Maximizing shareholder value is destroying capitalism

Pages

Maximizing shareholder value is destroying capitalism

Jack Welch quote: 'maximizing shareholder value is the dumbest idea in the world'

By Destro

Economy • August 2012 • Views: 1,827

Great Forbes article: The Dumbest Idea In The World: Maximizing Shareholder Value

Jack Welch’s quote that maximizing shareholder value is the dumbest idea in the world is from the man who mastered the art of maximizing share holder value while leading GE in the first place. Welch is claiming that the shareholder value has to be a function of or result of value created in the real market, that is, value for actual customers, created and enhanced by actual employees. Unfortunately since the late 70s the accepted theory of the firm has been that shareholders are the principals and CEOs are their agents, and thus the orientation of CEOs has to be toward maximizing shareholder value quarter-to-quarter rather than “delighting customers.”

I’ve always thought the efforts to please “Wall Street” and meet quarterly ” Analyists Estimates” and the failure to look at the long term picture has had a negative effect on our economy over the last 30 or so years. Now add in the rise of the hedge funds, derrivitives, and items such as the minipulation of the LIBOR rate and it’s no wonder that we’re in the fix we’re currently in. I found it interesting that Sandy Weil, the retired Citibank CEO now thinks we should go back to separating the commercial and investment bank entities.

Management emphasis on meeting expectations has hurt the long-term performance of some large firms. (Criticism of such management has been circulating for years. I read similar ideas from thirty years ago - when the Reagan era unleashed this destructive thinking.)

What we are seeing with the Go-Go accounting since the 80’s is the same phenomenon we are seeing in the political world - a fixation on short term advantages and an abandonment of long term planning. Older companies using real accounting become cash magnets for unscrupulous takeover artists who can buy them for a song and loot them (Bain Capital).

What Reaganomics has wrought.

Recent Pages by Destro (Destro):
Louis C.K. explains environmentalism to Christians Obama thanks Putin for help in Boston FBI investigated older Boston terrorist 2 years ago at the request of a foreign govt Captured terrorist will not be Mirandized (He will not be advised of his rights) Dedicated to Boston: The Mighty Mighty Bosstones - The Impression That I Get

Jump to bottom

60 comments

Bob Levin Thu, Aug 2, 2012 7:01:29am

I'm just curious. Don't you want to see capitalism destroyed? What brand of socialism do you subscribe to? In other words, shouldn't you see this a good news?

Destro Thu, Aug 2, 2012 7:10:37am

re: #1 Bob Levin

I'm just curious. Don't you want to see capitalism destroyed? What brand of socialism do you subscribe to? In other words, shouldn't you see this a good news?

Capitalism is like the bacteria in your digestive tract. You need the bugs but too much of them or too little and you have distress.

I support a mixed economy where capitalism is well regulated and seen as a necessary evil. Like seen in every advanced westernized country:

For example: Hardheaded Socialism Makes Canada Richer Than U.S.

If no govt and unlimited right to bear arms produced paradise then Somalia's lack of govt and ability to own any weapon you can afford should be a libertarian Utopia and Denmark should be running socialist death camps in Greenland.

kreyagg Thu, Aug 2, 2012 7:22:10am

My conception of good capitalism:
Building/making stuff for a profit.

Of bad capitalism:
Sucking every bit of value out of something then moving on.

Too often "maximizing shareholder value" is conflated with the latter notion.

Bob Levin Thu, Aug 2, 2012 7:26:01am

re: #3 kreyagg

Unless you're retired and live on that income generated by shareholder value.

Bob Levin Thu, Aug 2, 2012 7:32:09am

re: #2 Destro

Metaphors are nice, but...the web of interconnections and cause and effect are far too complex. Someone posted a video of Milton Friedman arguing with a college leftist.

Sifting through the confusion, the question was really, how can we insure justice and humanity through an unregulated market? This is where Friedmanites get stuck, falling back on the market the market the market. But Milton his own self said that such issues should be resolved by the courts, and that businesses that violate basic humanist principles should be severely punished, that is fined heavily until they decide to consider humanist values in their business decisions.

Bob Levin Thu, Aug 2, 2012 7:35:08am

re: #2 Destro

I support a mixed economy where capitalism is well regulated and seen as a necessary evil.

