May 2, 2010 11:46am May 2, 2010 11:46am
Quoting Darkstar
For all the vitrol tossed around in this thread and elsewhere about goldman, I still don't see how they did anything wrong. So they made a market for some bonds that declined in value. I sell widows and orphans currencies that I think will go down all the time. Most of the time they do. Does that mean I'm a social pariah and should be put in jail?

That seems like an incredibly stupid perspective for a member of forex factory to take, but I admit that I might have it all wrong.

Can one of the pitchfork weilders spell out what goldman did wrong...
Google: Max Taibbi The Great American Bubble Machine.

The AIG "save" alone condemns them since they were basically paid twice dollar for dollar on their potential losses. It goes downhill from there....
Scarlett
  • #965
  • May 2, 2010 12:26pm May 2, 2010 12:26pm
Quoting Darkstar
For all the vitrol tossed around in this thread and elsewhere about goldman, I still don't see how they did anything wrong. So they made a market for some bonds that declined in value. I sell widows and orphans currencies that I think will go down all the time. Most of the time they do. Does that mean I'm a social pariah and should be put in jail?

That seems like an incredibly stupid perspective for a member of forex factory to take, but I admit that I might have it all wrong.

Can one of the pitchfork weilders spell out what goldman did wrong...

Open your eyes folks........ when something hits main stream it just can't be the real thing, the fact that Goldman has being indicted, tells me that they are just another "scape goat" and their level of responsibility on all this must be small or none.

The big boys behind the curtain are a lot smarter and a lot more powerful than a silly hedge fund.

Currently the big boys control the money and the media ........try to fight something like this.

They are pretty close to have total control over you and me ( their final objective) and when they get it...well....history will repeat itself.
  • #966
  • Edited 2:06pm May 2, 2010 12:45pm | Edited 2:06pm
Quoting Darkstar
For all the vitrol tossed around in this thread and elsewhere about goldman, I still don't see how they did anything wrong. So they made a market for some bonds that declined in value. I sell widows and orphans currencies that I think will go down all the time. Most of the time they do. Does that mean I'm a social pariah and should be put in jail?

That seems like an incredibly stupid perspective for a member of forex factory to take, but I admit that I might have it all wrong.

Can one of the pitchfork weilders spell out what goldman did wrong...
To begin with, you got the facts wrong. Goldman's role went way beyond what a market maker does, they were advising clients to buy the CDOs, (not bonds as you say) as a sound investment while giving paid investment advice to their clients. That is not making a market, a true makert maker buys and sells without recommending the instrument. At the same time, they set up a hedge fund that was betting that all the instruments that they were touting to their clients would become worthless. They did this for 9 months without disclosure. That is not making a market, that is breaching a fiduciary relationship to their clients who paid them for investment advice. This has nothing to do with making a market for CDS or any other swap.

"Goldman has been behind virtually every financial crisis the US has experienced since the Civil War. In John Kenneth Galbraith’s “The Great Crash”, a chapter that documents Goldman’s contributions to the Great Depression is titled “In Goldman We Trust”.
http://wallstreetpit.com/23650-goldm...ets-handcuffed

"failed to disclose to investors vital information about the CDO"
http://www.dailyfinance.com/story/in...raud/19442942/

I guess if your hobby is to have your tax dollar used to bail out a company that made billions screwing the taxpayer, then and only then Goldman has done nothing wrong
(Goldman was reclassified a commercial bank in 24 hours, illegally and bypassing regulation, to obtain TARP funds, thanks to Paulson, the Goldman alumni posing as the US treasurer)

PS. I see from your signature that you are writing a book. Hope you take the time to research the topics of the book, rather than making remarks about things you are not well acquainted with, as done here. BTW, the word is spelled vitriol no vitrol.
  • #967
  • May 2, 2010 1:21pm May 2, 2010 1:21pm
Quoting Platypus
Open your eyes folks........ when something hits main stream it just can't be the real thing, the fact that Goldman has being indicted, tells me that they are just another "scape goat" and their level of responsibility on all this must be small or none.

The big boys behind the curtain are a lot smarter and a lot more powerful than a silly hedge fund.

Currently the big boys control the money and the media ........try to fight something like this.

