.
Vulture capitalists are about centralized control over the masses, who "need it, if they know what's good for them." They are not about decentralization of liberty or government. Spoil-driven, vulture capitalism does thin herds, but not necessarily herds that need to be thinned, nor herds that are thereby made more productive or efficient. Nor are vulture profits necessarily re-invested in job-producing functions, as opposed to chariot-enhancing functions. Nor is vulture capitalism necessarily inconsistent with conquistador-imposed feudalism. Primarily, vulture capitalism has to do with who shall have dominion, who shall crack the whip, and who shall luxuriate because his ruthlessness "earns" him the right. It cares nothing for borders for a land of free enterprise for the commoners, to avail them dignity and markets in which to buy and sell their goods, wares, and labor. Such efficiency as vulture capitalism does obtain is often at the expense of a culture of opportunity, freedom, and dignity for the commoners. Vulture capitalism is not primarily driven by desire to preserve a free and representative republic, but by desire among cronies to accumulate dominion. In bygone ages, it was called spoil-driven conquest, and its currency was swords, blood, enslavement, gold, and allowing caesars to strut and pretend to be gods. In kinder and gentler times, its currency has become lobby-owned politicians, debt-imposed servitude, fiat money laundered to crony-kickback artists, and all the short term pleasures that money can buy from third world labor. Vulture capitalists do NOT want to preserve borders for Western Civilization. They want a worldwide society that is open to being reduced to the servitude of Club Vulture Crony. They don't "earn" their money; they take and make it. Before being ravished, so I can respect myself in the morning, I want to hear more from Romney than passionate promises to defend my borders and dignity. I want to hear how he plans to reduce the ethos of vulture capitalism to serve the freedom and dignity of America and Americans. I don't want to hear how America should be subservient to international vulture capitalists.
.
Vulture capitalists are about centralized control over the masses, who "need it, if they know what's good for them." They are not about decentralization of liberty or government. Spoil-driven, vulture capitalism does thin herds, but not necessarily herds that need to be thinned, nor herds that are thereby made more productive or efficient. Nor are vulture profits necessarily re-invested in job-producing functions, as opposed to chariot-enhancing functions. Nor is vulture capitalism necessarily inconsistent with conquistador-imposed feudalism. Primarily, vulture capitalism has to do with who shall have dominion, who shall crack the whip, and who shall luxuriate because his ruthlessness "earns" him the right. It cares nothing for borders for a land of free enterprise for the commoners, to avail them dignity and markets in which to buy and sell their goods, wares, and labor. Such efficiency as vulture capitalism does obtain is often at the expense of a culture of opportunity, freedom, and dignity for the commoners. Vulture capitalism is not primarily driven by desire to preserve a free and representative republic, but by desire among cronies to accumulate dominion. In bygone ages, it was called spoil-driven conquest, and its currency was swords, blood, enslavement, gold, and allowing caesars to strut and pretend to be gods. In kinder and gentler times, its currency has become lobby-owned politicians, debt-imposed servitude, fiat money laundered to crony-kickback artists, and all the short term pleasures that money can buy from third world labor. Vulture capitalists do NOT want to preserve borders for Western Civilization. They want a worldwide society that is open to being reduced to the servitude of Club Vulture Crony. They don't "earn" their money; they take and make it. Before being ravished, so I can respect myself in the morning, I want to hear more from Romney than passionate promises to defend my borders and dignity. I want to hear how he plans to reduce the ethos of vulture capitalism to serve the freedom and dignity of America and Americans. I don't want to hear how America should be subservient to international vulture capitalists.
.
