Word is that Al Sharpton is holding a hunger strike to protest the fact that the Senate won’t move on the Lorretta Lynch AG nomination. You can guess why Sharpton think things are held up. One of the real reasons why Ms. Lynch is under such scrutiny is her support of civil forfieture. The seizing of property by the police even if someone has not been convicted of a crime. Across the country police departments have used the tool to feather their nests. The practice is often called “policing for profit.” People lose homes and livelihoods even if they have done nothing wrong.
One such example comes from Frederick County Maryland. A small farmer who ran a cash market sometimes would deposit just less than $10,000 after a sale day in the bank in an effort to avoid the paperwork associated with depositing more that $10,000. This practice is called “structuring” and according to police it is a no no. So the police decided to seize the $63,000 in the account used for the farmer’s market. They did this even though the police said they knew their victim was innocent of wrongdoing.
Everyone on Wall Street knows that Hillary is there for them. Sure she’s going to talk a good lefty-populist game but everyone knows that it’s bull. It’s part of the game. Tell the “politically unsophisticated” whatever they want to hear. People will forget. They always do. Accountability? Shoot this is 2015, post bailout. Accountability is for suckers.
Having a hard time making your car payment? Oh I understand. I eat at Chipotle too. Late on rent? CEOs make too much money!
Just say whatever. The American people are too “politically unsophisticated” to realize they’re being played. Ready for Hillary!
Government Motors is a big black hole of dysfunction. People forget that prior to the 2008 Crash people referred to GM as a healthcare company which just happened to make cars. A pension crisis loomed like nobody had seen too.
Then, poof. World goes into a depression and the union workers get their healthcare and pensions taken care of. Funny how that worked.
GM should be dead and the world would be better for it. Its bailout (along with the big banks) is a disgusting chapter in American history. And as we see in the article attached the bailout continues.
“This ruling padlocks the courthouse doors. Hundreds of victims and their families will go to bed tonight forever deprived of justice. GM, bathing in billions, may now turn its back on the dead and injured, worry free.”
What’s so strange about the president’s chief advisor cuddling the “journalists” on Morning Joe.
Joe Scarborough – “Valerie come give me a hug…”
It’s like a family reunion. So cozy.
The problem with the notion that pension reform is “good for Wall Street,” of course, is that pension reform is bad for Wall Street. The biggest shareholders in the world are public employee pension funds. This began back in 1984, when the California state legislature placed a citizen’s initiative onto the ballot, Prop. 21, that “deleted constitutional restrictions and limitations on the purchase of corporate stock by public retirement systems.” Scarcely understood and narrowly passed, Prop. 21 turned California’s government pension funds into the biggest gamblers on Wall Street.
These sorts of loans are typically vehicles for crony capitalism. Think Solyndra. But in this case the market has already resolved the issue. The plant the taxpayer backed loan is allocated for has already been built. The project was originally financed within the private sector. Why is megacorporation Alcoa now getting a plum loan?
The answer it appears is political. (Isn’t it always?)
Last week we posted a story about the cozy relationship Hillary and Bill Clinton have with the CEO of Columbia’s largest private oil company and we asked this question;
…are the UAW, the AFL-CIO, and the USW going to support a candidate for president who has taken millions and millions of dollars from a company (and its CEO) which has a history of busting unions at the point of a rifle?
The article did well in terms of traffic but of particular interest to me was the tone of some of the comments from readers at the end of the article. Among some of our more liberal commentors I sensed just a bit of real unease with Ms. Clinton.
Let’s get one thing out of the way. Both Paul and and Cruz are libertarianish. Paul more libertarianish than Cruz. Neither however is really pushing a hard core liberty oriented agenda.
In the attached article Paul and Cruz aren’t the real focus anyway. Crony capitalism is.
The author tries to make the argument that crony capitalism is what capitalism actually is. There is no distinction between capitalism partnered with the state and capitalism in general. It’s the same phenomenon.
This is the argument that many big government people try to make all the time on this site, because it is what fits the statist worldview. It is what people have been taught all their lives. I was certainly taught this.
On one side are the “progressives,” owners of progress, good government, making the world better and more fair. On the other side there are the “capitalists” monsters of greed and exploitation. Angels and demons.
This worldview is as simple as it is simple minded.
If one wants to be an internist one must be certified through the ABIM. However according to the attached report the ABIM is basically a Ponzi scheme in a lab coat, that Enron-like irregularities run through the organization’s books.
But Nick, these are good billionaires. They are fighting “climate change.” They are “green.” They are progressives.
Yeah, well they are also pushing regulations which will benefit them financially you can rest assured of that. You can also rest assured that they consider anyone who believes that government should be as small as humanly possible is – I hate to use this term – the enemy. To them those who won’t get on the green bandwagon are actually wronging the world. Those who do not buy into their worldview, some would call it a religion, are actually committing a crime (a sin?). I am not kidding.
Regular readers of ACC are aware of the current battle surrounding the reauthorization of the Export-Import Bank of the United States. We believe, along with many others, that Ex-Im is great example of crony capitalism which should be euthanized by a Congress which professes to be for free markets and small government. Whether this will actually happen is an open question however as the bank serves some of the heaviest hitters in corporate America, Boeing chief among them.
But for some, including the author of the attached article, the question is why even have this battle at all? Is cronyism really so bad? So what’s a little a public/partnership action? Who are these nuts anyway who want a separation of government and business. Free markets and economic freedom stink anyway.
We’ve documented why Ex-Im is bad from more than just a moral perspective. Taxpayer backed loans to one corporation often disadvantage other businesses. Free markets allow for opportunity and growth. Crony capitalism strangles growth and enriches established firms which get fat, inefficient, and tend to be slower to respond to the customer.
Still some still don’t get it. Jeff Spross at The Week clearly doesn’t.
The implications are not good that is for sure. As Bruce Fein says, we live in a Bailout State.