Wall Street Journal
OPINION
REVIEW & OUTLOOK
Whole Foods Capitalism
Believe it or not, a CEO steps up to defend free markets.
By the Editorial Board
December 1, 2020
Bernie Sanders may have made socialism mainstream, but John Mackey isn’t buying. Recently the Whole Foods CEO characterized socialism as “trickle up poverty”—while defending capitalism as the “greatest thing humanity’s ever done.”
Mr. Mackey offered his remarks while promoting his latest book, “Conscious Leadership.” The title points to the strategies he pursued in building Whole Foods. But the subtitle captures his larger message: “Elevating Humanity Through Business.” His argument is that businesses make money by creating value for others—producing goods or services that people want and can afford, creating livelihoods for workers, providing returns for its investors and helping communities.
In founding Whole Foods, he admits he wanted to make money. But he emphasizes that what really drove him was a passion to put fresh and healthy food within reach of all Americans. He says too many progressives and universities never see this larger story because they can’t get past the idea of profits, which they believe are dirty. Too many business leaders fail to push back.
“We’ve told a bad narrative,” he said, “and we’ve let the enemies of business and the enemies of capitalism put out a narrative about us that’s wrong.” It builds on his previous remarks that “from an ethical standpoint, we need to change the narrative of capitalism, to show that it’s about creating shared value, not for the few but for everyone.”
Mr. Mackey is right to worry that socialism may win the argument even as in practice it always proves a disaster. Instead of shrinking from political criticism, other CEOs could learn from his example.
Appeared in the December 2, 2020, print edition.
Showing posts with label Capitalism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Capitalism. Show all posts
Wednesday, December 2, 2020
Saturday, November 28, 2020
I wrote this for some morons for Jeebus.
"Why do some Christians think atheism and communism are the same thing?"
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
I'm a hardcore atheist and a capitalist.
Atheism says nothing about economic systems.
Atheism means just one thing: 100% certain magic god fairies are a ridiculous childish fantasy.
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
I'm a hardcore atheist and a capitalist.
Atheism says nothing about economic systems.
Atheism means just one thing: 100% certain magic god fairies are a ridiculous childish fantasy.
Wednesday, November 18, 2020
I'm adding this to my list of favorite quotes. It's about socialism and capitalism.
"Socialism is a failed economic system. Capitalism is a far superior system and is self-regulating. In fact, the less you regulate it, the better it works."
-- mustagme
-- mustagme
Wednesday, October 21, 2020
Tuesday, October 13, 2020
Capitalism is a good thing.
Wall Street Journal
OPINION
INSIDE VIEW
To Serve the Public, Seek Profits
Producers capture only 4% of the value they create, and all of society enjoys the rest.
By Andy Kessler
October 11, 2020
“It’s way past time we put an end to the era of shareholder capitalism,” Joe Biden declared in Dunmore, Pa., in July. Companies “have responsibility to their workers, their community, to their country.” This echoes last year’s virtue semaphoring by 181 CEOs, when the Business Roundtable redefined corporate purpose away from shareholders and toward “stakeholder capitalism”: a collectivist creed of workers, customers, communities, climate and country. Why does it feel like we’re about to get our pockets picked? The message is clear: Profits are greedy, so spread the wealth around.
It’s been 50 years since the New York Times published Milton Friedman’s article “The Social Responsibility of Business Is to Increase Its Profits.” Most people only read the title, so they miss Friedman’s statement that businesses are obliged to avoid deception and fraud. A company must “engage in activities designed to increase its profits,” he writes, “so long as it stays within the rules of the game.”
Almost as penance for publishing the original, the Times recently printed an eight-page supplement nitpicking Friedman’s article. It’s as if in 1826 the Times of London had ripped to shreds Adam Smith’s “The Wealth of Nations” and said, “No one has actually seen the invisible hand. Hidden incentives? Balderdash! Let’s go back to stakeholder mercantilism.” The sun would have set on the Industrial Revolution.
Capitalism and competition create wealth; other systems slop existing wealth around. Stakeholder capitalism is a passing fad with a blatantly obvious end result. Ding ding!—there were four redundant phrases in that sentence. “Stakeholder capitalism” is redundant because companies already benefit stakeholders or die quickly. “Customers are always beautifully, wonderfully dissatisfied,” Amazon’s Jeff Bezos told Congress in July. “A constant desire to delight customers drives us to constantly invent on their behalf.” And any company that wants to be around beyond next quarter already takes care of its community within the Friedmanesque rules of the game. Underpaying employees means competitors eventually lure them away.
No, profits aren’t greedy. They are a critical price signal—a measure of how well a company is deploying capital and creating value for society. The stock market sums all expected future profits, funding companies with great profit prospects and starving unworthy ones. But besides owning shares in those companies, what’s in it for us?