6 comments:
A rose by any other name. A libertarian who conserves American values and liberty is a conserver of America, i.e., a Conservative American, who can be treated as a thinking adult, who can: recognize myths for their myth values, as opposed to scientific values; encourage that condoms be readily availed to persons already unable to support their existing children; understand that, within limits, it's not inappropriate to use tax incentives to favor the basic unit for propagating civilization (the traditional family); apprehend that environmental concerns should be addressed mainly by incentives to reduce populations; apprehend that societies that over-produce should not be availed relief valves calculated to cause them to undermine neighboring cultures; apprehend that despotism should not be facilitated cover, under guise of religion; address genetic drag humanely, by providing only such safety nets as would not entice irresponsible subcultures of bums; leave concerns about local fairness to local foundations and churches. Radical capitalists, on the other hand, mean to turn governance into a for-sale commodity, to be monopolized by centralizing cronies. Technology is centrally quickening the human culture. This quickening must be addressed. The choice seems to be either (1) to eliminate middle classes in oder to foment differentiation into Super-crony and Sub-worker species, or (2) to apply general and decentralized incentives to conserve and connect a society of enlightened, liberated citizens (a City on a Hill).
I take it most Republicans and Free Traders recognize it's not good for venture capitalists to seek government-aided advantages to cause businesses that employ American workers to fail, so they can be bought for cents on the dollar and then be repackaged to foreigners, or invested in with foreign-aid Fed-fiat-money, kicked back to Congressional whores by lobbyists. I take it they recognize that to be a serious problem! So, is it a national problem, which should be addressed nationally? Given the alarming fall of America, the importance of the issue, and Romney's experience, I want him to expound. Since we're short in candidates who would be Conservers-of-America, I hope the implication is correct: that Romney would be good for what ails America. Romney does seem energetic, smart, decent, and generally loyal to American interests. Most Mormons are! I count his religion as a plus. I simply want to hold his feet to the fire, to ensure he apprehends the interest of Americans in the preservation of liberty ... for ALL Americans who faithfully wish to participate in liberty.
I don't wish to enslave myself to any single dimensional, linear dogma, like: Ugh, capitalism-good, free-trade-good, cheap-labor-good, socialism-bad, laborers-too-stupid-to-know-what-best-for-them, ugh. A log in the eyes of many free-market, faux purists perhaps consists in that they haven't thought so much about what freedom means as they believe they have. Until apprehending what mainly drives philosophy of oneself and one being addressed, it's hard to know one's own mind, much less avoid talking past another. Only by testing can I hope to apprehend the soul of Mitt's political philosophy. I already know Obama's: Apart from "Whitey must pay," he has none! and shows little capacity to acquire one. So he's nutty-putty for manipulators. I want to confirm Mitt's an improvement, not a greased slide to control to be re-centered in international cronies. Mitt knows how to centralize business control to squeeze profit from ailing businesses. I want to ensure his solution to contraction of liberty among Americans is not expansion of control among unbounded, disloyal, non-American corporatists.
No viable candidate would run against the soul of America. Even a sociopath would have sense enough to try to divine the soul, if only to lie to it. The problem is, the soul --- the assimilated theosophy and philosohy of America --- is confused, adrift, divided, and dissolving. The Obummer gang have filled airheads throughout the land with fluff and nonsense. Delusions about the destiny of a land of dopes are preserved by delaying dates with the debtholder. Good leadership will return as good common sense returns to America. But that requires hard knocks and the good sense to learn from them. Every one of the Republican candidates would make for better leadership, but only insofar as he is brought to sense that the electorate merits being led. The electorate will not merit being led until it senses how most of society's institutions have come to be owned and operated by apologists of corruption. Until then, it's every wolf to his wolfpack. Depending on wakeful vigilance of the electorate, Romney may become the best or the worst of potential leaders. He's a data measuring kind of guy. If the measure of America shows us to have become a nation of sheep, we will be farmed as sheep. If the measure shows we have awakened, our leaders will respect us and will seek our respect in return. Presently, the main force of the establishment still values economy over country, i.e., international free trade among cronies over freedom for ordinary Americans. Lovers of freedom-among-cronies hardly care whether they own everyone else socialistically, by owning our politicians, or capitalistically, by owning our corporations. They're two sides of the same coin of cronyism. Unless the electorate wakes and re-takes the ship of state, the sale of Americans into servitude under international cronies is America's destiny. Free trade my ass!
