Guest Post: In The Land Of Self-Interested Pygmies, No One Advocates For The Nation

Tyler Durden's picture




 
0
Your rating: None
 

- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Wed, 07/27/2011 - 16:40 | 1499197 Ahmeexnal
Ahmeexnal's picture

sacrifice your own self, to the needs of others.

well, that's what brought the world to where it's at now: the welfare state

Wed, 07/27/2011 - 16:53 | 1499255 njdoo7
njdoo7's picture

I submit that most people paying for the welfare state don't want to be paying for the welfare state (as a whole: war, bailouts, etc.). 

Therefore, it is not them sacrificing for the needs of others, but others using state coercion to benefit themselves.

Wed, 07/27/2011 - 16:57 | 1499282 mynhair
mynhair's picture

'paying' being the key word.

Wed, 07/27/2011 - 17:15 | 1499362 AldousHuxley
AldousHuxley's picture
Governing Dynamics: Ignore the Blond Scene - A Beautiful Mind Movie

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CemLiSI5ox8

 

Nash : Adam Smith needs revision.

Hansen : What are you talking about?

Nash : If we all go for the blonde...we block each other. Not a single one of us is gonna get her. So then we go for her friends, but they will all give us the cold shoulder because nobody likes to be second choice. Well, what if no one goes for the blonde?
We don't get in each other's way, and we don't insult the other girls.
That's the only way we win.
(Laughs)
Adam Smith said the best result comes from everyone in the group doing what's best for himself, right? That's what he said, right?

Others : Right.

Nash : Incomplete.
Incomplete, okay?
Because the best result will come...from everyone in the group doing what's best for himself...and the group.

Wed, 07/27/2011 - 18:04 | 1499579 GoinFawr
GoinFawr's picture

This is for Cara Leaf below:

REFORMAT!!!!! You've effed the thread's Chi.

Wed, 07/27/2011 - 18:33 | 1499687 AldousHuxley
AldousHuxley's picture

perfect example of selfish American ruining for the rest

Wed, 07/27/2011 - 19:20 | 1499824 JW n FL
JW n FL's picture

http://www.youtube.com/user/RussiaToday#p/u/19/tgzpQ10Y8go

SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! Worth the 5 - 10 minutes! This guy is FANTASTIC!!

Wed, 07/27/2011 - 19:45 | 1499899 t0mmyBerg
t0mmyBerg's picture

not sure which thing you are referring to, although max keiser is always interesting. 

as for this article by charles hughes smith, while it lists a few areas where large numbers of people fail to be reasonable, i think the idea that there is something wrong with self-interest as an organizing principle for economics is wide of the mark.   your example of pollution resulting from following self-interest is a bad one.  the real principle guiding our society is do what the hell you want as long as it does not negatively affect others in a way that is unreasonable.  clearly dumping toxic sludge in common waterways is unreasonable.  i realize it happened, but as a polity we took care of it.  better late than never.  so maybe come up with a better example.

what else will motivate people if not self-interest? some societies have tried other ways.  you may have heard of them; the soviet union, peoples republic of china, north korea?  the article, which is more in the vein of a bitch session, does not offer any solutions, but it implies that something other than self-interest should guide us.  history has shown this doesnt work out very well.  see the list above.

finally, why did the format of the comments section change here at ZH?  I liked it better before.

Wed, 07/27/2011 - 20:50 | 1500028 i-dog
i-dog's picture

"example of pollution resulting from following self-interest is a bad one"

Thank you for beating me to it! It is indeed a very bad example.

Prior to the growth of big government, in the 19th Century, all local issues were settled locally. A polluter would be sued for compensation by those around him who were affected.

Then, big government stepped in and started making decisions along the lines of the polluting factory being allowed to continue "otherwise jobs would be lost". Instead of a system of private contract, personal responsibility and natural justice, we arrived at the 'New Age' of government-mandated laws, regulations, bureaucrats and "he who pays the biggest bribes to the legislator wins"!