Then the question is whether a bureaucrat or the courts will do the regulation. Bureaucrats make their decisions in their office, and the decision process is mysterious. However, the courts must publish their decision making process. Which do you prefer?

Destro Thu, Aug 2, 2012 7:36:56am

Citing Milton Freidman who was buddies with General Pinochet of Chile, one of the most brutal dictators of all time in relation to humanism and compassion?

Have you no shame, sir?

LIBERTARIANISM IS THE TROJAN HORSE FOR FASCISM

Bob Levin Thu, Aug 2, 2012 7:38:08am

re: #7 Destro

So you're not going to actually follow the discussion? I didn't say a word about libertarianism.

Destro Thu, Aug 2, 2012 7:44:58am

re: #8 Bob Levin

So you're not going to actually follow the discussion? I didn't say a word about libertarianism.

When you mention Milton Friedman you invoke his libertarianism. It is implied.

Milton Friedman was not just one of the world's most distinguished economists -- he may have also been America's most famous and influential libertarian.

Bob Levin Thu, Aug 2, 2012 7:46:58am

re: #9 Destro

When you mention Milton Friedman you invoke his libertarianism. It is implied.

No it's not. If I take out a deck of cards, I'm not invoking high stakes poker. I might be thinking about Solitaire.

Destro Thu, Aug 2, 2012 7:48:09am

re: #5 Bob Levin

Metaphors are nice, but...the web of interconnections and cause and effect are far too complex. Someone posted a video of Milton Friedman arguing with a college leftist.

Sifting through the confusion, the question was really, how can we insure justice and humanity through an unregulated market? This is where Friedmanites get stuck, falling back on the market the market the market. But Milton his own self said that such issues should be resolved by the courts, and that businesses that violate basic humanist principles should be severely punished, that is fined heavily until they decide to consider humanist values in their business decisions.

Also read:

Confessions of An American European-Style Socialist

Destro Thu, Aug 2, 2012 7:50:16am

re: #10 Bob Levin

No it's not. If I take out a deck of cards, I'm not invoking high stakes poker. I might be thinking about Solitaire.

That metaphor would make sense if Milton Friedman had played multiple games with his deck of cards (i.e. he advocated for different systems for different economies - some socialist some not, etc) but he only played/advocated for one card game and it is the one most closely associated with the so called American libertarian system.

Bob Levin Thu, Aug 2, 2012 7:50:36am

re: #11 Destro

Do you understand my argument? Both you and Milton Friedman agree that regulation is necessary. Got that part? So, the only question is who is doing the regulation, the bureaucracy or the courts. I just asked which method of regulation do you prefer?

Bob Levin Thu, Aug 2, 2012 7:53:28am

re: #12 Destro

Did I not say

This is where Friedmanites get stuck, falling back on the market the market the market.

I think, in English, that this means the followers of Milton Friedman really don't get Milton Friedman.

Destro Thu, Aug 2, 2012 7:54:30am

re: #13 Bob Levin

Do you understand my argument? Both you and Milton Friedman agree that regulation is necessary. Got that part? So, the only question is who is doing the regulation, the bureaucracy or the courts. I just asked which method of regulation do you prefer?

Why are Americans all into this notion that bureaucracy is holding them back.

In any case bureaucracy is the result laws passed by politicians and upheld by the courts.

What do you feel bureaucracy will produce? No appeals health insurance death panels staffed by bureaucrats?

Bob Levin Thu, Aug 2, 2012 7:55:54am

re: #15 Destro

I just asked a question. Do you prefer bureaucrats or the courts to provide the regulations on the market?

Destro Thu, Aug 2, 2012 8:00:52am

re: #16 Bob Levin

I just asked a question. Do you prefer bureaucrats or the courts to provide the regulations on the market?

No, I prefer elected officials do so and the bureaus like the police or economic regulators to follow said laws. Even courts - a branch of govt here in the USA - not so in other nations - need the bureaucrats to enforce their rulings.

The reason I won't answer your question is that it really is a question based on a hypothetical. We have real world analogs to compare so find a real world example of what you are talking about. Which country operates like that?

