Why is no-one calling this Enron instead of goldman sachs?

The Massive Ponzi Scheme at Goldman Sachs

Doug Heller

In what might as well be called a perfect ending to the year - and maybe a reasonable summation of the decade - McClatchy is reporting on newly revealed documents from Goldman Sachs that point to a massive ponzi scheme by the Wall Street titan. (Credit to Truthdig for putting it on our radar.) 
By now it's clear that Goldman played the Fed and Treasury like a fiddle to reap billions of dollars through the AIG bailout, but these new documents illustrate how Wall Street's bonus-machine also ripped off its own investors.  As Greg Gordon at McClatchy reports:

In some of these transactions, investors not only bought shaky securities backed by residential mortgages, but also took on the role of insurers by agreeing to pay Goldman and others massive sums if risky home loans nose-dived in value — as Goldman was effectively betting they would...

and

The documents obtained by McClatchy also reveal that:
--Goldman's Caymans deals were riddled with potential conflicts of interest, which Goldman disclosed deep in prospectuses that typically ran 200 pages or more. Goldman created the companies that oversaw the deals, selected many of the securities to be peddled, including mortgages it had securitized, and in several instances placed huge bets against similar loans.
--Despite Goldman's assertion that its top executives didn't decide to exit the risky mortgage securities market until December 2006, the documents indicate that Goldman secretly bet on a sharp housing downturn much earlier than that.
--Goldman pegged at least 11 of its Caymans deals in 2006 and 2007 on swaps tied in some cases to the performance of a bundle of securities that it neither owned nor sold, but used as markers to coax investors into covering its bets on a housing downturn...
[Financial Services consultant Gary] Kopff said, Goldman appears to have created "mini-AIGs in the Caymans," arranging for investors to post the money that would cover the bets up front.
Kopff charged that Goldman inserted the credit-default swaps into CDO deals "like a Trojan Horse — secret bets that the same types of bonds that they were selling to their clients would in fact fail."

It's an elaborate game of taking securities overseas and creating shells that look like legitimate, if complex, investment vehicles that Goldman knew couldn't sustain themselves and was privately betting to fail.  Except for that last part - the hedging against the products it was selling to investors - Goldman's scheme brings back memories of Enron's "partnerships."  But Goldman's twist, essentially betting on their investors to lose money, is what makes these revelations a scary capstone to the 2000s. 
A decade that began with the collosal failure of Enron's indescribably complex, greed-driven and self-destructive schemes that cost taxapyers and investors billions ended with revelations of Goldman's indescribably complex, greed-driven and hugely profitable schemes that cost taxpayers and investors billions. 
So is that it?  Is Wall Street's big lesson of the The decade of the Oughts that you ought a bet against the people you're telling to trust you?  You can't win just by suckering people to follow you down your perverted path; you also have to avoid being suckered by your own scam.