A lot. In a 2005 paper, Yale economist William Nordhaus concludes, “Only a minuscule fraction of the social returns from technological advances over the 1948-2001 period was captured by producers, indicating that most of the benefits of technological change are passed on to consumers.” This is what Friedman was saying implicitly when he called for corporations to maximize profits: It would maximize value to society at large.
Mr. Nordhaus quantified that value in a 2006 paper for the National Bureau of Economic Research: “Innovators were able to capture about 4 percent of the total social surplus from innovation.” The social surplus Mr. Nordhaus identifies is the improvements capitalism brings to common living standards. That is societal wealth. Yes, entrepreneurs and innovators generate wealth for themselves, but not as much as they do for society. If that’s not socially responsible, I don’t know what is. Mr. Nordhaus should have won his Nobel for this, but it was his work on “integrating climate change into long-run macroeconomic analysis” that caught the committee’s eye in 2018. Sigh.
The flip side is that for every dollar government removes from profitable uses through taxes or regulation, it theoretically takes 25 times that amount from compounding social wealth. Each lost dollar reduces investment and potential productivity, and instead goes to whoever public policies favor. Same for environmental, social and governance investing, where distortions diminish returns, just as federal car mileage standards and union overpay destroyed Detroit.
In terms of social value, nonprofits by definition announce their ineffectiveness compared with profit-seeking companies. Millennials especially seem to want a “social purpose” from their employer and their jobs. But the Nordhaus effect means they already have it, often in spades.
There’s no point in trying to “reimagine capitalism.” Capitalism works by creating wealth. Equality comes best through the creation of ever-cheaper goods and services, not handouts. The supercomputer in your pocket, same-day delivery, heart stents, even perfect Costa Rican bananas in your ShopRite were all generated by reinvesting profits. Other “isms” typically fail because they eventually fritter away the wealth that capitalism had furiously created.
Here’s my message to a potential Biden administration: If you want to spend my hard-earned money on social programs, be honest about it. Say “we need to help the poor temporarily with tax dollars so they can get better jobs and stand on their own.” Fine, I’m in. But the more you hide behind word salads and social-justice jibber-jabber, the less I’m interested.
OPINION
INSIDE VIEW
To Serve the Public, Seek Profits
Producers capture only 4% of the value they create, and all of society enjoys the rest.
By Andy Kessler
October 11, 2020
“It’s way past time we put an end to the era of shareholder capitalism,” Joe Biden declared in Dunmore, Pa., in July. Companies “have responsibility to their workers, their community, to their country.” This echoes last year’s virtue semaphoring by 181 CEOs, when the Business Roundtable redefined corporate purpose away from shareholders and toward “stakeholder capitalism”: a collectivist creed of workers, customers, communities, climate and country. Why does it feel like we’re about to get our pockets picked? The message is clear: Profits are greedy, so spread the wealth around.
It’s been 50 years since the New York Times published Milton Friedman’s article “The Social Responsibility of Business Is to Increase Its Profits.” Most people only read the title, so they miss Friedman’s statement that businesses are obliged to avoid deception and fraud. A company must “engage in activities designed to increase its profits,” he writes, “so long as it stays within the rules of the game.”
Almost as penance for publishing the original, the Times recently printed an eight-page supplement nitpicking Friedman’s article. It’s as if in 1826 the Times of London had ripped to shreds Adam Smith’s “The Wealth of Nations” and said, “No one has actually seen the invisible hand. Hidden incentives? Balderdash! Let’s go back to stakeholder mercantilism.” The sun would have set on the Industrial Revolution.
Capitalism and competition create wealth; other systems slop existing wealth around. Stakeholder capitalism is a passing fad with a blatantly obvious end result. Ding ding!—there were four redundant phrases in that sentence. “Stakeholder capitalism” is redundant because companies already benefit stakeholders or die quickly. “Customers are always beautifully, wonderfully dissatisfied,” Amazon’s Jeff Bezos told Congress in July. “A constant desire to delight customers drives us to constantly invent on their behalf.” And any company that wants to be around beyond next quarter already takes care of its community within the Friedmanesque rules of the game. Underpaying employees means competitors eventually lure them away.
No, profits aren’t greedy. They are a critical price signal—a measure of how well a company is deploying capital and creating value for society. The stock market sums all expected future profits, funding companies with great profit prospects and starving unworthy ones. But besides owning shares in those companies, what’s in it for us?
A lot. In a 2005 paper, Yale economist William Nordhaus concludes, “Only a minuscule fraction of the social returns from technological advances over the 1948-2001 period was captured by producers, indicating that most of the benefits of technological change are passed on to consumers.” This is what Friedman was saying implicitly when he called for corporations to maximize profits: It would maximize value to society at large.
Mr. Nordhaus quantified that value in a 2006 paper for the National Bureau of Economic Research: “Innovators were able to capture about 4 percent of the total social surplus from innovation.” The social surplus Mr. Nordhaus identifies is the improvements capitalism brings to common living standards. That is societal wealth. Yes, entrepreneurs and innovators generate wealth for themselves, but not as much as they do for society. If that’s not socially responsible, I don’t know what is. Mr. Nordhaus should have won his Nobel for this, but it was his work on “integrating climate change into long-run macroeconomic analysis” that caught the committee’s eye in 2018. Sigh.
