Hi there

I have 3 discussion.I need someone to answer them.

NO1 . Strauss/Santoro: Wall Street Values, Ch. 7, Goldman Abacus Settlement press release (I have attached)

“Moral Moral” hazard is the label Santoro/Strauss give to settlements which do not include an admission of guilt. The Goldman Abacus settlement and other similar settlements did not include an admission of firm guilt. Do you think that the lack of such admission really matters, or was the level of fines and revisions to business practices substantial enough that justice was served?

No2.Reading – DOJ Goldman settlement (in files), also this link for very brief summary:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/goldman-reaches-5-billion-settlement-over-mortgage-backed-securities-1452808185 (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.

In 2016 the DOJ and Goldman reached an overall settlement related to Goldman’s business practices prior to the financial crisis. Again, the overall settlement leaves out admissions of guilt – The fines are substantial and cover many abuses. Are you satisfied that justice has been served and that these types of settlements provide sufficient deterrent to avoid future abuses.

No 3. Gary Cohn, Former Goldman President (until recently), now a member of the Trump Administration has been associated with advocating for undoing the repeal of Glass Steagal.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/gary-cohn-backs-breaking-up-big-banks-1491491219 (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.

Some find it difficult to accept that the former President of Goldman, who is leading the administration’s economic team is taking this point of view. Skeptics think that there has to be something in his point of view that is good for his former partners. Discuss your reaction to Cohn’s support the idea of undoing the repeal of Glass-Steagal.

Notice.After you post the answers I will give you small student’s opinion and please replay to them.