RedStater: "Cannibals" is an apt metaphor for some, not all, crony ventures. What we have is humans organizing to take advantage of other humans. Vultures and wolves don't usually do that. I didn't suggest that all or even most of Bain's pickings were viable, had they not been picked. I do suggest many viable American jobs are made not viable because of the way regulations, taxes, and international trade policies are structured. Whether politicians are just clueless or actively in on the scheme hardly matters. The fact is, America is being hollowed out. Insofar as Romney performed a service by euthanizing death-bed businesses and reviving others, great. However, too much of America is being hollowed out to chalk it all up to good vulturing. Your response strongly suggests you don't approve of bad-vulturing, i.e., undermining of American businesses that don't volunteer to be consumed. Yet, many are undermined, and the prevailing mindset is too often to label whatever the result as "for the best." I'm interested in how many American businesses are made not viable because governmental policies favor allowing international corporatists to force Americans to compete with cheap, helpless labor abroad. I recognize the response of pure capitalists: Well, give it time, and the pure competition of nature will produce species of hardier, better workers. I don't subscribe to that. I think, given time, unregulated, disloyal cronies will produce subclasses and castes for permanent farming. Except by importing slaves, could the North have competed with the South in producing cotton and rearing entitlement-minded masters? Would good-mindedness in the North eventually have convinced cheap-labor exploiters in the South to change their ways? This seems the gamble we're making as we trade with and enrich Chicoms and Jihadis. It's a gamble that needs either to be passed or very closely watched. It's not a gamble I would just take the players' word on. If Romney's a good vulture and not a cannibal bent on putting ordinary Americans in lockstep harness with cheap foreign laborers, let him explain it, and what he would do to stop it.
Vultures don't naturally slaughter buffalo, devour their tongues, and discard their carcasses. Profit is a matter of perspective. It takes an artificial construct, protected in law, to deem that kind of pillage "profitable." It's hardly profitable to the buffalo. In the case of vulture capitalism (better called cannibal capitalism), unnatural vultures aren't loyal to the American economy, but to the internationally centralizing agglomeration of vultures. Their faux loyalty to capitalism ranks higher than loyalty to country. They don't see buffalo as being in need of freedom, but in need of economically coordinated slaughter. Their idea of freedom of expression is to harvest the tongues of buffalo. (For the buffalo's own good, of course.) It's a truism that competition and death cannot be banished by law. However, a land of freedom CAN guide competition by means of taxes and regulations, in ways more friendly to all citizens and less favoring to packs of cannibals. Why should America avail or entice cannibal packs that hunt to rule the labor of humans for sport? Natural vulture capitalism is one thing. Cannibal capitalism is another. Especially when America lays her borders open to ravages of international plunderers who care little for the philosophy of free enterprise, apart from knowing how to yelp slogans as after the fact justifications. I want to hear Romney disown cannibal capitalism, recognize that it's at America's throat, and resolve to guide Americans in ways for taming the dire threat of crony, cannibal capitalism against the last, best hope for human freedom and dignity on Earth.
Suppose a company man could be trained to be a soulless, consult-bot for a pushy hedger, like Soros. Perhaps even put him in a control room and make him think it's just a game, so he doesn't know his recommendations are being applied to real people. Make it like Fantasy Hedge Capitalism. With practice, he would soon recognize situations where profit would be maximized by accelerating churn value for extracting quick profits, in order to churn more quick profits. There would sometimes be cold incentives to cannibalize and cash in a going concern, regardless of whether it may be able in itself to be made viable in some moderate term. When better opportunities appear that require quick cash, then quick profits will be taken. When the program is called by a computer-bot, the profits just go into a game account. When the bot-mind is run by a part-human, the part-human will own a real account. Eventual accumulation of profits from cannibalizing jobs may go to the luxury of the human investor, or may be re-invested to create more jobs. The point is: venture capital is not necessarily benign, and it is fully amenable of being deployed by cannibals. Indeed, hedgers can become pushers. Instead of betting on whether someone will jump from a window, a hedger may bet and then push. When you get good and big enough, you can "invest" by buying political candidates to rewrite rules and destabliize entire currencies. Didn't Soros say it was time to bring America down a few pegs? As America is pushed down a few pegs, who and what is pushed up? Something is rotting America. Why NOT take a look at how trade, corporations, and investments by foreign seed money are run?
Post a Comment