Here is a real world example of what life is like for an entrepreneur in a mixed European style socialist country (Luxembourg):

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

Bob Levin Thu, Aug 2, 2012 8:09:01am

re: #17 Destro

This is your topic, not mine. I'd probably take another approach to the problem. I think the key has to do with wisdom, and this is not a concept that is given value in our society. In the meantime, we must muddle through.

If you say this or that society works, I would attribute it to individuals who possess wisdom. If you point to a society that is not working, I would say that certain powerful people in that society lack wisdom.

The next step in the conversation would be for us to try and define wisdom, but that will take more than two weeks, and is more trouble than it's worth, time one could better spend on trying to increase one's own wisdom.

Or we could post some articles about Asian Philosophy.

Bob Levin Thu, Aug 2, 2012 8:12:55am

On that note, I think I'll just go do a few Zen-like activities.

Destro Thu, Aug 2, 2012 8:35:33am

re: #18 Bob Levin

This is your topic, not mine. I'd probably take another approach to the problem. I think the key has to do with wisdom, and this is not a concept that is given value in our society. In the meantime, we must muddle through.

If you say this or that society works, I would attribute it to individuals who possess wisdom. If you point to a society that is not working, I would say that certain powerful people in that society lack wisdom.

The next step in the conversation would be for us to try and define wisdom, but that will take more than two weeks, and is more trouble than it's worth, time one could better spend on trying to increase one's own wisdom.

Or we could post some articles about Asian Philosophy.

I am sorry, that sounds to me like Romney's line that universal mandated health insurance works fine for Mass but hell no for those idiots in Alabama. They can't handle universal health care in Alabama like sophisticated New Englanders can.........

Bob Levin Thu, Aug 2, 2012 9:03:25am

re: #20 Destro

I am sorry, that sounds to me like Romney's line

I'm pretty sure that in the real world Mitt Romney and Asian Philosophy don't go together.

Here's the beginning of a search combining Mitt Romney and Zen Buddhism.

Not a connection.

Bob Levin Thu, Aug 2, 2012 9:06:12am

This is not to say that if a person lacks wisdom they can't get wisdom. If one couldn't get wisdom, then there would be no Zen.

Can't buy it at Target.

Romantic Heretic Thu, Aug 2, 2012 9:11:53am

Oh Jesus. Not this shit again.

Let's get this straight. Capitalism is a tool, nothing more and nothing less. It is neither good nor evil. As a tool it can only do what its users tell it to do. That's where the fault is, with the users.

Maximizing shareholder value as a measure of success of a company is like using body count as a measure of an armed force's success at winning a war. It isn't an accurate measurement and, indeed, it is distracting from the real goal.

A business's purpose is to deliver products and services to its market. If it does so wisely and with care it will make a profit and deliver dividends to its shareholders. But profit and dividends is a result not a purpose.

This is where the problems are. Too many businesses are mistaking results for purpose and so they are losing their way.

Also, there are very few capitalists in the upper levels of the large companies these days. Nor are most stocks actually held by investors. That's a rant for another day.

Destro Thu, Aug 2, 2012 9:18:17am

re: #23 Romantic Heretic

Oh Jesus. Not this shit again.

Let's get this straight. Capitalism is a tool, nothing more and nothing less. It is neither good nor evil. As a tool it can only do what its users tell it to do. That's where the fault is, with the users.

Maximizing shareholder value as a measure of success of a company is like using body count as a measure of an armed force's success at winning a war. It isn't an accurate measurement and, indeed, it is distracting from the real goal.

A business's purpose is to deliver products and services to its market. If it does so wisely and with care it will make a profit and deliver dividends to its shareholders. But profit and dividends is a result not a purpose.

This is where the problems are. Too many businesses are mistaking results for purpose and so they are losing their way.

Also, there are very few capitalists in the upper levels of the large companies these days. Nor are most stocks actually held by investors. That's a rant for another day.

I enjoyed the rant. Please do so again.

aagcobb Thu, Aug 2, 2012 9:39:56am

re: #16 Bob Levin

I just asked a question. Do you prefer bureaucrats or the courts to provide the regulations on the market?

