Goldman Sachs’ (GS) board considered buying AIG in late June, 2008, so GS could use AIG’s premium float for capital (rather than becoming a bank holding company and using deposits to fund trades or as collateral for leveraged trading). Strangely, GS’s board didn’t realize that another part of GS was questioning the “mark to market” valuations that AIG was making on its swaps. Also, AIG had revised its November and December 2007 losses from $1 billion to $5 billion. GS and AIG had the same public accountant (Price), which GS was using to get AIG to down-value the value of its assets. On that week in September, 2008, when Lehman went under, JP Morgan and GS were working to put together a loan of $50 billion to cover AIG’s deepening hole At the same time, the two banks were demanding new collateral payments from AIG, pushing the insurance giant deeper into its hole. The Fed and AIG wondered if the fees and interest rate being set by the two banks for themselves and other contributing banks wasn’t essentially stealing the company.
As it turned out, AIG received funding from the Federal Reserve in exchange for the government taking warrants on a 79.9% ownership of the company. Goldman had bought $20 billion of insurance from AIG and received as much as $13 billion from AIG when the Fed funded AIG with $90 billion. The counterparties were paid in full, rather than the sixty cents on the dollar that AIG negotiators had been pressing. Even though GS was hedged because it had purchased credit default swaps in case AIG were to default, one has to ask whether Blankfein at GS used Paulson to have the government pay GS through AIG. Blankfein claims that his bank would not have gone under had AIG imploded, but surely GS relies on there being a financial market. Also, when the Fed essentially took over AIG, Paulson wanted to appoint a new CEO. Paulson was of course an ex-CEO of GS. Paulson had one of his advisors, also a GS alum, look at candidates. The aid favored Ed Liddy, who was on GS’s board. GS would be running AIG. Hence, the insurance giant would not run interferance on the $13 billion going to GS.
Besides these conflicts of interest, Goldman trades securities for big firms and pension funds. It also acts as adviser to many of the companies whose securities it trades. In other words, the problem is in its core business. So a person could be excused for wincing at Lloyd Blankfein’s statement that his bank is performing not only a social function in providing capital to firms so they can expand, but is “doing God’s work” as well. John D. Rockefeller used the same expression in regard to his Standard Oil monopoly that offered its remaining competitors the choice to be bought up or drowned. According to Rockefeller, Standard Oil was Noah’s Ark, saving the oil refining industry from destructive competition. So what if the uncooperative were put under? They deserved it. Besides, the industry would be saved. In this regard, the monopolist viewed himself as a Christ figure. Are the golden boys the incarnation of this figure? It goes without saying, but I will anyway, that Blankfein has no misgivings in paying (and being paid) record bonuses in 2009. The presumptuousness of those bankers aside, Jefferson’s dictum that a national bank would be more dangerous than a standing army to democracy seems apt. We, the American citizens, have an amazing ability not to see things, and then to tacitly enable that which is in actuality hardly a savior.