The flip side is that for every dollar government removes from profitable uses through taxes or regulation, it theoretically takes 25 times that amount from compounding social wealth. Each lost dollar reduces investment and potential productivity, and instead goes to whoever public policies favor. Same for environmental, social and governance investing, where distortions diminish returns, just as federal car mileage standards and union overpay destroyed Detroit.
In terms of social value, nonprofits by definition announce their ineffectiveness compared with profit-seeking companies. Millennials especially seem to want a “social purpose” from their employer and their jobs. But the Nordhaus effect means they already have it, often in spades.
There’s no point in trying to “reimagine capitalism.” Capitalism works by creating wealth. Equality comes best through the creation of ever-cheaper goods and services, not handouts. The supercomputer in your pocket, same-day delivery, heart stents, even perfect Costa Rican bananas in your ShopRite were all generated by reinvesting profits. Other “isms” typically fail because they eventually fritter away the wealth that capitalism had furiously created.
Here’s my message to a potential Biden administration: If you want to spend my hard-earned money on social programs, be honest about it. Say “we need to help the poor temporarily with tax dollars so they can get better jobs and stand on their own.” Fine, I’m in. But the more you hide behind word salads and social-justice jibber-jabber, the less I’m interested.
Tuesday, October 6, 2020
This is bullshit. Capitalism works best when the government gets the fuck out of the way. Politicians are fucking assholes, especially the fucking Democrats.
New York Times
BREAKING NEWS |
Amazon, Apple, Facebook and Google abused their monopoly power, House lawmakers said in a report that called for sweeping changes to antitrust laws. |
Tuesday, October 6, 2020 4:40 PM EST |
In a 449-page report that was presented by the House Judiciary Committee’s Democratic leadership, lawmakers said the four companies had turned from “scrappy” start-ups into “the kinds of monopolies we last saw in the era of oil barons and railroad tycoons.” The lawmakers said the companies had abused their dominant positions, setting and often dictating prices and rules for commerce, search, advertising, social networking and publishing. |
Sunday, August 30, 2020
This is interesting. Even the Washington Post thinks Trump could win. "Biden's race with President Trump is tightening as the general election contest begins in earnest."
The Washington Post
Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden will resume in-person campaigning across the country in coming days amid the still-raging coronavirus pandemic, an answer to allies imploring him to meet voters where they are and a sign that his race with President Trump is tightening as the general election contest begins in earnest.
•••••••••••••••••••••••••
But many Democrats have long predicted the race would tighten in the fall as more voters are engaged, and the Republican convention did not dispel them of that notion.
“I think all of the polls we’ve seen are written on the water’s edge in sand,” said Peter Hart, a longtime Democratic pollster. He said the race probably will not harden until after the first debate, scheduled for Sept. 29. “Then we’ll know if people feel comfortable with Joe Biden and are willing to say, ‘It’s time to change,’ or do they end up saying, ‘As much as I hate Donald Trump, I’m uncertain about Joe Biden.’ ”
•••••••••••••••••••••••••
The polls are wrong because most of the people who are voting for Trump won't admit. The same thing happened in 2016. The polls were wrong.
I predict Trump is going to win. It's fair to say that's not a good thing because Trump is trying to destroy the environment. Also, Trump is an uneducated moron.
The problem is Biden will destroy the American economy and he will make America a socialist country. Socialism doesn't work.
Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden will resume in-person campaigning across the country in coming days amid the still-raging coronavirus pandemic, an answer to allies imploring him to meet voters where they are and a sign that his race with President Trump is tightening as the general election contest begins in earnest.
•••••••••••••••••••••••••
But many Democrats have long predicted the race would tighten in the fall as more voters are engaged, and the Republican convention did not dispel them of that notion.
“I think all of the polls we’ve seen are written on the water’s edge in sand,” said Peter Hart, a longtime Democratic pollster. He said the race probably will not harden until after the first debate, scheduled for Sept. 29. “Then we’ll know if people feel comfortable with Joe Biden and are willing to say, ‘It’s time to change,’ or do they end up saying, ‘As much as I hate Donald Trump, I’m uncertain about Joe Biden.’ ”
•••••••••••••••••••••••••
The polls are wrong because most of the people who are voting for Trump won't admit. The same thing happened in 2016. The polls were wrong.
I predict Trump is going to win. It's fair to say that's not a good thing because Trump is trying to destroy the environment. Also, Trump is an uneducated moron.
The problem is Biden will destroy the American economy and he will make America a socialist country. Socialism doesn't work.
Tuesday, August 18, 2020
The Democrats are blaming Trump for everything that isn't working. What a surprise!
