John Paulson is living under a dark cloud.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

It is just a sense I have when I read about him or look at his photo.

The Paulson and Company Hedge Fund is the creature that helped design and construct which toxic assets (sub prime mortgages they knew would fail) to package and sell as supersecure, prime investments. Its president, John Paulson, made a billion in that program. Then, he bet against the assets, knowing that they would tank like the titanic, and he made another billion in the process.

How long will it be before an angry investor starts looking at Paulson? We've already had two investors commit suicide after their investments became worthless.

Please note. I am not, and will not advocate violence, but it strikes me that other than a woman scorned, the most angry and determined person who seeks retribution is usually a very rich person who suddenly becomes dirt poor.

The best result, for Paulson, investors, and the country at large, would be to find a way to try Paulson fairly, and if guilty, to put him in a secure, barred, and permanent location for a very, very long time.

[kentuck]

1. Goldman Sachs used Paulson in a similar way they use energy traders...

on Wall Street.

They do the bidding for Goldman. They drive up the prices on the futures markets for oil by manipulation, and having nothing to do with the market realities. And we pay $4.00 per gallon for gasoline. Who makes the money? Is it all legal?


.

[rucky]

2. Maybe he's turned state's evidence against Goldman?

Otherwise, I can't see how he's been spared from this indictment.

[anigbrowl]

5. Perhaps, but I don't think he'll be indicted or accused

It's not illegal to offer a shitty deal, in and of itself. It's predatory, and arguably highly unethical, but not illegal. Now, Goldman had legal responsibilities to report the terms of the deal to partners and potential investors, and they did not fulfil those responsibilities, so it's pretty clear their actions were illegal.

Did Paulson hope that that would happen, or even suggest that they operate in this way? Very possibly. But how to prove that for a charge of conspiracy? If there is no proof in writing or recordings of phone conversations, it's pretty much impossible. Ultimately, it was Goldman's legal responsibility - they created the financial instrument and it was incumbent on them to follow the rules.

I imagine the SEC would like to slap him, but it's better they should bring the case that's easy to prove than one that could fail for lack of evidence.

[AnArmyVeteran]

3. Two Words: STAR CHAMBER

[GreenPartyVoter]

4. Is he in Iceland now?

Ok, bad jokes aside I think this is a very interesting line of thought you have. Unfortunately, for the most part people continue to direct their ire at the government. (And in some cases they are right to do so.) But it sure would be nice to see the average person get mad at rich crooks in the private sector.