Biderman Blasts Barack Obama's Biggest Of The Big Lies

Tyler Durden's picture

"Inherent in the nature of government itself is the fact that it is incapable of effectively providing services," Biderman blasts, noting that "by 'effective', he means dollars and hours." The TrimTabs CEO is breathless in his beration of "the biggest of the big lies," that continues to be believed by most of America ("given their re-election of Barack Obama" he adds), that government can effectively provide services. The reality is "governments are not capable of getting anything done cost-effectively," and Biderman, focused on Obamacare as a recent example, concludes "its all FUBAR."

 

Some uncomfortable truths...

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
q99x2's picture

First minority as president and the country goes to hell in a handbasket. What's that tell you?

James_Cole's picture

Unlike Biderman's industry which is extremely cost effective and responsible.

Hedgetard55's picture

No one is putting a gun to your head to use anyone in Biderman's industry, unlike Obombercare, douchebag.

tsx500's picture

>>>>> BHO dangerous Marxist puppet

>>>>> BHO True American Patriot

Stackers's picture

Nice to see ole' Chuck back in his trade mark purple shirt.

DeadFred's picture

Door #3: NWO/banker/elitist puppet hiding in false leftist clothing.

bubblemania's picture

I voted uo, don't drone me Bro.

slaughterer's picture

Everytime I see these Bidermann videos, I always remember he went 100% short at ES 1425.

 

 

walküre's picture

ouch that had to leave a mark or a couple of stains

DeadFred's picture

And he'll be in the black by EOY.

Bam_Man's picture

But only with "Other Peoples' Money".

If it was his own, he'd be recording these videos from a homeless shelter, not the balcony of an 8-figure property in Sausalito.

James_Cole's picture

But only with "Other Peoples' Money".

If it was his own, he'd be recording these videos from a homeless shelter, not the balcony of an 8-figure property in Sausalito.

Yes the big irony, folks like him burning through OPM and then complaining about the government for doing the same thing (often solely at the benefit of his industry, moar irony!). 

Bay of Pigs's picture

+1 Biderman has zero credibilty. Tyler wouldnt even bother with him if he wasnt paying to put this on here.

The hypocrisy and lack of honesty and transparency of people like Biderman is appalling.

Renewable Life's picture

No one dislikes .gov as a service provider, more then I do.........BUT where were these fucking CEO's in 2008 and 2012, with their harsh critique of .gov and in favor of free market capitalism?????

Oh ya thats right, they had their fucking hands out and their mouths wide open for every penny of free shit they could get! Now they want to cry about efficiency??

Priceless!

Freddie's picture

Biderman's window looks out on Sausalito which is about as lib as it gets.  Mostly trust fund types, Silicon Valley money and San Fran dough.  Some of the homes look out of the bad were nose bleed expensive years ago. 

I wonder what his Sausalito neighbors think about their boy Obama now.

quikwit's picture

It tells me that you don't understand the difference between correlation and causation.

Zymurguy's picture

Not all persons of a minority race here are like that but in this case someone really chose a winner (er, a loser that is)

vxpatel's picture

nothing you idiot...the country has been headed down this path since ronald mcreagan...the presidents since him have only been acclerating the ride to hell...

Crime of the Century's picture

Oh to have a great man like Nixon or Jimmuh back in office. You are so right, my friend.

vxpatel's picture

Jimmy made a lot of sense...which is why he was villified by the AmeriKan public...nixon...that's another bag altogether...

buckethead's picture

They will hate you for this, but he might have been the last non-fed-cabal-controlled president. The system bucked his ass.

 

Nixon? Fed-cabal wet dream.

vxpatel's picture

JC had all these 'crazy, radical' ideas ....like consume less, use less fossil fuels...live within your means...get deficit spending under control...and for that he's considered the 'worst' president ever...tagicomdey at its finest.

Encroaching Darkness's picture

Brother Jimmuh was a total loss of a president. The inflation that was bad under Ford went astronomic under Carter; I needed a mortgage, the going rate was 18%. No one felt he was effective, reliable or understood what he was doing on a macro scale. The Russians saw him as an impotent clown, the Chinese weren't developed enough yet to be a factor; but the jihadis (early version) weren't impressed, his great Camp David peace initiatives lasted long enough for the ink to dry and the "get deficit spending under control" was a loss, as his own party was too busy buying votes with pork to pay him any attention either.

Ineffective when noticed, irrelevant when un-noticed, Brother Jimmuh was a loss for the country (Shah of Iran, Panama Canal, Castro ignored him and Arafat took advantage of him) so unless you snored through his presidency none of what you said above makes sense.

vxpatel's picture

Inflation has little to do with presidency, it's run by the fed. as for your assertions regarding foreign leaders...it's comical. The vietnam fisaco had recently ended, of course we looked ridiculous on the foreign stage.

GeezerGeek's picture

Fourth consecutive Ivy League, big-government president, and 25 years of deterioration in one sense or another.

Third consecutive Baby Boomer, big government brat as president, and 21 years of deterioration in one sense or another.

No more Baby Boomer, Ivy Leaguer big government presidents, please. (Yeah, that includes Hillary Rodham.)

Freddie's picture

All four them work for The Company.  They are all agency men even Clinton.   Skull and Bonzmen for Foggy Bottom/Langley.  Scum.

Alpo for Granny's picture

Every damned time I see Biderman I think of this guy from Dumb and Dumber.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCFuM9U7gso

zorba THE GREEK's picture

Biderman should be named Beaverman, did you see this guys 2 front teeth? They would

make a beaver jealous.

TheReplacement's picture

Yeah it's almost like his half blackness completely outweighs his actual political and governing philosphies and practices.

