There was a thread yesterday about Jim Cramer and Gamestop (GME) stock.
Although I disagreed with just about everyone in that thread, it did cause me to do a little digging.
I found this lecture by Patrick Byrne. He explains how Goldman Sachs creates FAKE shares of stock that do not exist, and this is how their company is so profitable.
The problem is, it has caused massive leverage in the system, and could be one of the reasons for a stock market crash (the money printing by the Federal Reserve is the other reason).
Goldman Sachs and the other prime brokers are THE SOURCE of ALL fake shares in the marketplace (and basically, all the fuckery in the marketplace).
The part where he explains HOW they create the fake shares is about 10 minutes of the presentation, and starts at about 3:00 (then, he goes on to talk about how to solve the problem with blockchain):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=COQvMsbb-Cw
- Almost 100% of the profits of Goldman Sachs comes from their "Securities Lending" operation
- That operation is focused mostly on "hard to borrow shares"
- They identify stocks that people want to short, then they lend those shares out
- They do NOT have to actually own the stock when they lend it out
- This allows GS to lend out shares that do not exist
- Since they are also a prime broker, most of this lending is necessarily to hedge funds, which are the investors who are shorting stock that does not exist
Goldman Sachs and the other 5 prime brokers are the SOURCE of all the fake shares out there.
This is EXACTLY the same as the "money changers" from centuries ago, when they created more money certificates than were actually backed by gold on deposit. Same exact scam, just with stock instead of gold.
It is always good to know the names of the criminals to prosecute. Now, it's just a matter of finding the prosecutors and getting them into office.
Respond to the other commenters you fucking coward.
Hey fuck face, I have probably responded a hell of a lot more than you or anyone else.
If you will so kindly point in the direction of the topic you refer to ...
... I'll think about it.
Maybe address the arguments in your responses then?