Its a stupid question. Both administrative agencies and courts have a role to play. Having no administrative agencies to regulate the market and leaving it entirely to the courts means that people who can't afford a good lawyer will be at the mercy of corporations who can afford to hire entire law firms to litigate aggressively.

Destro Thu, Aug 2, 2012 9:53:50am

re: #25 aagcobb

Its a stupid question. Both administrative agencies and courts have a role to play. Having no administrative agencies to regulate the market and leaving it entirely to the courts means that people who can't afford a good lawyer will be at the mercy of corporations who can afford to hire entire law firms to litigate aggressively.

The welfare state is a check against servility towards the rich. A strong welfare state would give us the power to say Fuck You to our bosses—this is the power to say ‘I’m gonna work odd jobs for twenty hours a week while I work on my driftwood sculptures and play keyboards in my chillwave band. And I’ll still be able to go to the doctor and make rent.’

Sounds like freedom to me.

Bob Levin Thu, Aug 2, 2012 9:55:45am

re: #25 aagcobb

The issue is transparency in the decision making process. People can feel that an administrative agency has wronged them--and if they have no money then they too are at the mercy of the agency's decision. And part of that legal battle will be to subpoena the agency's records.

However, this is much different from the idea that only the market can mediate between the aggregate and the individual. The point is that both Friedman and advocates of large bureaucracy agree that a third party is needed to mediate. It becomes a question of which one, or rather, a more transparent mediator or a less transparent mediator. That's not stupid at all.

There is also the possibility of passing a law to help those without access to large law firms get fair and competent representation. The flexibility is there.

Destro Thu, Aug 2, 2012 10:04:35am

re: #27 Bob Levin

The issue is transparency in the decision making process. People can feel that an administrative agency has wronged them--and if they have no money then they too are at the mercy of the agency's decision. And part of that legal battle will be to subpoena the agency's records.

However, this is much different from the idea that only the market can mediate between the aggregate and the individual. The point is that both Friedman and advocates of large bureaucracy agree that a third party is needed to mediate. It becomes a question of which one, or rather, a more transparent mediator or a less transparent mediator. That's not stupid at all.

There is also the possibility of passing a law to help those without access to large law firms get fair and competent representation. The flexibility is there.

The fundamental point is that a free-market capitalist society has never and by definition can never lead to full-employment and thus freedom from want that allows freedom of action. Free market capitalism actually requires a huge mass of the unemployed—it’s not just a side effect. It requires this because fear keeps the masses inline. Corporate America loves a high unemployment rate. When most everyone has a job, workers are less likely to take abuse. They do nutty things like join unions, demand better wages and refuse to work off-the-clock. They start to stand up to real power.

That is why the first reforms the Athenians did to ensure their democracy would work is distribute land to as many citizens as possible so that at least even the poorest citizen had enough land to grow his own food supplies for a year and thus be free from fear and can make decisions. Athenians considered being an employee (even a free one and highly paid one) akin to being a slave. That is why in Greek the term for worker and slave and servant are all one word (doulos for you New Testament Greek studiers). To a Greek the only freedom came from land ownership that produced enough to sustain you. In the USA, we had the frontier and lots of land to move into once so we did not need a welfare state at first. But now we have no virgin land to set up a cabin in and no game filled forests anymore to go to if we lose our jobs and no one is offering jobs at middle class wages. So the so called nanny-state needs to step in to ensure the citizen is free from fear so he can be a rational citizen.

Freedom is when people are not afraid they will lose their health care or be thrown to the street if they lose their jobs and their decisions would be based on other rationale.

Daniel Ballard Thu, Aug 2, 2012 10:11:27am

Great catch Destro!! The article is right on the money. The big distortion in capitalism is shareholder value over product/service quality and efficiency. One can rail at CEO as evil by nature, scream about Reaganomics all they want. Those are the lessor factors in the problems we now face trying to claw up and out of the recession.

