I have a memory from the Republican primaries in 2000. W. and McCain were debating. I think it was South Carolina, a debate hosted by Larry King. Keyes was there too. At some point, McCain said that Bush’s proposals favored “the wealthiest one percent.” That was the same little lefty alliterative line that Al Gore was using. And I thought, “What use will it be to nominate John McCain if he’s going to talk the same language as the Democrat?”
Remember when “wealthiest one percent” was a buzz-phrase in our politics? Incredibly annoying.
I think a lot of people like capitalism in theory but not in practice. And I speak with some humility here: I’m the kind of guy who, as a kid, never had a lemonade stand. I could sooner have beaten Bruce Jenner in the decathlon. But I appreciate kids with lemonade stands, and I know that the entrepreneurial are essential to our society.
It's not a republican thing, it's a populist thing. The caricature of Republicans as wealthy robber barons has stuck since Teddy Roosevelt's administration and many GOP candidates feel they have to fight it by agreeing. Actually most Republicans were small business men or farmers so while addicted to earmarks for their areas were not supportive of the crony capitalism of the Morgans or Mellons.
Mitt Romney and His dad are wealthy financiers who want to be accepted into the elite. Mitt knows how to pitch to the Massachusetts liberals, but since he's strayed off the reservation he'd better get used to the populist attack from all sides. Since the Media has kept hand's off Romney until after he is the presumptive candidate, it's better he gets bloodied now.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAs a kid, I sold coffee and donuts to the people waiting in gas lines during the gas crisis in 1979. I made a killing.
Nevertheless, that kind of capitalism isn't the kind of capitalism that reasonable Americans remain suspicious of in 2012. CEOs who get rich by sitting on each other's boards and giving each other enormous pay hikes instead of innovating and improving have given the real entrepreneurs a bad name. Lobbying, regulatory capture and ethical breaches do more damage to capitalism's image than a generation of Marxists ever could.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe DNC/MSM/OWS** attacks on Romney's capitalism/wealth is the EXACT conversation I, as a fiscal conservative, want to have.....you know why?
Because it's the truth: Capitalism is apart the pursuit of happiness. We will win with the truth.
What Romney and men and women like him do is what makes this country the freedom loving hope of the earth.
**Newt, Santorum, Rush, Sarah, Huntsman are acting just like the DNC/MSM/OWS.....for shame.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI understand your points exactly (both articles) and I sure dont think Romney needs to go out of his way explaining why he favored #2 pencils while at Bain either. By over defending "business experience" we play right into Obama's position. We react.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbusePerhaps some basic education is needed around economic freedom and some reminders that the bulk of the Federal Government owes its very existance to business of one sort or another..
But its interesting how corporate executives are singled out as the great satans....while professional sports figures somehow escape scrutiny so far as money is concerned. For sports figures the salaries are taken for granted as being what needs to be paid for "the best"...but on that other world the best executives are reduced to being basically crooks because they strive to maximize returns for shareholders....
Lemonade stands are a good generic entrepreneurial symbol, but there were (and are) much better ways to make a few bucks on your own as a youngster. In 1975 (age 10) my dad bought me a wagon and passed out flyers in our neighborhood touting "Alan's recycling service". I picked up papers, cans, bottles, etc. from about a dozen houses for a couple years and made some decent cash. Paper routes (if still available) are always good; not easy work, but a good money-maker. And I'm always a sucker for some kid who wants to mow my lawn, even for twenty bucks. Saves me time and sweat.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAnd that makes McCain's behavior in the 2008 election all the more strange. "Everything's fine, the economy is fine, gogo capitalism!" Who told McCain to defend a straw man view of capitalism in that election when it obviously went against all his instincts? At precisely the wrong time to do it?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseJay, let's continue with your lemonade-stand analogy.
Your rich neighbor says "Jay, I'll buy out your lemonade stand. And I'll even give you a year's allowance up front! I'm just going to need for you to fire your kid sister - she spends too much time chatting with customers, anyway! Also, instead of your expensive, home-grown lemons we'll get lemon flavoring from a low-cost supplier who services a lot of the major airlines! Oh, and to pay off the high-interest loan that I'm taking out to buy your stand, you're going to have to halt your silly orchard experiments on new, fruity refreshing drinks. All that, um, 'seed' money will go to paying off the debt and launching a marketing campaign. Sales will go up, at least temporarily. Then we'll sell the lemonade stand to Country Time and split the profits!"
This kind of "wealth-generating" shell game does not impress Main Street Republicans.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseLet's continue further. In your scenario, one of the following things must be true:
1. The orchard experimentation did not have a positive net present value, in which case ceasing it was wealth-maximizing for the entire economy.
2. The orchard experimentation did have a positive net present value, in which case a profit-maximizing buyout firm would maintain or even enhance it, knowing that Countrytime will pay more for the company that way.