Virtual DNC opens with speakers blaming Trump for woes in the U.S.
Speakers from Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) to Ohio’s former Republican governor John Kasich praised Joe Biden and pleaded with voters to set aside ideological differences to defeat President Trump.
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••An interesting fact: Bernie Sanders is a socialist asshole. Capitalism makes him cry.
I answered a dumb question.
Is it possible that the United States could become a communist nation like China and all Christians will be killed?
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Communism doesn't work. I prefer capitalism.
But I like the idea of wiping out all the Christian scum.
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Communism doesn't work. I prefer capitalism.
But I like the idea of wiping out all the Christian scum.
Sunday, May 10, 2020
"Capitalism is an abstract machine most beautiful to behold in the wonder of its workings."
The Atheist Conservative
Capitalism works well because it is in tune with our nature. Adam Smith called it “the natural order of liberty”. Everyone selfishly desires to provide for his needs. To pay for what he wants from others – services and goods – he has to provide something that others will pay him for. Millions do it, and the result is prosperity. Capitalism is an abstract machine most beautiful to behold in the wonder of its workings. When individuals have the incentive to achieve, acquire, and enjoy something for themselves, they’ll go to great lengths to afford it. They’ll compete with each other to provide what others want, toil to make it the better product, and set the price of it lower. The best is made available at the least cost. Everyone is both a taker and a giver, and everyone benefits. True, not everyone’s effort always succeeds, but nothing stops anyone from trying again.
Capitalism works well because it is in tune with our nature. Adam Smith called it “the natural order of liberty”. Everyone selfishly desires to provide for his needs. To pay for what he wants from others – services and goods – he has to provide something that others will pay him for. Millions do it, and the result is prosperity. Capitalism is an abstract machine most beautiful to behold in the wonder of its workings. When individuals have the incentive to achieve, acquire, and enjoy something for themselves, they’ll go to great lengths to afford it. They’ll compete with each other to provide what others want, toil to make it the better product, and set the price of it lower. The best is made available at the least cost. Everyone is both a taker and a giver, and everyone benefits. True, not everyone’s effort always succeeds, but nothing stops anyone from trying again.
Tuesday, March 24, 2020
Fucktard Senator Elizabeth Warren (Democrat) and Fucktard Senator Marco Rubio (Republican) are stupid fucking assholes.
Wall Street Journal
OPINION
COMMENTARY
Worst Coronavirus Idea: A Ban on Share Buybacks
They’re good for ordinary investors and for economic growth.
By Donald L. Luskin and Chris Hynes
March 22, 2020
Democrats insist that any government aid to businesses laid low by the Covid-19 crisis be conditioned on compliance with a laundry list of progressive demands. Sen. Elizabeth Warren would require, among other things, that to receive aid firms must institute a $15 minimum wage, set aside board seats for workers, and obtain shareholder approval for any political expenditures. Of all her proposals, perhaps the most damaging economically in the long run is her insistence that companies receiving aid be permanently barred from executing share buybacks, even after the aid is repaid.
This is an opportunistic mutation of the left’s longstanding claim that buybacks are a uniquely evil form of predatory capitalism. In reality, buybacks create benefits for shareholders large and small, and are a valuable source of cash for many of the people progressives claim to care about, especially retirees.
For some reason progressives don’t object when companies pay money out to shareholders through dividends. Buybacks are superior because they give shareholders a choice. Shareholders must receive a dividend when it’s declared and pay taxes on it. In a share buyback, investors who want cash can sell some shares and pay taxes. If they don’t want cash, they can choose to hold on to their shares.
This is exactly why Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway has never paid dividends but does buy back its stock. Progressives love to quote Mr. Buffett when he argues for higher tax rates. But they never mention his view on buybacks.
Some opponents of buybacks—including Sen. Marco Rubio, hardly a progressive—argue that they waste company cash that ought to be reinvested in plant and equipment. But not every company is in growth mode, and even those that are might have more cash than growth ideas. Within Mr. Buffett’s portfolio of companies, if See’s Candies is showing a huge profit, do we really need to insist that it build more stores? Maybe there are already enough.
Paying money out to shareholders frees them to reinvest in new companies with big growth ideas. This is the best way to promote growth for the economy as a whole. At a time like this, when so many sacrifices are being made for the sake of the health of the overall community, surely we don’t want to force companies to hoard their capital, any more than we want people to hoard toilet paper.
Democrats are trying to use the firms most in distress now to set a precedent for depriving ordinary investors—and the economy as a whole—of the benefits of share buybacks. We can have a debate about buybacks, and the $15 minimum wage, and everything else on the progressive list of demands. But let’s have debate, not blackmail, and let’s have it after the crisis has passed.
Mr. Luskin is chief investment officer of Trend Macrolytics LLC. Mr. Hynes is CEO of Hynes Capital.
OPINION
COMMENTARY
Worst Coronavirus Idea: A Ban on Share Buybacks
They’re good for ordinary investors and for economic growth.