Thu, 07/28/2011 - 00:17 | 1500321 TDoS
TDoS's picture

We didn't fix anything.  The clean water act was gutted by the Bush administration, and for the most part ALL OF OUR INDUSTRY WAS MOVED OVERSEAS!  With the jobs went a lot of the toxic sludge.  Corporations said, "Fuck it, we'll build in China and dump all the shit we want."

Funny thing about the planet though.  Pollution doesn't stay local for long.  The dioxin in the breast milk of every mammal on the planet should be evidence enough.

Wed, 07/27/2011 - 19:46 | 1499900 t0mmyBerg
t0mmyBerg's picture

not sure which thing you are referring to, although max keiser is always interesting. 

as for this article by charles hughes smith, while it lists a few areas where large numbers of people fail to be reasonable, i think the idea that there is something wrong with self-interest as an organizing principle for economics is wide of the mark.   your example of pollution resulting from following self-interest is a bad one.  the real principle guiding our society is do what the hell you want as long as it does not negatively affect others in a way that is unreasonable.  clearly dumping toxic sludge in common waterways is unreasonable.  i realize it happened, but as a polity we took care of it.  better late than never.  so maybe come up with a better example.

what else will motivate people if not self-interest? some societies have tried other ways.  you may have heard of them; the soviet union, peoples republic of china, north korea?  the article, which is more in the vein of a bitch session, does not offer any solutions, but it implies that something other than self-interest should guide us.  history has shown this doesnt work out very well.  see the list above.

finally, why did the format of the comments section change here at ZH?  I liked it better before.

Wed, 07/27/2011 - 23:08 | 1500236 snowball777
snowball777's picture

Well, what if no one goes for the blonde?

And what if Nash was just trying to hustle them to get the blond for himself?


Thu, 07/28/2011 - 05:31 | 1500515 AldousHuxley
AldousHuxley's picture

that is the trust necessary to make the system work...social contract.

However, captalism favors winner-takes-all economies.

and we have a global economy. It is not just Nash and his American friends anymore, but many other groups of guys(Russian, China, India) also looking to get laid with still only enough girls for one group. If Americans practice winner-takes-all, then one American will get the blond and 4 guys from another group will play in team to get the other girls. 3 other Americans will not get laid.

 

American superelites have a starting advantage so they may be able get the blond. But it is highly unlikely that American middle class will get laid when competing against Chinese, Russian, Indian elite-middle class team.

 

 

 

Wed, 07/27/2011 - 17:56 | 1499551 cara leaf
cara leaf's picture

The Center for Responsive Politics lists all donations.

Republocrats receive similar donations in similar magnitude from similar sources. 

 Goldman and AIG were among Obama’s largest supporters.  Health insurance, hospitals, nursing homes & drug companies dumped $9M on Baucus while he headed the Committee to Overhaul Healthcare. 

 

This plunder, to Mr. Populist himself

Univ. of CA       $1,591,395

Goldman           $994,795

Harvard            $854,747

Microsoft           $833,617

Google              $803,436

Citigroup           $701,290

JPMorgan           $695,132

Time Warner       $590,084

Sidley Austin       $588,598

Stanford            $586,557

Nat’l Amusements  $551,683

UBS                   $543,219

Wilmerhale LLP    $542,618

Skadden Arps     $530,839

IBM                  $528,822

Columbia           $528,302

Morgan Stanley    $514,881

GE                   $499,130

US Gov’t           $494,820 ???

Latham Watkins  $493,835

 

Top of Form

Bottom of Form

Bottom of Form

Top Donors 1989-2010

Top of Form

 

Top of Form

Rank

Outfit

1989-2009

Dem

Rep

Tilt

1

ATT

$45,650,984

46%

52%

2

American Municipal Employees

$42,963,511

99%

0%

  

3

Act Blue

$42,601,344

99%

0%

  

4

National Realtors

$36,848,743

57%

41%

5

Goldman

$32,750,702

44%

55%

6

American Assn for Justice

$32,602,779

96%

2%

  

7

Intl Brotherhood Electrical Workers

$32,573,445

98%

1%

  

8

National Education

$30,891,230

92%

7%

  

9

Laborers Union

$29,767,300

95%

3%

  

10

Teamsters

$28,764,784

97%

2%

  

11

Service Employees

$28,738,432

100%

0%

  