Daniel Ballard Thu, Aug 2, 2012 10:23:26am

Destro-
This paragraph
A third is to restore the focus of executives on the real market and on an authentic life by eliminating the use of stock-based compensation as an incentive. This doesn’t mean that executives shouldn’t own shares. If an executive wants to buy stock as some sort of bonding with the shareholders or for whatever other reasons, that’s just fine. However, executives should be prevented from selling any stock, for any reason, while serving in that capacity—and indeed for several years after leaving their posts. Stock based compensation is a very recent phenomenon, one associated with lower shareholder returns, bubbles and crashes, and huge corporate scandals. In 1970, stock based compensation was less than 1 percent of compensation. By 2000, it was around half of compensation. For the last 35 years, stock-based compensation has been tried. It had the opposite effect of what was intended. We should learn from experience and discontinue it.

As I recall from the Clinton years, CEO salaries were penalized by new taxation levels, and suddenly in an obvious tax dodge companies went with stock compensation instead. Write that off as tragic unexpected results.

Bob Levin Thu, Aug 2, 2012 10:43:39am

re: #28 Destro

Why are you talking about lifeless entities such as 'corporate America' and 'free-market capitalism' as if there were alive with thoughts, feelings, and plans? Especially to control and keep down the 'masses.'

Are you and I part of the same 'masses'? If so, it doesn't seem like the masses are so massed.

I think Jack Welch would be a more staunch defender of capitalism than I would be. Jack Welch would want to make capitalism work better. This is Jack Welch's point--here's how to make our present state of capitalism better. You're not on Jack's side on this issue, right?

Destro Thu, Aug 2, 2012 11:39:02am

...

Destro Thu, Aug 2, 2012 11:39:49am

re: #31 Bob Levin

Why are you talking about lifeless entities such as 'corporate America' and 'free-market capitalism' as if there were alive with thoughts, feelings, and plans? Especially to control and keep down the 'masses.'

Are you and I part of the same 'masses'? If so, it doesn't seem like the masses are so massed.

I think Jack Welch would be a more staunch defender of capitalism than I would be. Jack Welch would want to make capitalism work better. This is Jack Welch's point--here's how to make our present state of capitalism better. You're not on Jack's side on this issue, right?

Why are you talking about lifeless entities such as 'corporate America'
'corporations are people, my friend" Mitt Romney.

Sorry, couldn't resist.

Beyond that I just remembered who you are (forgot your name) and that you accused me of being a redneck, KKK, anti-semite, neo-nazi backwoods living right winger.

My "go F yourself" to you still stands and I implore you to seek professional help to cure you of your mental disorder.

aagcobb Thu, Aug 2, 2012 11:47:45am

re: #27 Bob Levin

There is also the possibility of passing a law to help those without access to large law firms get fair and competent representation. The flexibility is there.

Right, we only provide underpaid, overworked public defenders to people whose lives are on the line in criminal trials because courts force us to, and you think we will provide the funding so that ordinary people can get compentant representation to sue megacorporations? I know libertarians view government as some evil alien bent on subjugating us all, and that is true of many governments. But the US government is elected by us to serve us, and for the most part it does what it does because that is what we want it to do. Unregulated corporations are massive engines of destruction, and leaving it to private individuals to try to regulate their behavior through slow, expensive litigation in the courts is a recipe for disaster.

Bob Levin Thu, Aug 2, 2012 12:02:16pm

re: #33 Destro

So I'm back to being a political prisoner in your version of utopia. Not at all surprised.

Bob Levin Thu, Aug 2, 2012 12:18:20pm

re: #34 aagcobb

Do you want to talk about an idealized system, or the way systems actually function, because you can't do both simultaneously.

If you'd like me to agree that the present system is quite broken, then fine. It's broken. If you want me to agree that another idealized system will work in an ideal way, I won't agree to that. Nothing works in an ideal way.

Is this terribly broken system doing what we elected it to do? I don't think so. I don't think too many folks would say that Washington DC is working in the way that they hope it would.

I think all attempts to regulate corporations are slow, and not as effective as planned. Potential legislation gets locked up in committee. Regulatory agencies are frequently three steps behind the entity they are trying to regulate.

I'm really not sure what your point is.

Destro Thu, Aug 2, 2012 12:30:29pm

re: #35 Bob Levin

So I'm back to being a political prisoner in your version of utopia. Not at all surprised.

See my F U at #33 and the why for it. I don't mind conversations with people I disagree with people I do have a problem with a smear artist like yourself, especially if they make stuff up out of their delusions.

