A few months ago, the Economist wrote an article defending Goldman Sachs in the light of growing controversy over the investment bank’s shady business dealings. The article, titled “Greedy until proven guilty”, had a subheading which reads: “There is a difference between self-interest and breaking the law.”
Well the SEC begs to differ. The “settlement” reached is actually a $550 million fine for fraudulent trading, whereby GS knowing fleeced clients by selling them investments that were designed to go under.
The Economist is wrong about a lot of things. Their support for the 2003 Iraq war and GW Bush election in 2000 are two obvious examples. But I wonder if people are starting to see the infamous Gordon Gekko’s “greed…is good” mantra for the socially destructive ideology that it is. Apparently the Economist doesn’t. It will be interesting to see whether the Economist admits the error, or critiques this decision as an example of the “dangers” of a regulated economy.