12

Carpenters & Joiners

$28,645,308

85%

14%

 

13

American Federation of Teachers

$28,042,891

99%

0%

  

14

Communication Workers of America

$27,800,156

96%

1%

  

15

Citigroup

$27,576,042

49%

49%

16

American Medical

$26,839,420

51%

48%

17

United Auto Workers

$26,509,902

99%

0%

  

18

Machinists & Aerospace Union

$25,924,777

98%

1%

  

19

National Auto Dealers

$25,310,758

50%

49%

20

UPS

$24,908,388

44%

54%

21

United Food/Commercial Workers Union

$24,841,083

99%

0%

  

22

Altria

$24,342,266

35%

63%

23

American Bankers

$23,386,446

37%

61%

24

National Home Builders

$22,799,905

40%

59%

25

EMILY's List

$22,397,454

100%

0%

  

26

National Beer Wholesalers

$22,248,295

56%

43%

27

Microsoft

$21,036,363

58%

40%

28

JPMorgan

$20,370,613

51%

48%

29

National Letter Carriers

$20,253,434

96%

3%

  

30

Time Warner

$20,029,888

84%

15%

 

31

Morgan Stanley

$19,888,968

42%

55%

32

Lockheed

$19,362,865

55%

44%

33

Verizon

$19,320,192

55%

43%

34

General Electric (they don’t just sell light bulbs)

$19,102,517

60%

38%

35

Pfizer

$18,816,803

56%

42%

36

FedEx

$18,431,040

45%

52%

37

AFL-CIO

$18,418,996

90%

9%

  

38

Credit Union National

$18,254,729

55%

43%

39

Bank of America

$17,920,978

38%

60%

40

Ernst & Young

$17,695,174

52%

47%

41

NRA

$17,661,946

28%

71%

 

42

Blue Cross

$17,494,283

41%

58%

43

Sheet Metal Union

$17,443,563

98%

0%

  

44

Plumbers & Pipefitters

$17,208,076

94%

3%

  

45

American Dental

$17,174,379

50%

48%

46

American Hospital

$17,159,429

70%

29%

 

47

Fire Fighters

$17,147,743

81%

18%

 

48

Deloitte Touche

$16,926,261

43%

55%

49

Operating Engineers

$16,460,265

89%

10%

 

50

Pricewaterhouse Coopers

$16,237,227

43%

56%

51

Air Line Pilots

$16,143,447

87%

12%

 

52

UBS

$16,132,574

38%

61%

53

AFLAC

$15,635,319

46%

53%

54

Nat’l Ins & Fin. Advisors

$15,464,854

50%

48%

55

Boeing

$15,101,349

58%

40%

56

Union Pacific

$14,711,598

51%

47%

57

Merrill Lynch

$14,286,110

0%

0%

58

United Steelworkers

$14,176,151

100%

0%

  

59

United Transportation Union

$14,122,960

89%

11%

 

60

Ironworkers

$14,002,675

97%

2%

  

61

Reynolds

$13,588,078

7%

92%

  

62

Northrop Grumman

$13,300,564

53%

44%

63

American CPAs

$13,244,347

45%

52%

64

BellSouth

$12,993,782

0%

0%

65

Credit Suisse

$12,858,973

49%

50%

66

Anheuser-Busch

$12,775,021

61%

38%

67

Nat’l Rural Electric Cooperative

$12,715,821

51%

48%

68

Postal Union

$12,627,473

98%

1%

  

69

General Dynamics

$12,262,457

62%

37%

70

Disney

$11,614,912

60%

37%

71

American Financial Group

$11,524,337

10%

89%

 

72

GlaxoSmithKline

$11,448,990

45%

53%

73

KPMG

$11,225,845

46%

52%

74

Chevron

$11,223,599

18%

80%

 

75

Air Traffic Controllers

$11,210,838

83%

15%

 

76

Comcast

$11,185,687

62%

36%

77

DLA Piper

$11,129,757

69%

28%

78

Exxon Mobil

$11,103,878

16%

81%

 

79

News Corp

$10,998,353

60%

37%

80

Raytheon

$10,982,771

54%

44%

81

Active & Retired Fed Employees

$10,645,000

60%

40%

82

Club for Growth

$10,429,413

0%

89%

 

