MAN, DO I HAVE AN ABACUS FOR YOU

I can't believe it. It just doesn't seem possible. Goldman Sacks lost money on this toxic mortgage bundle scheme, this Abacus thing, they claim, and so did everyone else who ever even heard of it. You didn't have to actually invest in it, or bet against it, so the story goes, all you had to do is hear about it and, presto, you lost money. Am I glad I never heard of it before. Oops, I hope knowing about it now doesn't mean I'm going to loose any money. Hey, where's my wallet? Oh, alright, but this sounds a little suspicious to me. Goldman helps put this toxic brew together, which they apparently knew was going to be a looser, and then they invest in it themselves? It sounds like an Abbot and Costello routine where one plans a con and the other buys it by mistake. Oh, alright, they're more sophisticated then Bud and Lou, but it looks like they weren't a whole lot more sophisticated, if you believe Goldman's story. The question is, are they still guilty of perpetrating a con game even if they conned themselves in the process? YES! Being stupid is not an argument the courts will accept. Unless of course, it's this Supreme Court. Then all bets are off. Maybe that was Goldman Sack's plan all the time. Act stupid, play dumb, the court will eat it up. What I don't understand is this, if everybody lost money on this deal, who got the money? Oh I know, the guy that thought up the con in the first place got his share. Presumably he was smart enough not to buy into it too. But who got the rest of the money? Ya think it just disappeared? Even the money that was bet against it? Maybe sombody is sitting on a beach in Central America with a large suitcase next to his loungechair. This is an act that could make it on TV as a situation comedy if it were just a little more believable.