"Some 58% of the loans were no-documentation or low-documentation. ... Even though the individual loans in GSAMP looked like financial toxic waste, 68% of the issue, or $336 million, was rated AAA by both agencies--as secure as U.S. Treasury bonds. ... Thus, a total of 93% was rated investment grade", Allan Sloan, in Fortune, 29 October.
Are the "national" rating agencies this incompetent? Or worse than incompetent? GSAMP? Goldman Sachs (GS) Alternative Mortgage Products, what else? GS is everywhere. It has friends everywhere. Can the U.S. afford the continued existence of GS?
Are the "national" rating agencies this incompetent? Or worse than incompetent? GSAMP? Goldman Sachs (GS) Alternative Mortgage Products, what else? GS is everywhere. It has friends everywhere. Can the U.S. afford the continued existence of GS?
No comments:
Post a Comment