<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Continuations - Latest Comments in What Goldman Sachs Should Do</title><link>http://continuations.disqus.com/</link><description></description><atom:link href="https://continuations.disqus.com/what_goldman_sachs_should_do/latest.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Wed, 14 Oct 2009 18:20:00 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: What Goldman Sachs Should Do</title><link>http://continuations.com/post/212757346#comment-20076510</link><description>&lt;p&gt;For once on a "conspiracy" topic I find myself in some partial agreement with you.  There has been too incestuous a relationship between Treasury, Fed and Goldman.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">albert</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 14 Oct 2009 18:20:00 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: What Goldman Sachs Should Do</title><link>http://continuations.com/post/212757346#comment-20076509</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Yes -- it would provide great leadership for an industry that badly needs it.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">albert</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 14 Oct 2009 18:20:00 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: What Goldman Sachs Should Do</title><link>http://continuations.com/post/212757346#comment-20057104</link><description>&lt;p&gt;As a former Investment Banker turned entrepreneur I want to chime in here in support of Albert's position. Goldman is the top of the pops when it comes to the titans of modern finance and could really set a great example. But rather than make one big donation or even set up an ongoing charitable organization, I think Goldman would do much better to charge its employees with individual responsibility, to donate a portion of their bonus to a charity of their choice and some number of community service hours along with it. Perhaps this is idealistic, but if Goldman really supported its employees in this endeavor it would make a real change. &lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">brycemaddock</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 14 Oct 2009 13:05:16 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: What Goldman Sachs Should Do</title><link>http://continuations.com/post/212757346#comment-20056155</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I believe the world is changing in a way where that as the sole purpose will not be enough to sustain organizations.  May be wildly wrong on that!&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">albert</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 14 Oct 2009 12:46:22 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: What Goldman Sachs Should Do</title><link>http://continuations.com/post/212757346#comment-20049733</link><description>&lt;p&gt;why should they do anything different, no one is going to stop them no matter what. most folks don't want to acknowledge who owns goldman sachs, who owns the federal reserve, how they are the same people, and how this finance cartel has basically hijacked the american government. i don't think america or goldman sachs will be able to get a real solution without acknowledging the fundamental reality of the situation. &lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">kidmercury</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 14 Oct 2009 12:00:13 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: What Goldman Sachs Should Do</title><link>http://continuations.com/post/212757346#comment-20043011</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Would that really change anything? I mean, I agree I am not sure they do, but I am not sure people do either (as Jeremy proves).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;They do  wonderful job at creating wealth form themselves, not at making the world a better place.  Maybe we should just acknowledge that? &lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Julien</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 14 Oct 2009 10:06:43 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: What Goldman Sachs Should Do</title><link>http://continuations.com/post/212757346#comment-20040243</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Not sure they do.  But I believe it would be good for the sustainability of the business.  They already attract some incredibly bright people -- this would further broaden their appeal.  Then again they may not care!&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">albert</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 14 Oct 2009 09:13:29 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: What Goldman Sachs Should Do</title><link>http://continuations.com/post/212757346#comment-20039794</link><description>&lt;p&gt;do they really care about looking decent?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;you make a great point about one time contributions not changing perceptions. im a big believer in corporate philanthropy and i think the fact that they are *considering* a one time donation (albeit, a large sum of money) is ridiculous.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;im not a conspiracy theorist but i think the fact that they make $100m/day in prop trading will overshadow any type of charitable contribution. &lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">jeremystein</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 14 Oct 2009 08:59:55 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>