By Donald L. Luskin and Chris Hynes
March 22, 2020
Democrats insist that any government aid to businesses laid low by the Covid-19 crisis be conditioned on compliance with a laundry list of progressive demands. Sen. Elizabeth Warren would require, among other things, that to receive aid firms must institute a $15 minimum wage, set aside board seats for workers, and obtain shareholder approval for any political expenditures. Of all her proposals, perhaps the most damaging economically in the long run is her insistence that companies receiving aid be permanently barred from executing share buybacks, even after the aid is repaid.
This is an opportunistic mutation of the left’s longstanding claim that buybacks are a uniquely evil form of predatory capitalism. In reality, buybacks create benefits for shareholders large and small, and are a valuable source of cash for many of the people progressives claim to care about, especially retirees.
For some reason progressives don’t object when companies pay money out to shareholders through dividends. Buybacks are superior because they give shareholders a choice. Shareholders must receive a dividend when it’s declared and pay taxes on it. In a share buyback, investors who want cash can sell some shares and pay taxes. If they don’t want cash, they can choose to hold on to their shares.
This is exactly why Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway has never paid dividends but does buy back its stock. Progressives love to quote Mr. Buffett when he argues for higher tax rates. But they never mention his view on buybacks.
Some opponents of buybacks—including Sen. Marco Rubio, hardly a progressive—argue that they waste company cash that ought to be reinvested in plant and equipment. But not every company is in growth mode, and even those that are might have more cash than growth ideas. Within Mr. Buffett’s portfolio of companies, if See’s Candies is showing a huge profit, do we really need to insist that it build more stores? Maybe there are already enough.
Paying money out to shareholders frees them to reinvest in new companies with big growth ideas. This is the best way to promote growth for the economy as a whole. At a time like this, when so many sacrifices are being made for the sake of the health of the overall community, surely we don’t want to force companies to hoard their capital, any more than we want people to hoard toilet paper.
Democrats are trying to use the firms most in distress now to set a precedent for depriving ordinary investors—and the economy as a whole—of the benefits of share buybacks. We can have a debate about buybacks, and the $15 minimum wage, and everything else on the progressive list of demands. But let’s have debate, not blackmail, and let’s have it after the crisis has passed.
Mr. Luskin is chief investment officer of Trend Macrolytics LLC. Mr. Hynes is CEO of Hynes Capital.
Monday, March 16, 2020
Senator Elizabeth Warren is a socialist asshole, she's a liar, and she's a moron.
The Washington Post has a list of candidates that Biden might choose to be the Vice President. I wrote this comment:
•••••••••••••••••••••••••
Kamala Harris then Biden wins.
Amy Klobuchar then Biden wins.
Elizabeth Warren then Trump wins. I have extreme contempt for Trump but I would vote for him to avoid a socialist like Warren. She says she's a capitalist but she's a liar. Real capitalists don't attack corporations just because they are brilliant and successful. Fortunately, Biden is not going to select a candidate who was in 3rd place in her own state.
•••••••••••••••••••••••••
Kamala Harris then Biden wins.
Amy Klobuchar then Biden wins.
Elizabeth Warren then Trump wins. I have extreme contempt for Trump but I would vote for him to avoid a socialist like Warren. She says she's a capitalist but she's a liar. Real capitalists don't attack corporations just because they are brilliant and successful. Fortunately, Biden is not going to select a candidate who was in 3rd place in her own state.
Sunday, March 15, 2020
The Washington post has an article that has a list of possible candidates for Vice President. This is what I wrote about the most moronic choice, liberal fucktard Warren.
"Sen. Elizabeth Warren (Massachusetts)"
A good way to lose the election. I would vote for Trump to avoid having a socialist Vice President. She says she's a capitalist but she wants to destroy capitalism.
Capitalism works best when the government gets out of the way.
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
This is what I didn't write for the morons at the Washington Post:
During the debates, Warren was constantly attacking Mike Bloomberg about things nobody cares about. She's a stupid fucking asshole and she's a socialist retard.
A good way to lose the election. I would vote for Trump to avoid having a socialist Vice President. She says she's a capitalist but she wants to destroy capitalism.
Capitalism works best when the government gets out of the way.
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
This is what I didn't write for the morons at the Washington Post:
During the debates, Warren was constantly attacking Mike Bloomberg about things nobody cares about. She's a stupid fucking asshole and she's a socialist retard.
Friday, March 13, 2020
Tuesday, February 25, 2020
South Carolina debate Tuesday February 25, 2020.
I'm watching the debate now. Warren is a fucking asshole. She can't stop harassing Mike Bloomberg.
Mike is doing a great job explaining why a socialist moron (Sanders) would lose the November election which means we would be stuck with Trump for 4 more years.
Mike talked about what he did when he was Mayor of New York City for 12 years. He did a fantastic job.