83

Human Rights

$10,363,479

97%

2%

  

84

Honeywell

$10,286,130

52%

47%

85

Saban

$10,140,585

100%

0%

  

86

MBNA

$10,029,256

0%

0%

87

National Restaurant

$10,009,295

36%

63%

88

Southern Co

$10,008,830

46%

52%

89

Koch

$9,991,672

12%

86%

 

90

New York Life

$9,980,923

58%

41%

91

UST

$9,950,761

0%

0%

92

Wal-Mart

$9,886,854

47%

51%

93

Prudential

$9,860,156

78%

20%

 

94

Freddie Mac

  $9,815,240

61%

38%

95

Builders & Contractors

$9,777,058

1%

96%

  

96

Academy Ophthalmology

$9,774,208

56%

43%

97

AIG

$9,761,084

41%

57%

98

American Health

$9,760,879

62%

36%

99

MetLife

$9,748,477

54%

45%

100

News Web Corp

$9,674,850

100%

0%

  

101

Anesthesiologists

$9,583,037

43%

55%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Lehman Brothers: 1990-2010 Individual Contributions

$50,000+ Federal Candidates/ Parties during time at Lehman.

Donor

Total

Soft

Dem

Rep

 Dem

  Reps

Chancellor 

$297,000

$211,750

$10,250

$286,750

     4%

   97%

Collerton

$242,140

$0

$242,140

$0

   100%

   0%

DeMuro 

$174,350

$0

$174,350

$0

   100%

   0%

Fuld, Dick

$297,900

$1,000

$259,600

$29,300

   87%

   10%

Goldfarb

$94,400

$0

$88,400

$4,000

   94%

   4%

Krueger

$336,480

$0

$331,230

$4,000

   98%

  1%

Lessing

$357,075

$0

$17,300

$337,775

    5%

95%

Schwartz

$313,713

$0

$4,500

$308,013

    1%

98%

FEC 9/13/10

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now HERE’S SOMEONE you won’t meet everyday:

James A. Johnson (Partial CV)

Faculty, Princeton

Senate staffer 

Director, Public Affairs,  Dayton-Hudson (Target)

Carter Admin, asst. Walt Mondale

Founder, Public Strategies (has to be some kind of lobbyist)

1985-90 Managing Director, LEHMAN (Think maybe Hank didn’t like him?)

1991-8 Chair, CEO, Fannie Mae 

2001- Vice-Chair, Perseus  (hmmm…wonder does he know Norm Selby?)

2004- OFHEO finds Johnson improperly defers $200m of Fannie expenses (he’s not the one who committed suicide, is he?)

2006- OFHEO (Oops! Guess not!)  finds Fannie has significantly underreported Jim’s income.  Not a paltry $6 million---$21 million (who said you can trust an accountant?)

June 4, 2008- Obama anoints Jim “Head Chimeara” of a three-headed formation that will vet his V-P; Jim suddenly attracts a little too much controversy when it’s discovered blood bro’ Angie Mozilla gave sweetheart Jumbos to Jimbo. May 22, 2008- Party lets it slip that Mr. Populist himself  still wanted Jim to select his VP.  (So now we know.  Our president is a masochist.)

June 11, 2008- Jim steps down (but hey, it’s not exactly jail!)  and once again, Democracy triumphs!

Jim’s is also a really good Eagle Scout.  Just have a look at all of those badges!  

Board Member:  Goldman, Gannett, KB, Target, Temple-Inland Director (past,) United Health

1996-2004- Chair, Kennedy Center     1994-2003- Chair, Brookings

Member in good standing: (anybody else think these clubs are connected?)

American Friends of Bilderberg  Trilateral Commission   Council on Foreign Relations

My goodness! Such an industrious fellow!  Who wouldn’t want someone like him on their team? 

 

 

 

Wed, 07/27/2011 - 19:16 | 1499809 Henry Chinaski
Henry Chinaski's picture

Get a blog.

Wed, 07/27/2011 - 21:31 | 1500091 fuu
fuu's picture

wtf are you JW in FL's wife?