They are pretty close to have total control over you and me ( their final...
Who do you think "the big boys" are?
They are primarily the central banks who basically control the world economy and steer the money that determnes who has a job, who gets a mortgage, the cost of commodities and, yes, who wins presidential elections....GS is their "big boy"....

I don't disagree that the GS drama is a sideshow but there are many levels and this one may very well be a sideshow to appease the masses.

Just as this erupted simultaneously with the new so-called "bank /wall street reform" bills that BO (aka Barry Soetoro) is attempting to pass, so did the TARP bail-out, financial "melt-down" coup de etat occur just in time to make certain that BO/Barry Soetoro would "win" the presidential election. No sir, there are no accidents. GS is a multi-gazillion dollar international succubus involved in much more than trying to make a buck....
Scarlett
  • #968
  • May 2, 2010 1:55pm May 2, 2010 1:55pm
Quoting wwwin
PS. I see from your signature that you are writing a book. Hope you take the time to research the topics of the book, rather than making remarks about things you are not well acquainted with, as done here. BTW, the work is spelled vitriol no vitrol.
Thanks smart ass, except you spelled word wrong.

Quote
To begin with, you got the facts wrong. Goldman was not making the market and their role was not that of a market maker, they were advising clients to buy the CDS, (not bonds as you say) as a sound investment as investment advisors to their clients.

Unfortunately this statement highlights that your mastery of this subject is as clear as that of your spelling....

A CDS is a credit default swap. In effect its an insurance policy that pays out in the event the underlying product fails to perform it's obligations. So "selling" a CDS is akin to betting that the underlyer will perform as described.

I think what you mean is that Goldman was "buying" CDS from companies like AIG (an "insurance company" btw). Had they not been buying, they would have lost money on the CDS transactions when the underlier failed, as opposed to making it.

Goldman was "selling" Mortgage backed securities (MBS). An MBS is a collateralized debt obligation (CDO). Investors in CDO's get a periodic interest payment on securities that are rated by rating agencies for probable risk of default. So in effect, MBS securities are bonds.

I'll get to your point about the advisory role in a minute...

[quote]That is not making a market. At the same time, they set up a hedge fund that was betting that all the instruments that they were touting to their clients would become worthless. They did this for 9 months without disclosure. That is not making a market, that is breaching a fiduciary relationship to their clients who paid them for investment advice. This has nothing to do with making a market for CDS or any other swap.[quote]

Goldman wasn't making a market for CDS, that was AIG's gimmick. Goldman was making a market for MBS. The very fact that they were selling the MBS means that they were not in an advisory role. You can't be an independent advisor and a sales person at the same time. Even if goldman held themselves out to be an independent advisor, then shame on the counterparty for believeing it.

To put this is a different context; I may like the salesman at the local used car lot, but I accept that his job is to sell cars. Failure on my part to get the car checked out before I buy it doesn't mean the sales person is a criminal, it means I was an ignorent consumer.

The fact is, goldman was in a sales position trying to move a product. The ratings agencies stamped the product as AAA and goldman gave the standard risk disclosure when it sold the product. Whether goldman was betting against the product or not, it was the buyers responsibility to engage in due dillegence.

If ANYONE is at fault it's the ratings agencies for stamping the product AAA. THEY are the ones who are supposed to be acting in an advisory role in these transactions by rating the risk of default. So my question is, why all this fire and brimstone over goldman? Why aren't you guys rioting out in front of S&P's headquarters? Where are the congressional hearings for the Moodies execs?

PS: Knowing how much you enjoy hunting out spelling mistakes, I submit this without proofing. Enjoy.
  • #969
  • May 2, 2010 2:04pm May 2, 2010 2:04pm
Quoting Darkstar
Thanks smart ass, except you spelled word wrong.



Unfortunately this statement highlights that your mastery of this subject is as clear as that of your spelling....

A CDS is a credit default swap. In effect its an insurance policy that pays out in the event the underlying product fails to perform it's obligations. So "selling" a CDS is akin to betting that the underlyer will perform as described.

I think what you mean is that Goldman was "buying" CDS from companies like AIG (an "insurance company" btw). Had they not been buying,...
This is why Goldman is being sued by the SEC, there is a criminal investigation also underway, and the FSA is also investigating.

"failed to disclose to investors vital information about the CDO"
http://www.dailyfinance.com/story/in...raud/19442942/

"Goldman has been behind virtually every financial crisis the US has experienced since the Civil War. In John Kenneth Galbraith’s “The Great Crash”, a chapter that documents Goldman’s contributions to the Great Depression is titled “In Goldman We Trust”.
http://wallstreetpit.com/23650-goldm...ets-handcuffed

and they were laughing about selling shit to their clients
http://www.boingboing.net/2010/04/27...chs-email.html

I guess you see nothing wrong with bailing out the people that screw you.
  • #970
  • May 2, 2010 2:07pm May 2, 2010 2:07pm
Quoting Darkstar
Thanks smart ass, except you spelled word wrong.
Bad use of grammar in that sentence

I agree, why hasn't there been more fuss over the AAA rating!?
  • #971
  • May 2, 2010 2:18pm May 2, 2010 2:18pm
Quoting Porkpie
Bad use of grammar in that sentence

I agree, why hasn't there been more fuss over the AAA rating!?
Goldman was pushing S & P to depart from it's rating standards
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE63K4T120100423

"One email from a Standard & Poor's official to colleagues expressed frustration at having to push Goldman to improve its Abacus products, or "trades," as the email calls them.
"I can't tell you how upset I have been in reviewing these trades. And not only have these trades consumed tons of my time, but they have generated an enormous amount of stress since I'm the one that has to break the news that these trades are wrong ... which makes us look like idiots," it said.
The emails also showed that S&P, a unit of McGraw-Hill pushed back against Goldman's request for the agency to depart from its standards in rating an Abacus product."

"It was Goldman's marketing of a batch of subprime mortgage loans called Abacus 2007-AC1, that led the SEC to charge it and the 31-year-old Tourre with fraud.
The SEC said that Goldman did not tell investors that billionaire hedge fund manager John Paulson was betting against the product, which he also helped structure."
  • #972
  • May 2, 2010 2:21pm May 2, 2010 2:21pm
LMAO, I can think of few ways better for the majority - which are largely ignorant of the behavior of markets and of sound financial management - to channel their anger and frustrations harmlessly than to get angry at a bunch of rich bankers, and especially at a brash and annoying French guy!

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi..._Scapegoat.jpg

Yeah, tar and feather those banksters! Gensler is the devil! And so on!
  • #973
  • May 2, 2010 2:33pm May 2, 2010 2:33pm
Quoting Darkstar
....Can one of the pitchfork weilders spell out what goldman did wrong and why we should be mad about it?
Inserted Video
  • #974
  • May 2, 2010 2:33pm May 2, 2010 2:33pm
Quoting Scarlett
Google: Max Taibbi The Great American Bubble Machine.

The AIG "save" alone condemns them since they were basically paid twice dollar for dollar on their potential losses. It goes downhill from there....
Alright I just read the article. It puts forth a very compelling arguement but its rather weak on substance. The fact that all these government employees were once employees of goldman, while interesting, doesn't mean there is a conspiracy afoot.

What bothers me about the article (asside from the authors obvious bias, and that it was printed in rolling stone) is that in habitually relies on the assumption that nobody in the world (outside goldman) is capable of their own thought.

The fact is that every transaction goldman engages in requires a counterparty. Someone had to buy the MBS and sell the CDS and sell the oil futures contracts, and buy the IPO shares, BY CHOICE! for any of these supposedly engineered bubbles to inflate. The article makes it sound like all the counterparties are required to buy whatever goldman is selling, regardless how they feel about the product.

Anyone who has spent some time learning how financial markets operate knows that this is total horseshit. Everyone in the market is greedy and would eat goldmans lunch if given the chance. If any of goldmans competitors thought that the MBS market (for example) was a house of cards engineered by goldman, they could have crushed it in short order.

Obviously a few people out there thought it was (and made a fuckton of cash in the process) but for the most part everyone assumed housing couldn't go down (me included). Thats why all the big banks and investment houses (including goldman) took substantial losses on MBS.

The point I'm trying to make is that Goldman is no different from GE. Both companies make shit to sell. Some of it is immesely useful and some of it is crap, but at the end of the day, somone has to be willing to buy what they're selling for them to make a profit. In every case outlined in the article, if goldman couldn't find a willing buyer for their overpriced shit, it would have lost and lost big.

No matter how many foxes you plant in the government hen-house, without the individual investors across the economy buying what your selling, your going to be a loser.
  • #975
  • May 2, 2010 2:43pm May 2, 2010 2:43pm
Quoting Darkstar
Alright I just read the article. It puts forth a very compelling arguement but its rather weak on substance. The fact that all these government employees were once employees of goldman, while interesting, doesn't mean there is a conspiracy afoot.

What bothers me about the article (asside from the authors obvious bias, and that it was printed in rolling stone) is that in habitually relies on the assumption that nobody in the world (outside goldman) is capable of their own thought.

The fact is that every transaction goldman engages in requires...
The clients are paying them huge fees for their investment expertise and JUDGMENT, not for being a market maker.

Inserted Video
  • #976
  • May 2, 2010 2:47pm May 2, 2010 2:47pm
Quoting Scarlett
Who do you think "the big boys" are?
They are primarily the central banks who basically control the world economy and steer the money that determnes who has a job, who gets a mortgage, the cost of commodities and, yes, who wins presidential...
They are very well known people....what makes their identification pointless because nobody will believe me if i name their names !!

By the way they are not known to deal in the financial world....
  • #977
  • May 2, 2010 2:58pm May 2, 2010 2:58pm
Quoting wwwin
This is why Goldman is being sued by the SEC, there is a criminal investigation also underway, and the FSA is also investigating.


blah blah blah

I guess you see nothing wrong with bailing out the people that screw you.
No, I don't see anything wrong because at this point there is no proof that they screwed anyone. All we have are conveniently timed investigations and lawsuits that makes an accusation of inpropriety.

What has been offered to the public doesn't make the case for fraud. It doesn't even make the case for an ethical violation. None of the arguements I've seen can even accurately describe the details of the transaction (this thread included), never mind prove goldman acted illegally.

Where are the counterparties statements on the subject? Where is the MBS prospectus that contained fraudulent information? Why is Goldman being indicted for selling a product that S&P rated AAA? Why isn't S&P testifying before congress?

There are a great many things in this case that don't add up and/or are conveniently omitted from the public. Instead of casting stones at Goldman for things that may or may not be true, maybe we should be demanding answers from the authrities for all these unanswered questions.
  • #978
  • May 2, 2010 3:05pm May 2, 2010 3:05pm
Quoting wwwin
The clients are paying them huge fees for their investment expertise and JUDGMENT, not for being a market maker.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTZkh...eature=related
You DO underatand that goldman has 35,000 employees working in hundreds of different departments, engaging in different businesses, don't you?

The buyers of the Abacus MBS products were NOT using goldman as an advisor. Period. If you believe they were, please go back and re-read the used car salesman example.

Levin may be able to cobble shit together to make his point without getting called out, but that doesn't make it true.

PS: please stop with the videos. I watched the entire days testimony live so I know what was said. If you have a point, make it in your own words because the videos don't support anything.
  • #979
  • May 2, 2010 3:06pm May 2, 2010 3:06pm
Quoting Darkstar
Alright I just read the article. It puts forth a very compelling arguement but its rather weak on substance. The fact that all these government employees were once employees of goldman, while interesting, doesn't mean there is a conspiracy afoot.

What bothers me about the article (asside from the authors obvious bias, and that it was printed in rolling stone) is that in habitually relies on the assumption that nobody in the world (outside goldman) is capable of their own thought.

The fact is that every transaction goldman engages in requires...
Inserted Video
  • #980
  • May 2, 2010 3:20pm May 2, 2010 3:20pm
Quoting wwwin
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFvnL...eature=related
This proves what? That employees from goldman work in the government? I never disagreed with that fact. If anything, Geitner catagorically denied the premise that there is a conspiracy between the government employees and Goldman the firm.

This is why you should stop posting videos and explain things in your own words. I have no idea what your implying or why I just wasted 5 minutes of my life listening to Maxine Walters stupidity.
0 traders viewing now