Bob Levin Thu, Aug 2, 2012 12:46:32pm

re: #37 Destro

So, it would be a smear if I called you the Black Hole of Reason? I see your comment #33, and I think you've earned the title.

Destro Thu, Aug 2, 2012 1:38:02pm

re: #38 Bob Levin

So, it would be a smear if I called you the Black Hole of Reason? I see your comment #33, and I think you've earned the title.

Bob Levin Thu, Aug 2, 2012 2:33:18pm

re: #39 Destro

The only thing you have going for you is that I don't know how to put together a compendium of your comments--which show that your arguing skills are a combination of Sean Hannity's and Joseph Goebbels'. You are conspiracy-minded and dishonest. When you run out of arguments, you call names, and if that doesn't work you result to childish tricks. Your politics are authoritarian, and heaven forbid there is a legal system in your paradise because you've already issued your guilty verdict to include millions of people for capital offenses--just in a few weeks of discussions. Not to mention the very large crowd you would place in institutions as political prisoners for daring to question your left wing bona fides.

You might as well create a file for your usual response--that way you can just cut and paste.

Destro Thu, Aug 2, 2012 3:32:15pm

re: #40 Bob Levin

which show that your arguing skills are a combination of Sean Hannity's and Joseph Goebbels'

There you go again calling me a Nazi. Now you accuse me of wanting to round people up into internment camps (which is what the Sean Hannity right says the left wants to do).

And you say I insult when I lose an argument? Those were your accusations from the get go based on your kooky views. You have no argument skills because you are all arguments without citations. You are just a kook and I invoke Godwin's Law on your sorry ass.

Bob Levin Thu, Aug 2, 2012 4:18:01pm

re: #41 Destro

Well, thank you for forcing me to learn how to do a search.

I'm reading a conversation in which you accuse Americans of being homicidal maniacs.

Here's one where you accuse Sheldon Adelson of treason.

Here's one where the subtext of your post is that even Israeli newspapers admit Netenyahu has exerted undue influence on a US Presidential Candidate. If that's not the subtext, then why the post in the first place?

Oh, here's a nice description of Israel:

There is no vested interest in the USA angering an already fragile Arab world by these un-diplomatic statements regarding a topic (what is the capital of a small volitile country far away) that at the end of the day does not put bread on American tables or gives them a job or makes their lives safer.

Here's one where you are judging whether someone is objective enough to decide if the NY Times has a history of unfairly criticizing Israel--saying that they are too partisan to be objective, like your objective statement above.

Here's one where you call the Democrats whores.

Here's another one about Israel trying to use American politicians.

Here's a long conversation where you pretend to be weapons expert. Ah, someone disagrees with you and you call him George Bush.

Just the other day you tried to sneak in the backdoor and downding me for everything you could find, until someone called you on it.

And this is just for five days.

By the way, I did not get to conversations between you and me. These are all with other people and bots.

Destro Thu, Aug 2, 2012 6:44:06pm

re: #42 Bob Levin

[Link: www.timesunion.com...]

THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN: Romney's wasted trip to Israel

One quick question and observation about Mitt Romney's visit to Israel. Since the trip was not about learning anything but about how to satisfy the political whims of the right-wing, super pro-Bibi Netanyahu, American Jewish casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, why didn't they just do it in Las Vegas?

If I wrote that (and I wrote something close to that pre-trip) what would you have accused me of?

The observation is this: Much of what is wrong with the U.S.-Israel relationship today can be found in that Romney trip. In recent years, the Republican Party has decided to make Israel a wedge issue. In order to garner more Jewish (and evangelical) votes and money, the GOP decided to "out-pro-Israel" the Democrats by being even more unquestioning of Israel.

Ouch!!!

This arms race has pulled the Democratic Party to the right on the Middle East and has basically forced the Obama team to shut down the peace process and drop any demands that Israel freeze settlements. Add on top of that the increasing role of money in U.S. politics and the fact that the main Israel lobby, AIPAC, has made itself the feared arbiter of which lawmakers are "pro" and which are "anti-Israel" and, therefore, who should get donations and who should not — and you have a situation in which there are almost no brakes, no red lights, around Israel coming from America anymore.

Double ouch!!!!