Thu, 07/28/2011 - 04:44 | 1500495 Escapeclaws
Escapeclaws's picture

You could have made a bar graph of a lot of this data and saved space. However, I don't disagree with what you say.

Wed, 07/27/2011 - 20:30 | 1499845 oldman
oldman's picture

njdoo,

'Therefore, it is not them sacrificing for the needs of others, but others using state coercion to benefit themselves.'

 

And just think of how seldom we hear in conversation or read any objection to the fact that that the coercers pay so little of the tab for anything. Slave wages, no social support for those they cast aside as our technology increases production, writing the law that places corporatism and statism above we trolls, wars, wars, and wars without end in our history----------------sorry, I cannot go on with this without becoming enraged by the terrorized humans i see everywhere I go in the US.

Enough to say that we cannot even tax these bastards.

This is going to be the long war. Unless we give up and accept ourselves as the trolls we are and then, get to work and clean this up. If each of us would understand that each is both 'part of the problem' as well as 'part of the solution', then by 'doing-nothing' more than, individually, reducing our being 'part of the problem', the war would be over.

I used the word 'individually' with great intention, so that all of you 'red-blooded cold-hearted 'individuals' at ZH might be able to join the rest of us trolls----and not just mock the reality with your childish labeling and name-calling.

it will take every phucking one of us coming together in collaboration--------------unless we are simply whining as I suspect we are.

Ignore this      just an oldman

 

Wed, 07/27/2011 - 17:15 | 1499360 Oh regional Indian
Oh regional Indian's picture

Someone said the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
I say it's lit up by a thousand points of light.
ORI

Wed, 07/27/2011 - 17:20 | 1499382 GoinFawr
GoinFawr's picture

Jesse's perspective:

 "The corporatist strategy has been to give generous tax cuts to the wealthy, spend money like drunken sailors on things that benefit the monied interests, and then declare a budget crisis and take the difference out of the hides of the middle class, the weak, and the elderly. So far Obama is following the same playbook, with a little dusting of compassionate sounding hoo-hah."

From: http://jessescrossroadscafe.blogspot.com/2011/07/time-to-take-nuclear-option-in-deficit.html

Sounds spot on to me.

Wed, 07/27/2011 - 17:55 | 1499546 gwiss
gwiss's picture

Charles usually has good viewpoints, but he missed the boat bigtime on this one.  He forgets, the market works great WHEN TRANSACTIONS ARE VOLUNTARY.  The "voluntary" is what keeps the service providers honest.  You get junk service?  You stop paying, and the service provider gets recycled.  Without this feedback loop, the whole concept of the market can't function.  Thus, public servants must be seen as providing a service.  And, if the service they provide is worth the cost, people use the service.  If it is not, they don't.  In this case, the "service" that public servants are supposedly providing is some type of adult level administration of public goods.

 

But, they aren't providing that service.  Instead, they make poor choices that essentially loot the company they work for, but they don't care because by the time the consequences come around, they will be long gone. It's as if you turned your car into the valet, and come back to find roaches in the ashtray, cigarette burns in the leather, and ass marks and a used condom on the back seat. 

 

The problem isn't some lack of selfless public interest.  That way of running a company or a society or a nation is a black hole, because history tells us that regardless of how enlightened the motives will be going in, in remarkably short order the cream of the shit will rise to the top if allowed.  Thus, you need a system that is capable of correcting problems through bulletproof feedback loops, which is what the market is when allowed to function.  You can't depend on altruism -- it's way to fragile.  That's like entering a Formula 1 car in the Paris-Dakar -- it's broke inside of a mile. 

Wed, 07/27/2011 - 23:05 | 1500230 prole
prole's picture

gwiss very astute comment re "voluntary transactions."
Everything you said after the word "thus" is total BS.

"Public servants" should always be in quotes, unless you can call these "public servants" as such after watching this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kassP7zI0qc If you can, then I know what type of "job" you have.

Any relationship where one party is pointing a gun at the head of the other party, can in no way be considered voluntary, or related in any way to Capitalism or free market.

