A number of my social media friends have been posting items lately about “government failure”; and, of course, re-broadcasting that hate-piece businessman Steve Wynn recently unleashed about how the scary black man who’s President is scaring away new business because of his economic policies.
The Wynn thing is easily dismissed by watching his rant, which is widely available. Wynn simply hates Obama. His assertion that businesses are sitting on their cash now, because of economic conditions created by the Obama administration, is ludicrous. Business operates the way business operates, regardless of whose economic policies (or lack thereof) hold sway. If a particular business is “sitting on its cash”, it’s because it’s advantageous to do that right now. If it was advantageous to the particular business to “create jobs” with its cash, that’s exactly what it would be doing.
Another favorite making the rounds is an op/ed piece from Joe Soucheray, a Twin Cities radio guy with a big following, who recently ranted about the situation between Miller Brewing and the State of Minnesota. If you follow the news, you know Miller was told to get all its products off store shelves in the land of a few thousand lakes, because the company didn’t pay the annual licensing fee necessary to “do business” in Minnesota. (The fee is what Soucheray should have railed about on his “Garage Logic” program.) Long story short, Miller overpaid the fee, the state has no mechanism to deal with overpayments and refunds (which is idiotic), so the licenses lapsed. Soucheray ranted about how because of government stupidity and inefficiency like this, we may as well all throw in the towel, because we “work” for the government.
Really?
Perhaps it’s escaped Soucheray’s notice, or perhaps he has “people” who deal with large corporations for him, but anyone who’s over 21 has had countless dealings with the bureaucracy of huge private corporations, with stultifyingly ignorant front-line employees who make our lives just as miserable as the employees of any government at any level in America.
Phone companies: when’s the last time you had a GOOD experience dealing with an issue involving AT+T, Verizon, yadda yadda yadda? Cable companies: ditto. They seldom show up as agreed, and if you have a tech issue, regardless of your level of sophistication, you’re going to be asked if the receiver is plugged in and if the power is on, and countless other inane questions, because THAT’S WHAT’S IN THE MANUAL. Same can be said of most any electronics manufacturer. God forbid you should have a problem with one of their products and need to call their national service number.
Ever had a good experience dealing with a health insurance company? Didn’t think so.
I have a GE refrigerator. We bought it new, and within a few days, the ice-maker FAILED. The local merchant we bought it from referred us to GE, which referred us to a “licensed repair facility”, which told me to go ahead and order a replacement ice-maker from GE and he’d come install it and reimburse me. I ordered the ice-maker, and they sent me the tray that fits under the ice-maker to collect the ice cubes. Can you imagine the kind of nightmare this (one would think) relatively simple problem became, because I had to deal with the twits at GE time and again about this?
Ever tried to deal with an auto manufacturer to try and solve a (one would think) relatively simple, but annoying problem, with a just-purchased vehicle that cost more than you earned in your first five years in the workforce? You’d think they’d bend over backward to make you happy, but NOOOOOO……
I could go on and on, and I’m sure you have plenty of stories of your own about dealing with idiots in NON-GOVERNMENT private organizations. So spare me the belly-aching about government, which is capable of boundless screw-ups. But compared to the irritation you can suffer at the hands of a large, private company, government bureaucracies are pikers.
There IS a difference, of course.
ReplyDeleteYou can (and just did) hammer the bejabbers out of GE (et al) and they will lose some sales over the problem you had. You'll buy an Amana next time.
Precisely which Gummint will you choose next time? The US Gov't, or the US Gov't?
And your vile accusation of Wynn-racism is beneath you, by the way. Can you prove that he is anti-black, or do you just toss that around because it's cool?
I keep mistaking stupidity for racism. Oh. I get it.
ReplyDeleteWhat is Wynn belly-aching about? He should be singing Obama's praises! Wynn's share price has been setting record highs. Not bad for an enterprise that is licensed to fleece people while creating no real wealth or value.
ReplyDeletePostPartisan blogger Charles Lane notes ...
"Las Vegas casino mogul Steve Wynn ... is an unlikely spokesman for the dispirited bourgeoisie. Wynn Resorts’ second-quarter earnings were up more than $300 million from the same period of 2010. Its stock price has more than tripled since June 2009. He’s also rather hyperbolic: According to him, the president “keeps using that word redistribution,” and “making speeches about redistribution.” Huh? I can’t think of a single such instance, and, for what it’s worth, the White House told me that they can’t find the word anywhere in his speeches and statements since 2009."
If you are inclined to read on, here's the post: http://goo.gl/aA0Wl
It's pretty clear from his pompous tirade that Mr. Wynn, who rakes in money faster than Scrooge McDuck, simply doesn't like the idea of a black man as president.
On the other hand, George H has a point: This could very well be an example of "Heinlein's Razor" in action. In 1941, author Robert Heinlein posited words to this effect: "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity, but don't rule out malice."