So how about all you U.S. politicians — Republicans and Democrats — stop feeding off this conflict for political gain. Stop making things even worse by telling the most hard-line Israelis everything that they want to hear, just to grovel for Jewish votes and money, while blatantly ignoring the other side.

Now go call Friedman an anti-semite.

PS: I am not a Democrat. They are as a party, to me, whores.

Dark_Falcon Thu, Aug 2, 2012 7:16:26pm

re: #33 Destro

Wh r y tlkng bt lflss ntts sch s 'crprt mrc'
'crprtns r ppl, m frnd" Mtt Rmny.

Srr, cldn't rsst.

Bynd tht jst rmmbrd wh y r (frgt yr nm) nd tht y ccsd m f bng rdnck, KKK, nt-smt, n-nz bckwds lvng rght wngr.

M "g F yrslf" t y stll stnds nd mplr y t sk prfssnl hlp t cr y f yr mntl dsrdr.

The Hater says what?

Destro Thu, Aug 2, 2012 7:19:45pm

re: #44 Dark_Falcon

I don't speak tea-bagger.

Bob Levin Thu, Aug 2, 2012 8:38:42pm

re: #43 Destro

Now go call Friedman an anti-semite.

I have a better idea. Why don't you write Friedman a 'thank you' note? Let's hope he doesn't do a full search of the writings of who sent him the note.

Which is it D, are we talking content or making personal attacks? I've learned so many things today. One is that it always comes down to personal attacks with you, and two, I can find everything you've written here.

So, let's sum up shall we. You hate the national anthem, you hate America, you hate the Republicans, you hate the Democrats, you deny hating Jews (but why, you're on a roll), you hate religious people, you hate Israel, you hate capitalists, you hate the war criminals in America (war criminals defined as anyone who paid taxes during the Iraq War), you hate American culture--BUT, you love the masses because you're such a good socialist.

That about cover it?

Destro Thu, Aug 2, 2012 9:28:42pm

re: #46 Bob Levin

Like I said, you have a reality perception problem. And I would refer you to to my #33 and add to that 'and the horse you rode in on' for your paranoid delusional accusations you incorrectly made.

Bob Levin Thu, Aug 2, 2012 11:21:17pm

re: #47 Destro

You downdinged a guy that simply said that he studies Talmud. What more do you want? What would it take to make you take a good hard look in the mirror?

You do your little repetition dance, but I'll tell you, that only works if I don't know how to do a search. Now I can. Your own words will tell the story.

Am I paranoid delusional about you downdinging someone who simply said that they study Talmud? You admit to that, yes? And would you even know about the historical ghosts that such an action brings up?

But I'll tell you what, I can take your bullshit pop psychology a whole lot easier than you can take the truth of your stone heart being pointed out. So get ready.

Workers of the world unite, baby.

Bob Levin Thu, Aug 2, 2012 11:22:31pm

And Tom Friedman wouldn't downding a guy that said he studies Talmud.

Destro Thu, Aug 2, 2012 11:27:10pm

re: #48 Bob Levin

I negged an article that had as it's title an offensive word that is the same as the N word. The J - e -w word without the "ish" at the end is offensive in certain usages.

Bob Levin Thu, Aug 2, 2012 11:38:23pm

re: #50 Destro

But why Ludwig? Let's go back to you looking in the mirror. What will it take?

Destro Thu, Aug 2, 2012 11:40:22pm

re: #51 Bob Levin

But why Ludwig? Let's go back to you looking in the mirror. What will it take?

Why don't you take your meds, gramps cause your rambling.

Bob Levin Fri, Aug 3, 2012 4:04:41am

re: #52 Destro

What's your first language? It's not English, can't be English.

Why don't you stay on topic? It's about how you agree with Jack Welch that capitalism needs some fixing. I know that this must be the topic because you are a person of such integrity that you would never purposely distort another person's views in order to fit your worldview.

Hey, is the Talmud prohibited reading in your utopia? Better get us that list of banned books before the revolution happens, you know, like a heads up.

Bob Levin Fri, Aug 3, 2012 4:07:23am

You sure you want to continue this thread? Because as it stands right now, I'm just going to be writing comedy.