Takes are real rocket surgeon to figure that out.

kurzdump's picture

There is no competition, so how an WHY should the government be efficient in any way?

yogibear's picture

Look at VA hospitals. 

It's been a mess for decades.

One huge boondoggle for the liberals.

What a difference from a private vs a VA hospital. What a way to treat vets. Guess it's different in the White House, they get the best.

 

ronaldawg's picture

There was someon on this blog the other day indicating that the VA single payer system works well.  REALLY?

ObamaCaresHugSquad's picture

But they're free (if you have a disability rating, which is not hard to get if you know the system).  And personally, I've had a good experience in VA hospitals.  I've been on private insurance too and I didn't experience a noticeable difference.

ToNYC's picture

USG like M$FT grow by monitoring customer input, and AAPL does it best.

NOTaREALmerican's picture

Re: that government can effectively provide services. The reality is "governments are not capable of getting anything done cost-effectively,"

What a dumbass.   That's a feature NOT a bug for those living off of Big-Ag, Big-MIC, Big-Road, Big-Water, Big-Airport, Big-Energy, Big-Ed, Big-House, Big-Fin, Big-OldFart, Big-OldFartHealthcare, Big-AntiDrug, & Big-PoliceState.

Moving loot to the politically-connected is a "service" the government is VERY capable of doing effectively.

DeadFred's picture

I disagree. They could outsource the fleecing of America to a bunch of Cambodians named 'Ben' and 'Sally' and do it for half the cost. The politically connected are fools for not realizing this.

Freewheelin Franklin's picture

Government spends about 70% of tax dollars to get 30% of tax dollars to the poor. The private sector does the opposite, spending about 30% or less to get 70% of aid to the poor.

 

https://mises.org/journals/jls/21_2/21_2_1.pdf

James_Cole's picture

Actually, that's complete bullshit.

'Income redistribution' aside, charities are famously shit at actually getting the money they take in out to people. I (and my family) give to a number of charties and have researched it quite a bit and it's difficult to find charties who are at all effective with what they claim is their specialty. Particularly obvious when you look at their actual fiscal statements. 

http://80000hours.org/blog/93-why-most-charity-fundraisers-cause-harm

NOTaREALmerican's picture

Re:  Actually, that's complete bullshit.

Another Libertarian fantasy.  There's also the concept of the low-hanging fruit that private charties deal with.   I'm not a big fan of welfare, but the reality is that a significant percentage of the population is semi-psychotic and disfunctional and will never be able to "compete" with those who have better mental equipment.   Just life.   We can either let them die in a survival-of-the-fittest orgy, or keep them alive because they are humans.    

Beam Me Up Scotty's picture

That's because most charities are nothing more than Jobz programs now. How much do the principles at those charitable organizations earn per year? They sure as hell aren't volunteering their time. They need to run the phone banks to keep their revenue(and pay) up. Meanwhile Jon Q Public thinks most of that money he donated is going to the "worthy" cause.

2bit Hoarder's picture

the CEO of any charity you're ever heard of makes 7 figures.  The only thing more profitable than running a charity is religion.

from my own research, i have found the salvation army to be taking the least off of the top, (except small local charities) which is why they are the charity to which i donate.  i am a libertarian.  Your "libertarian fantasy" poke shows how little you really know about libertarians.

NOTaREALmerican's picture

Re: Your "libertarian fantasy" poke shows how little you really know about libertarians.

I should have quoted "Libertarian" (LINO - the ones who keep voting Red Team).

I'm a libertarian too, but I would never think there's enough nice people to keep charities private.   I might be a libertarian, but - in the real world - I know most people are self-serving selfish assholes (including the guy in the mirror).

monad's picture

You're both right. Its just harder to shut down a POS state crony sponsored charity. 

Future Jim's picture

Yes, cronyism is bad, but don't confuse crony charities with the concept of charity.

Freewheelin Franklin's picture

Then I guess you need to do your homework when deciding what charity to give to.Or is that too much work? I know it is much easier for your employer to just take the money out of your paycheck and give it to the government and let them worry about who gets help and who doesn't.  After all, the government is so effective at providing charity that it creates a "trap", at the expense of tax payers.Charities are supposed to be like the free market and have to compete for donations. The government hands out charity about as well as it controls the economy.

 

But if you can dispute the 70% to 30% the government spends on bureaucrats, feel free. The government has a near monopoly on charity and it is very difficult to compete with a near monopoly.

 

And by law, charities are only allowed to keep 1/3. That's enough to provide incentive and hire competent management.. What incentive does the government have? Your vote? Exactly how accountable is government and their bureaucrats compared to private charities? 

 

And that's just the utilitarian argument. We have yet to discuss the moral implications of takingh money, by force, to "help" others.

 

http://reason.com/blog/2013/10/23/charity-navigator-revamps-ratings-system

James_Cole's picture

Then I guess you need to do your homework when deciding what charity to give to.

Funny... it's almost like that's exactly what I said. 2bit Hoarder echoes my experience. 

And by law, charities are only allowed to keep 1/3. That's enough to provide incentive and hire competent management.. 

You don't understand how charities work. 

http://reason.com/blog/2013/10/23/charity-navigator-revamps-ratings-system

I use charity navigator, there are a few good similiar services. 

 

TimmyM's picture

Hey James_Cole gov shill, one of them is voluntary-get it?

 

Bunga Bunga's picture

Obamacare will fail, not because a government is unable to operate a health care system  (other countries have done it for decades), but because the Americans are the sickest people in the world. Now mental care is covered too, that will blow up the system instantly.