Warren, who is way behind in the polls, can't stop yapping. Sanders, the socialist asshole, can't stop screaming.
Bloomberg told Warren to shove it.
Pete Buttigieg talked about his husband.
Warren never puts up her hand for permission to talk, she just starts yapping as loud as possible. What a stupid fucking asshole.
Bloomberg is the only adult in this debate.
It should be obvious to anyone who isn't a socialist fucktard, the only candidate who is qualified for the president job is Mike Bloomberg.
Monday, February 24, 2020
Imagine the worst-case scenario then bet on it.
In 2016 nobody imagined Trump would win the Republican nomination for president. When he won the nomination despite the odds, nobody imagined this celebrity clown would defeat Ms. Clinton.
What the fuck happened?
For the Republican nomination, there were many candidates. Trump didn't have to get most of the votes. He just had to get more votes than anyone else. And that's what happened because there were so many other candidates.
How did Trump defeat Clinton?
She made mistakes, especially when she insulted the people who wanted to vote for Trump. She called them "deplorables".
What about 2020?
Now we have the same problem. There are too many candidates for the Democratic nomination. This will make it possible for a socialist moron to win the nomination without having to win most of the votes. That stupid fucking asshole is Bernie Sanders. The people who have been voting for him are very young and very fucking stupid.
The worst-case scenario: The candidate for president could be Trump against Sanders (moron against moron).
If that happened then the voters would have to choose which moron to vote for.
I have extreme contempt for Trump. He is the stupidest president this country ever had. But if Sanders wins the Democratic nomination, then I'm voting for Trump.
8 fucking years of Trump.
March 3, 2020, is a big fucking deal because numerous states will be voting that day. Mike Bloomberg has to win most of those states or else this country is in big trouble. Are the Democrats as stupid as I think they are? We will see what happens.
••••••••••••••••••••••••••
This is from a transcript of the Nevada debate:
JACKSON: Mayor Bloomberg, you own a large company. Would you support what Senator Sanders is proposing?
BLOOMBERG: Absolutely not. I can't think of a way that would make it easier for Donald Trump to get re-elected than listening to this conversation.
(APPLAUSE)
It's ridiculous. We're not going to throw out capitalism. We tried. Other countries tried that. It was called communism, and it just didn't work.
What the fuck happened?
For the Republican nomination, there were many candidates. Trump didn't have to get most of the votes. He just had to get more votes than anyone else. And that's what happened because there were so many other candidates.
How did Trump defeat Clinton?
She made mistakes, especially when she insulted the people who wanted to vote for Trump. She called them "deplorables".
What about 2020?
Now we have the same problem. There are too many candidates for the Democratic nomination. This will make it possible for a socialist moron to win the nomination without having to win most of the votes. That stupid fucking asshole is Bernie Sanders. The people who have been voting for him are very young and very fucking stupid.
The worst-case scenario: The candidate for president could be Trump against Sanders (moron against moron).
If that happened then the voters would have to choose which moron to vote for.
I have extreme contempt for Trump. He is the stupidest president this country ever had. But if Sanders wins the Democratic nomination, then I'm voting for Trump.
8 fucking years of Trump.
March 3, 2020, is a big fucking deal because numerous states will be voting that day. Mike Bloomberg has to win most of those states or else this country is in big trouble. Are the Democrats as stupid as I think they are? We will see what happens.
••••••••••••••••••••••••••
This is from a transcript of the Nevada debate:
JACKSON: Mayor Bloomberg, you own a large company. Would you support what Senator Sanders is proposing?
BLOOMBERG: Absolutely not. I can't think of a way that would make it easier for Donald Trump to get re-elected than listening to this conversation.
(APPLAUSE)
It's ridiculous. We're not going to throw out capitalism. We tried. Other countries tried that. It was called communism, and it just didn't work.
Friday, February 21, 2020
This is free and it never ends. Bloomberg Global News - 893 watching now - Started streaming on November 6, 2018
Watch this video on YouTube. Playback on other websites has been disabled by the video owner.
Monday, December 9, 2019
I don't agree with the Mormon (Latter-day Saints) theology but they do everything else right. They have my respect.
OPINION
COMMENTARY
CROSS COUNTRY
Wall Street Journal - Why Utah Has Become America’s Economic Star
From taxes to education to the business climate, the Beehive State has its house in order.
By Stephen Moore
December 6, 2019
Salt Lake City
Which of the 50 states has the best economic outlook? For each of the past 12 years, Arthur Laffer, Jonathan Williams and I have answered that question in “Rich States, Poor States,” an index of economic competitiveness published by the American Legislative Exchange Council. Every year the top performer has been Utah.
In our 2019 report, Idaho, Arizona and Florida nearly took the top spot, but fell short again. For the other 49 states, outcompeting Utah is starting to look about as futile as beating Rafael Nadal on the red clay at the French Open.
