[dirtboy]

You continue to operate under the delusion that you can create money for yourself by directing that third parties not pay their debts.

No, I am simply pointing out that GS failed to ensure that AIG was capable of making good on their CDS commitments. Instead, it took a federal bailout to cover AIG. That is a cold, hard fact that you are unwilling to face in your worship of the jackasses who brought us the financial meltdown in the first place.

[JasonC]

GS did not bring us the financial meltdown in the first place. Your pretending they did is purely a matter of your class hatred of bankers, which you expect everyone else to share as a matter of course, without argument. Goldman didn't need to do anything different in its trading with AIG. It made $13 billion of that trading, risking nothing unless it had been wrong about the future value of low quality mortgage backed securities, which they weren't. If AIG had failed messy then Goldman would have made marginally less off those trades, after AIG was dismembered and the pieces sold to satisfy it along with other creditors. This would not have involved Goldman losing anything, merely making marginally less off being right about the mortgage bonds it bet against. There was and is nothing reckless in the entire piece, on their part, and nothing they had to do differently.