From that thought flows this tincture of public-domain wisdom: You don't have to be a right-wing Republican to be racist, but if you are a racist, chances are you're a right-wing Republican.
And,
ReplyDeleteYou don't have to be a race-baiting room-temperature-IQ to be a Democrat, but if you ARE a Democrat, chances are you are a race-baiting room-temperature-IQ critter.
Corollaries are neat!
And now, the voice of reason...
ReplyDeleteThere have been plenty of American-Africans elected to public office over the years. Yes, there have been plenty of people that have voted against American-Africans because their skin isn't white. Granted.
But what I can't figure out is why the raaaaaacist label drops so readily from the lips of those who bridle at criticism of President Obama. To me it sounds like an example of the tyranny of low expectations: give the black man a chance because he's black. He'll do fine, you'll see! Really he will. Oh, look! He signed a big spending bill into law! And he's left-handed, too! Just like Bill Clinton! Isn't that wonderful?
Tim and Hieronymous and George, is there no room in your world view for critics of the President who are not racist? I mean, c'mon! You call somebody a racist as if that explains everything. That there cannot possibly be a sane, rational, or coherent criticism leveled at the President that isn't founded on a deep-seated and manifest hatred for people of differently colored skin.
I think that critics of the President can be forgiven for their frustration at the knee-jerk and, frankly, simplistic branding of them as racists. The label becomes a shield behind which supporters hide.
And just look at the ones you've labeled racist, standing there with their mouths hanging open yet again because they can't figure out any wittier comeback than, "No, I'm not!" And, since it's hard to prove a negative, the libs win the "argument" going away!
It's like the greatest punchline in the world: RACIST! Liberals laugh and non-liberals are left standing there in bewilderment...which is their natural state anyway, so why not pile on?
It reminds me (thank you Hieronymous) of another Heinlein-ism: "One horse laugh equals 10,000 syllogisms." In present day progressive terms: One cry of Raaaaacist! lays low 10,000 libertarians, conservatives, and neo-cons.
Jeez! Enough already!
The Town Crank
Neenah
As to this "racism" thing. 17 words of the first graph of a 500-word rant, which is really about Wynn and other BUSINESSPEOPLE deliberately dissembling about thier economic condition, and The Town Crank and Dad29 dismiss the (fairly obvious, I thought) point of this rant: Wynn and others, too many to catalog, have made boku bucks during (and, presumably before) the Obama administration, yet would have the world believe that Obama and his policies (or lack of same) are causing the U. S. economy to go to hell in a handbasket.
ReplyDeleteCall me a racist if you wish; I need not defend my credentials to anyone but myself.
But your tactic of yelling "RACIST" about this rant is what we used to call in sales training "dismiss and redirect".
It's about lying liars like Wynn who have done extremely well in the past couple years, but would have you believe there's no more money to be made because of the policies (or lack of same) under the current administration.
I'd rather Wynn and his ilk would just have a nice big helping of STFU, and count their money and compound their interest while "sitting on it".
"And now, the voice of reason..."
ReplyDeleteOh, Crank, I've been chortling over that grandly pompous comment all day. What in heaven's name are you doing blowing hard in defense of the indefensible at quarter-past 3 in the morning? I agree ... Jeez! Enough already.
OK. Sanctimonious is not your long suit. Especially at closing time. If you want props you should not attempt holier-than-thou unless you are, at minimum, prepared to make some concessions. Like declaiming that you really do not sing along when Rush plays "Barack the Magic Negro."
You could maybe say it was awful that Republican Rep. Geoff Davis of Kentucky referred to Obama as "that boy." And it would enhance your cred if you'd admit upfront that when Rep. Lynn Westmoreland, a conservative Republican from Georgia, called the president "uppity" he probably should have taken the opportunity the press gave him to "clarify" his remark. Instead of taking the coded offer to backtrack, he went ahead and, by jingo, clarified it. "Uppity, yeah," said he.
From here it appears you either condone such behavior, or simply do not recognize it for what it is. Which might explain why you really "can't figure out ... why the raaaaaacist label drops so readily..."
You plaintively ask ...is there no room in your world view for critics of the President who are not racist?
First of all, I do not have a "world view." I am not given to such flatulent conceits, especially in riposte to self-styled pundits who are.
You seem to argue that civil discourse should hold a place of tolerance and respect for the likes of Tea Party activist and Iowa GOP official Marilyn Davenport who circulated an image of President Obama Photoshopped to look like a baby chimpanzee.
By extension you would also defend the much-emailed cartoon (From Rupert Murdoch's NY Post) of cops shooting a chimpanzee, then commenting that "They'll have to find someone else to write the next stimulus bill."
Do you really mean to confer absolution on such willfully atrocious behavior? If I read you correctly, you forgive those gleeful e-mailers (failed ultraconservative Republican NY gubernatorial candidate Carl Paladino among them) their frustration for being simplistically branded as racists.