How does Utah manage to remain so economically competitive? As a destination spot, the Beehive State has natural advantages, including gorgeous red mountains and national parks that make it a scenic and recreational wonderland. But the real secret to Utah’s success is disarmingly simple: The state’s politicians tend to do everything right to encourage business development and job creation.
Utah has a low, flat-rate income and corporate tax of below 5%. There’s no death tax, so wealthy people don’t have to flee to Florida after they retire. It’s is a right-to-work state, meaning workers can’t be compelled to join unions. Even though the regulatory touch is light, Utah has some of the best health outcomes in the nation.
The minimum wage in Salt Lake City and Provo is $7.25 an hour, not the $10 to $15 mandated in many blue states and cities. This has allowed employers to respond to labor-market forces. Because jobs are so plentiful, wages are rising briskly. Job growth has ranked second in the nation for the past decade, and the state’s population growth ranks in the top three. The Salt Lake metro area has become one of America’s fastest-growing tech sectors and is now nicknamed the Silicon Slopes.
Utah’s K-12 schools serve families well despite per pupil state spending that is the lowest in the nation and $4,000 below the national average. Fourth-graders in the state ranked in the top 10 in both math and reading on the 2019 National Assessment of Educational Progress. So much for money buying better school results.
The state government in Salt Lake also has Utah’s fiscal house in order. Utah was among the first states in the nation to start erasing public pension liabilities by gradually shifting to a defined-contribution pension system for government workers. Property taxes fund actual municipal services—schools, police protection, hospitals and roads. In other states—most notably, California, Illinois and West Virginia—hundreds of billions of dollars in pension liabilities are draining tax revenues.
“We are unapologetically pro-business and pro-jobs in Utah,” Gov. Gary Herbert told me. “And we have a long tradition of being frugal on how we spend tax dollars.” Utah spends a third less per capita on state and local government services like housing and education than do New York, Connecticut and Rhode Island. But while their elected representatives are frugal, Utah residents don’t feel deprived. According to WalletHub.com Utah is the second-happiest state in the country. Only Hawaiians are happier.
Part of the reason for Utah’s consistently strong economic growth is a still-predominant Mormon culture that encourages out-of-fashion virtues such as thrift, delayed gratification and stable families. The state has the nation’s lowest median age. There is no dreary Malthusian concern about “overpopulation” in young and vital Utah. Stand outside a church on a Sunday morning, as I did recently, and you will see families with large numbers of kids spilling out of minivans. In the graying Northeast, that’s a rare sight.
Many analysts have attributed Utah’s prosperity to favorable demographics. But good economic policy leads to favorable demographics. Roughly half of Utah’s population explosion has been due to net migration of almost 80,000 newcomers (mostly young) over the past decade from other states. If Utah had New York’s or California’s tax rates and anti-business attitudes, the flow of people would likely run the other way.
Progressives dismiss red states like Utah as places that reward the superrich with low taxes at the expense of everyone else. But perhaps the most confounding thing about Utah is that despite (or because of) its antiprogressive policies, it has the least income inequality in the nation, according to the latest U.S. Census Bureau data.
If the progressive soak-the-rich policies of presidential candidates Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders are really the path to prosperity, why does conservative Utah—which spurns all their ideas—keep coming out No. 1?
Mr. Moore is a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation and a co-author of “Rich States, Poor States.”
COMMENTARY
CROSS COUNTRY
Wall Street Journal - Why Utah Has Become America’s Economic Star
From taxes to education to the business climate, the Beehive State has its house in order.
By Stephen Moore
December 6, 2019
Salt Lake City
Which of the 50 states has the best economic outlook? For each of the past 12 years, Arthur Laffer, Jonathan Williams and I have answered that question in “Rich States, Poor States,” an index of economic competitiveness published by the American Legislative Exchange Council. Every year the top performer has been Utah.
In our 2019 report, Idaho, Arizona and Florida nearly took the top spot, but fell short again. For the other 49 states, outcompeting Utah is starting to look about as futile as beating Rafael Nadal on the red clay at the French Open.
How does Utah manage to remain so economically competitive? As a destination spot, the Beehive State has natural advantages, including gorgeous red mountains and national parks that make it a scenic and recreational wonderland. But the real secret to Utah’s success is disarmingly simple: The state’s politicians tend to do everything right to encourage business development and job creation.
Utah has a low, flat-rate income and corporate tax of below 5%. There’s no death tax, so wealthy people don’t have to flee to Florida after they retire. It’s is a right-to-work state, meaning workers can’t be compelled to join unions. Even though the regulatory touch is light, Utah has some of the best health outcomes in the nation.
The minimum wage in Salt Lake City and Provo is $7.25 an hour, not the $10 to $15 mandated in many blue states and cities. This has allowed employers to respond to labor-market forces. Because jobs are so plentiful, wages are rising briskly. Job growth has ranked second in the nation for the past decade, and the state’s population growth ranks in the top three. The Salt Lake metro area has become one of America’s fastest-growing tech sectors and is now nicknamed the Silicon Slopes.
