KeepHip.com

As for the first link: I thought the problem was that Goldman at the same time bet for the bubble to collapse as it was selling products that would only be a good deal for the buyers if the bubble was continuing to grow. That is, Goldman was betting against their own customers whom they advised. If that's not a moral hazard, what is?

I don't think it's appropriate to put on your application to the Upright Citizens Brigade.

But like the article says, is that really front page news?

"Biggest bank betrays their own customers" sounds like a perfectly valid news story. I think there are more important items like bank regulation, but for that to make it to the front pages it would require journalists that don't think their audiences are stupid (and journalists that actually understand these matters; I'm not saying there aren't, I'm just saying that the issues are difficult and therefore it's hard to have lots of competent output concerning these matters).

One thing that blew me away concerning the wider field of bank regulation was that the credit rating companies are paid by the people who are being rated, not those that are buying products based on the rating. If something screams "stupid", then that.