And, you bleat, "... just look at the ones you've labeled racist, standing there with their mouths hanging open yet again because they can't figure out any wittier comeback than, 'No, I'm not!'" Sorry, Crank, but these strangers to politesse are not babes in the woods. They know who and what they are. They just don't expect to be called out for their display of arrant bigotry.
Thoughtful criticism? Try it, if you can. You'll find it is always welcome. Stupidity such as Mr. Wynn's ignorant crypto-racist whining is another matter. It would be easier to plausibly deny the racial component of Mr. Wynn’s remarkable remarks if they didn’t so readily pass the duck test.
Wynn and others, too many to catalog, have made boku bucks during (and, presumably before) the Obama administration, yet would have the world believe that Obama and his policies (or lack of same) are causing the U. S. economy to go to hell in a handbasket.
ReplyDeleteIt's both-and, plus!!
Maybe Wynn is a greedy bastard. OK, so is Soros, Gates, Immelt, Paulson, Buffett.....the list is really long.
So what?
That fact (if you accept it as such) does NOT mean that his criticism is erroneous, any more than since you are out of the broadcast biz you are not capable of fairly criticizing broadcasters.
The principal cause of business hesitancy is simple: lack of demand.
Behind that, however, is the uncertainty about the direction of the economy--and THAT is caused by a number of actions taken by this Administration. Putting Gulf oil-drilling off-limits (de facto or de jure makes no diff); issuing CO2 mandates which are NOT scientifically justified, but which WILL increase the cost of electricity; putting in place a national healthcare plan the cost of which is NOT determined (nor the cost of complying with its regulatory snakepit); blocking a manufacturer from starting up a plant in a non-union location;.........we can go on, and on, and on.
So. On top of that, no one really knows what tax-rate will be operative next year for anyone earning $250K+, which DOES have an impact on disposable income, which DOES have an impact on marginal-hiring decisions.
Demand sucks, costs WILL rise, there is still licit uncertainty about '12 numbers.
And what would you have Wynn do about it?
Would you issue a command that GE stop moving X-Ray to China?
Hieronymous,
ReplyDeleteHere I come back from a weekend getaway in Door County to find this!! Oh, dear me.
I can see that you're practicing for a political career! You've got a talent for silence-implies-sympathy, guilt-by-association, and tarring with the same brush. As the French say, "Formidable!"
Stirring in "Barack the Magic Negro" with a couple Congresscritters I never heard of...man! So that if I don't denounce it all then I must sympathize with it...and therefore I must be racist, too! Neat!
I guess that only a black man can criticize a black man, is that it? But then, if Walter Williams or Thomas Sowell or Larry Elder or any other black conservative criticizes Obama, then I bet that you'd have a ready response for that, too: you'd say that they're all Uncle Toms! Neat!
>> Stupidity such as Mr. Wynn's ignorant crypto-racist whining is another matter. It would be easier to plausibly deny the racial component of Mr. Wynn’s remarkable remarks if they didn’t so readily pass the duck test. <<
Another gem! If a guy can't simply be called a racist he can still be called a crypto-racist! It still counts!
You amaze me.
The Town Crank
Neenah
Colonel,
ReplyDeleteSomething else to add to what Dad said...the point of your rant wasn't what you said in your comment; i.e., that Wynn had made so much money in the current economy "and yet" was kvetching about how horrible the economy was. In other words, he's gotten so wealthy off of the current economy that he should STFU.
No, the point of your rant was that private corporations are just as incompetent as the government...or, more properly, that the government is no worse (and is in many ways better) than private corporations when it comes to customer service.
I had no idea that Wynn's business had done well during the Obama administration until you mentioned it in your comment. To echo Dad, "So what?"
In any event, I wouldn't have gotten all shirty about your first paragraph if it had had read: "...re-broadcasting that hate-piece businessman Steve Wynn recently unleashed about how the President is scaring away new business because of his economic policies."
(I might have bridled at "hate-piece". He was making extemporaneous remarks on a conference call, not writing a well-reasoned or even loony op-ed.)
>> But your tactic of yelling "RACIST" about this rant is what we used to call in sales training "dismiss and redirect". <<
My main point was that calling someone a racist is the perfect slur. The only proof one has to offer is that the "racist", a white man, criticized a black man. It's an axiom. It's manifest. QED.
I would not have appeared to dismiss your original point (that government is no worse -- and is mostly better -- than private corporations when it comes to service) if you'd avoided the immediate reference to racism.
I mean, when you get down to it, you did the old "dismiss and redirect" by saying that your point was that Wynn should shut up because he's made plenty of money...when that wasn't your point at all.
And, yes, I did write in a sarcastic manner about the "tyranny of low expectations". To me, calling critics of Obama racists takes the easy way out. I did, however, go too far with my sardonicism. I apologize.
The Town Crank
Neenah
In my book, HK still wins the thread.
ReplyDelete