Utah’s K-12 schools serve families well despite per pupil state spending that is the lowest in the nation and $4,000 below the national average. Fourth-graders in the state ranked in the top 10 in both math and reading on the 2019 National Assessment of Educational Progress. So much for money buying better school results.
The state government in Salt Lake also has Utah’s fiscal house in order. Utah was among the first states in the nation to start erasing public pension liabilities by gradually shifting to a defined-contribution pension system for government workers. Property taxes fund actual municipal services—schools, police protection, hospitals and roads. In other states—most notably, California, Illinois and West Virginia—hundreds of billions of dollars in pension liabilities are draining tax revenues.
“We are unapologetically pro-business and pro-jobs in Utah,” Gov. Gary Herbert told me. “And we have a long tradition of being frugal on how we spend tax dollars.” Utah spends a third less per capita on state and local government services like housing and education than do New York, Connecticut and Rhode Island. But while their elected representatives are frugal, Utah residents don’t feel deprived. According to WalletHub.com Utah is the second-happiest state in the country. Only Hawaiians are happier.
Part of the reason for Utah’s consistently strong economic growth is a still-predominant Mormon culture that encourages out-of-fashion virtues such as thrift, delayed gratification and stable families. The state has the nation’s lowest median age. There is no dreary Malthusian concern about “overpopulation” in young and vital Utah. Stand outside a church on a Sunday morning, as I did recently, and you will see families with large numbers of kids spilling out of minivans. In the graying Northeast, that’s a rare sight.
Many analysts have attributed Utah’s prosperity to favorable demographics. But good economic policy leads to favorable demographics. Roughly half of Utah’s population explosion has been due to net migration of almost 80,000 newcomers (mostly young) over the past decade from other states. If Utah had New York’s or California’s tax rates and anti-business attitudes, the flow of people would likely run the other way.
Progressives dismiss red states like Utah as places that reward the superrich with low taxes at the expense of everyone else. But perhaps the most confounding thing about Utah is that despite (or because of) its antiprogressive policies, it has the least income inequality in the nation, according to the latest U.S. Census Bureau data.
If the progressive soak-the-rich policies of presidential candidates Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders are really the path to prosperity, why does conservative Utah—which spurns all their ideas—keep coming out No. 1?
Mr. Moore is a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation and a co-author of “Rich States, Poor States.”
Thursday, December 5, 2019
I wrote this comment about Mike Bloomberg for the Republican fucktards at the Wall Street Journal.
Mike Bloomberg will be the best president this country ever had.
He is for the best things about both political parties. For the Republicans, he is for free trade and he's very pro-business. For the Democrats, he will do something to fix the human-caused global warming problem without destroying the economy.
He is for the best things about both political parties. For the Republicans, he is for free trade and he's very pro-business. For the Democrats, he will do something to fix the human-caused global warming problem without destroying the economy.
Thursday, September 19, 2019
In America politics we have people who call themselves "liberals" which means "don't understand how capitalism works."
At the New York Times, a liberal moron wrote an article to explain why millions of people couldn't get a job because President Obama didn't waste enough taxpayer money to create jobs.
These fucking liberals don't understand anything. The best job creator is not the government. Jobs are created by large corporations and small businesses. When Trump became president, despite his extreme stupidity, he knew what he had to do to help businesses create jobs. All he had to do was get the government out of the fucking way. He did this by throwing out unnecessary regulations on businesses.
This is what I wrote and what someone else wrote at the New York Times to help liberal morons understand:
What I wrote:
"Trump got rid of unnecessary regulations. What he did was a good idea. These days anyone who wants to work can get a job. Capitalism works best when the government gets out of the way."
What someone else wrote:
"They will never give Trump an ounce of credit and will focus only on environmental laws. In fact, Trump's loosening the regulatory yoke from the necks of small businesses was a godsend."
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
For numerous reasons, America has to get rid of President Fucktard Trump. Unfortunately, the Democrats are so fucking stupid they're going to lose the 2020 election.
These fucking liberals don't understand anything. The best job creator is not the government. Jobs are created by large corporations and small businesses. When Trump became president, despite his extreme stupidity, he knew what he had to do to help businesses create jobs. All he had to do was get the government out of the fucking way. He did this by throwing out unnecessary regulations on businesses.
This is what I wrote and what someone else wrote at the New York Times to help liberal morons understand:
What I wrote:
"Trump got rid of unnecessary regulations. What he did was a good idea. These days anyone who wants to work can get a job. Capitalism works best when the government gets out of the way."
What someone else wrote:
"They will never give Trump an ounce of credit and will focus only on environmental laws. In fact, Trump's loosening the regulatory yoke from the necks of small businesses was a godsend."
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
For numerous reasons, America has to get rid of President Fucktard Trump. Unfortunately, the Democrats are so fucking stupid they're going to lose the 2020 election.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)