5 ms·

For better or worse, a lot of people admire and respect success. Goldman Sachs is very successful, so unless it does something really bad, it will be respected

by _cs2017_ 7y ago

For better or worse, a lot of people admire and respect success. Goldman Sachs is very successful, so unless it does something really bad, it will be respected by many. I don't think you should refer to people as terrible just because they don't admire the same qualities that you do.

pmiller2 7y ago
You do realize you’re talking about the same people who nearly took down the entire US banking system 10 years ago, right? The only thing they’ve been “successful” at recently is getting the government to bail them out of the mess they created.
- _cs2017_ 7y ago
  I didn't say they made the world a better place. They weren't trying to. They had one clear goal: make a lot of money for themselves. And they have, for many years, achieved this goal splendidly, through hard work, financial and business skills, reputation, innovation, connections, lies, market manipulation, government bailouts, etc. This is considered success, and earns respect, in both Western and Eastern cultures. There are people who hate the way Goldman makes money, but they are not the majority even in the general population. For example, take a look at this: https://www.businessinsider.com/goldman-sachs-reputation-score-has-improved-since-the-financial-crisis-2018-9 https://www.businessinsider.com/goldman-sachs-reputation-sco... or http://www.vault.com/company-rankings/banking/vault-banking-50/ http://www.vault.com/company-rankings/banking/vault-banking-...
  - closetohome 7y ago
    Country over party. Country over profit. Only the unethical respect the unethical.
  - pmiller2 7y ago
    Where I come from, that’s considered sociopathic (and, yes, I know it applies to all corporations, not just GS or investment banks).
    - _cs2017_ 7y ago
      Do you mind if I ask you which country you're referring to? Does it mean people in your country would hate for their kids to get a job at Goldman Sachs, organizations would hesitate to take Goldman Sachs donations, etc?
xvector 7y ago
> I don't think you should refer to people as terrible just because they don't admire the same qualities that you do. By your logic, you can admire all sorts of terrible people, like those who have committed murder, genocide, etc. It is fine to judge people on a moral level if they are committing blatantly unethical acts. Being "successful" does not exclude one from being terrible.
- _cs2017_ 7y ago
  The post I was responding to didn't call GS terrible; they called people who admire GS terrible. That's a lot more people than GS, and that is a very questionable claim. To your point, I think maybe 99.9% of people agree that murderers are terrible. The number of people who agree that Goldman Sachs is terrible is nowhere close to that. In fact, I suspect close to 25-50% actually admire them. I think it's wrong to call a quarter of the population "terrible" just because they don't agree with your definition of morality.

pmiller2 7y ago

You do realize you’re talking about the same people who nearly took down the entire US banking system 10 years ago, right? The only thing they’ve been “successful” at recently is getting the government to bail them out of the mess they created.

_cs2017_ 7y ago
I didn't say they made the world a better place. They weren't trying to. They had one clear goal: make a lot of money for themselves. And they have, for many years, achieved this goal splendidly, through hard work, financial and business skills, reputation, innovation, connections, lies, market manipulation, government bailouts, etc. This is considered success, and earns respect, in both Western and Eastern cultures. There are people who hate the way Goldman makes money, but they are not the majority even in the general population. For example, take a look at this: https://www.businessinsider.com/goldman-sachs-reputation-score-has-improved-since-the-financial-crisis-2018-9 https://www.businessinsider.com/goldman-sachs-reputation-sco... or http://www.vault.com/company-rankings/banking/vault-banking-50/ http://www.vault.com/company-rankings/banking/vault-banking-...
- closetohome 7y ago
  Country over party. Country over profit. Only the unethical respect the unethical.
- pmiller2 7y ago
  Where I come from, that’s considered sociopathic (and, yes, I know it applies to all corporations, not just GS or investment banks).
  - _cs2017_ 7y ago
    Do you mind if I ask you which country you're referring to? Does it mean people in your country would hate for their kids to get a job at Goldman Sachs, organizations would hesitate to take Goldman Sachs donations, etc?

xvector 7y ago

> I don't think you should refer to people as terrible just because they don't admire the same qualities that you do. By your logic, you can admire all sorts of terrible people, like those who have committed murder, genocide, etc. It is fine to judge people on a moral level if they are committing blatantly unethical acts. Being "successful" does not exclude one from being terrible.

_cs2017_ 7y ago
The post I was responding to didn't call GS terrible; they called people who admire GS terrible. That's a lot more people than GS, and that is a very questionable claim. To your point, I think maybe 99.9% of people agree that murderers are terrible. The number of people who agree that Goldman Sachs is terrible is nowhere close to that. In fact, I suspect close to 25-50% actually admire them. I think it's wrong to call a quarter of the population "terrible" just because they don't agree with your definition of morality.