3. The orchard experimentation did have a positive net present value but was not maximally efficient integrated with a lemonade stand, in which case a profit-maximizing capitalist would spin it off for sale to a venture capitalist or for separate development.
One of the following must also be true:
1. Your kid sister was in fact hurting profits, in which case she had a negative net present value in that position and letting her go was efficient (not just for the enterprise, but for the economy as a whole).
2. Your kid sister was increasing profits, in which case a profit-maximizing capitalist would keep her on in order to maximize the value of the enterprise when he sells out to Countrytime.
One of the following must also be true:
1. The stand's customer base prefers cheaper lemonade made with lemon flavoring (in which case the switch enhanced efficiency, total wealth, aggregate welfare, utils, etc.).
2. The stand's customer base prefers real lemon juice, even at a price premium, in which case a profit-maximizing buyout firm would recognize that.
One of the following must also be true:
1. The new marketing campaign is an efficient way to let people who would like to buy Jay's lemonade know about it.
2. Countrytime is staffed by idiots who can't tell the difference between long-term and short-term profitability.
One of the following must also be true:
1. The changes made by the buyout firm enhance efficiency so much that it can make an outsize profit for itself while paying high interest rates on a leveraged loan.
2. The changes made by the buyout firm do not enhance efficiency, in which case the firms lending on the leveraged loan must be staffed by idiots.
In other words, at each point in your narrative, you're positing irrationality by economic actors. Some economic actors are certainly irrational, but they aren't the ones that make profits and stay in business.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYet we went right ahead and nominated John McCain in 2008. Yet NRO went right ahead and endorsed McCain over J.D. Hayworth in 2010. I tend to believe that Newt has a lot more to offer than McCain ever did, but apparently, NRO has always been able to reconcile with the likes of John McCain. You think John McCain has a vision for this country while he goes and endorses Romney? McCain has a vision and all it is, is the reflection from him looking in the mirror.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAre we conflating "free market" with "private ownership of the means of production"?
Because the latter existed in Fascist Germany and Italy and Spain, whereas the former did not.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseBravo, Jay. This kerfuffle reminds me of something Scott Adams (of Dilbert fame) once said, if memory serves: "I love capitalism. But it's rich comic material because it creates winners and losers."
And so it does. In the off-season (as you say), conservatives are interested in economic winning, and so the mechanisms of capitalism are more welcome. But in political season, they're interested in political winning, and sometimes that consists of appeasing the economic losers. Perhaps a conservative can do so with his hand holding his nose, regretting that it must be done. But it's depressing to see that so many don't even notice the smell.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse“the wealthiest one percent"
Great point again Mr. Nordlinger.
The rank populism is vivid. For years we have watched a very poor offering from so many. My diddos have shrunk, after listening to the EIB push ugly class warfare with terms like "Blue Blood". The "Ruling Class" sophistry mimics the Democratic Partisan folly completely, filled with bitter divisive garbage. This poor Celebrity coddling of the worst fashion has weakened all, selling a shell game which exploits conservatism. Rush has simply played to the mob after 2006. Truly regretful.
We see many poor offerings from so many of the sideline players who are desperate to find acceptance, ratings, readers, etc. A number of Politicians have tried to exploit the weak shell game of identity politics bringing us even further downward. The obvious attempts to exploit Our fine Base with cliche after cliche has become a comedy. The endless slogans which have little meaning, like "fight" or "common sense" sounds nice, but ends up looking truly foolish without including some substance in the recipe.
It isn't very surprising now, to see the EIB get it completely wrong about the latest Donna Brazile comments which provided laughter on live TV. Rush is so lost in placating fashion, he continues to make huge mistakes. The pattern of error is growing significantly from the Golden Mic. He recently admitted to not knowing about a special Election in NY the day after it was over, then tried to apply the most mundane rationale for the loss seconds later. It was simply embarrassing.
So many regretful moments. Such poorly conceived offerings. One of the worst signs is seeing some try to sell populism as a form of conservatism. An obvious signal the source is no longer sound. The loss of credibility is far and wide amongst those selling "conservatism" these days, and the reputations of some may not survive after this Primary.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseMy father was his high school's valedictorian. He was a Phi Beta Kappa graduate of the University of Iowa but that didn't matter to my mother's cousin who was graduated from Princeton. He did not go to the best schools. He wasn't a blue blood. My father called him the cousin who went to Princeton and never got over it.
I have been trading futures for over twenty years and I am well aware that it is possible to play by the rules but still cheat the system. It helps when your friends make the rules. High frequency trading aided by the co-location of servers have driven small local traders like myself out of the business of market making. Front running in the pits used to get you arrested, now it is legal if your computer is doing it for you.
I am extremely distrustful of east coast Republicans. I think, with justification, that they put their kind first and conservatism second. This blind loyalty to Romney, who has done worse damage to free markets through his rhetoric than Gingrich or Perry, is just part of the bias I see at NR and from the other east coast centered conservative media.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse