Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: riversides who wrote (110797)	4/19/2010 10:13:48 PM
From: The Vet	2 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 116555

As GS actually "manufactured" the financial products they sold why aren't they responsible for loss and damages caused by those products? If they were manufacturing motor vehicles, household goods or food that caused harm to the purchaser, there are clear consumer protection rules and remedies available under the law against the manufacturer of faulty or defective goods that cause injury or loss to the buyer even if the producer is not aware of that potential when he makes the initial sale. Penalties are, quite rightly, increased if the manufacturer of the faulty product continues to market the product after discovering a problem especially if they fail to warn the buyers or attempt to hide the defect. So why should financial "products" be treated any differently?