Bob Levin Fri, Aug 3, 2012 4:11:36am

re: #50 Destro

That's another cultural faux pas right there. I'm not going to tell you the correct answer, or correct way of addressing this minority. Besides, I already told you weeks ago and you didn't believe me.

But

it's title [contained] an offensive word that is the same as the N word. The J - e -w word without the "ish" at the end is offensive in certain usages.

is just not true.

Destro Fri, Aug 3, 2012 7:26:16am

re: #55 Bob Levin

That's another cultural faux pas right there. I'm not going to tell you the correct answer, or correct way of addressing this minority. Besides, I already told you weeks ago and you didn't believe me.

But

is just not true.

How can you say "Jew" as in Jew shadow" is not used in the way the term has always been used in an offensive manner?

[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

"The word Jew has been used often enough in a disparaging manner by antisemites that in the late 19th and early 20th centuries it was frequently avoided altogether, and the term Hebrew was substituted instead (e.g. Young Men's Hebrew Association). Even today some people are wary of its use, and prefer to use "Jewish". Indeed, when used as an adjective (e.g. "Jew lawyer") or verb (e.g. "to jew someone"), the term Jew is purely pejorative."

Destro Fri, Aug 3, 2012 7:30:54am

re: #54 Bob Levin

You sure you want to continue this thread? Because as it stands right now, I'm just going to be writing comedy.

As I stated before, I don't mind having conversations with people that disagree with me but since you refuse to apologize for calling me David Duke like, a KKK member, a backwoods redneck, a nazi, a right winger and so on why should I converse with a insult baiting troll like you? You might also be touched in the head so I hope you get well. I am still trying to figure out how you think I am a right winger when I am openly praising some form of socialism and how you think that will lead to me wanting to put people in concentration camps. Just weird, mate.

Bob Levin Fri, Aug 3, 2012 7:44:09am

re: #56 Destro

Why believe Jews when you have Wikipedia? You're totally sensitive to our culture. It's so obvious. You're almost a Judeophile.

Bob Levin Fri, Aug 3, 2012 8:03:53am

re: #57 Destro

why should I converse with a insult baiting troll like you?

Oh you shouldn't. So why do you keep adding entries to this thread? Think about it.

I am still trying to figure out how you think I am a right winger when I am openly praising some form of socialism and how you think that will lead to me wanting to put people in concentration camps.

I don't know. It's such a new phenomena. Never before seen in Jewish history.

To be a socialist means to let the ego serve the neighbour, to sacrifice the self for the whole. In its deepest sense socialism equals service. The individual refrains and the commonwealth demands.
Frederick the Great was a socialist on a king's throne.
"I'm the first servant of the state." A kingly socialist saying.

You've already denounced most of the American people as war criminals and traitors. You keep repeating canards about Israel and Jews. You downding a fellow for reading the Talmud, because it's...what, prohibited thought? Gee, I'm stumped as to why I would say that.

You try to tell me that you know more about Jewish culture than I do because of Wikipedia. Your logic is...overwhelming.

Is this the last entry to this thread, can you stop yourself? Like I said, I'll be writing comedy from here on in.

Do you think you can stop yourself?

Destro Fri, Aug 3, 2012 2:38:05pm

re: #59 Bob Levin

Oh you shouldn't. So why do you keep adding entries to this thread? Think about it.

I don't know. It's such a new phenomena. Never before seen in Jewish history.

You've already denounced most of the American people as war criminals and traitors. You keep repeating canards about Israel and Jews. You downding a fellow for reading the Talmud, because it's...what, prohibited thought? Gee, I'm stumped as to why I would say that.

You try to tell me that you know more about Jewish culture than I do because of Wikipedia. Your logic is...overwhelming.

Is this the last entry to this thread, can you stop yourself? Like I said, I'll be writing comedy from here on in.

Do you think you can stop yourself?

I said Americans, including you and I have blood on our hands for the Iraq war crime. I don't believe in your fairy sky god and I seem to have more spiritual reflection on what that war did to people using my tax money than someone like you who professes a faith. And yea, by my reconing I am complicit in mass murder done with my tax dollars in a democraticly elected govt.

You Bush war apologists and cheerleaders disgust me.

Auto

This page has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!