Instead of "public servant" you should be required to replace that prevarication with the term "people who point guns at us and tell us what to do against our will."  This should cure you of your folly

Thu, 07/28/2011 - 10:13 | 1500940 BigJim
BigJim's picture

I suggest you re-read gwiss' post. You appear to have missed his point completely.

Thu, 07/28/2011 - 10:14 | 1500946 gwiss
gwiss's picture

Your response is puzzling to me.  My whole point is that interactions between people only stay healthy if the interaction is mutually voluntary.  When you institute a government answer to something, it is no longer a voluntary interaction.  Instead, it is a monopoly situation.  A monopoly situation will always lead the party providing the service to give poor quality at a high price, while the party receiving the service will always be angry because they don't have the option of withdrawing from an unsatisfactory relationship.

Thus our unhappyness with our current government -- they aren't providing the service we contracted them to provide, and instead are using their monopoly power to enrich themselves and maintain their position at our expense.

And your response is to post a video showing police abusing their power, as if this is some sort of rebuttal to what I'm saying?  Seems like we're on the same side, no?

Wed, 07/27/2011 - 18:02 | 1499569 cara leaf
cara leaf's picture

The Center for Responsive Politics lists all donations.

Republocrats receive similar donations in similar magnitude from similar sources. 

Goldman and AIG were two of Obama’s largest contributors. 

The insurance industry gave Baucus $9 million while he headed the committee to overhaul health insurance. 

THIS PLUNDER, TO MR. POPULIST HIMSELF.

Univ. of CA       $1,591,395

Goldman           $994,795

Harvard            $854,747

Microsoft           $833,617

Google              $803,436

Citigroup           $701,290

JPMorgan           $695,132

Time Warner       $590,084

Sidley Austin       $588,598

Stanford            $586,557

Nat’l Amusements  $551,683

UBS                   $543,219

Wilmerhale LLP    $542,618

Skadden Arps     $530,839

IBM                  $528,822

Columbia           $528,302

Morgan Stanley    $514,881

GE                   $499,130

US Gov’t           $494,820 ???

Latham Watkins  $493,835

 

Top of Form

Bottom of Form

Bottom of Form

Top Donors 1989-2010

Top of Form

 

Top of Form

Rank

Outfit

1989-2009

Dem

Rep

Tilt

1

ATT

$45,650,984

46%

52%

2

American Municipal Employees

$42,963,511

99%

0%

  

3

Act Blue

$42,601,344

99%

0%

  

4

National Realtors

$36,848,743

57%

41%

5

Goldman

$32,750,702

44%

55%

6

American Assn for Justice

$32,602,779

96%

2%

  

7

Intl Brotherhood Electrical Workers

$32,573,445

98%

1%

  

8

National Education

$30,891,230

92%

7%

  

9

Laborers Union

$29,767,300

95%

3%

  

10

Teamsters

$28,764,784

97%

2%

  

11

Service Employees

$28,738,432

100%

0%

  

12

Carpenters & Joiners

$28,645,308

85%

14%

 

13

American Federation of Teachers

$28,042,891

99%

0%

  

14

Communication Workers of America

$27,800,156

96%

1%

  

15

Citigroup

$27,576,042

49%

49%

16

American Medical

$26,839,420

51%

48%

17

United Auto Workers

$26,509,902

99%

0%

  

18

Machinists & Aerospace Union

$25,924,777

98%

1%

  

19

National Auto Dealers

$25,310,758

50%

49%

20

UPS

$24,908,388

44%

54%

21

United Food/Commercial Workers Union

$24,841,083

99%

0%

  

22

Altria

$24,342,266

35%

63%

23

American Bankers

$23,386,446

37%

61%

24

National Home Builders

$22,799,905

40%

59%

25

EMILY's List

$22,397,454

100%

0%

  

26

National Beer Wholesalers

$22,248,295

56%

43%

27

Microsoft

$21,036,363

58%

40%

28

JPMorgan

$20,370,613

51%

48%

29

National Letter Carriers

$20,253,434

96%

3%

  

30

Time Warner

$20,029,888

84%

15%

 

31

Morgan Stanley

$19,888,968

42%

55%

32

Lockheed

$19,362,865

55%

44%

33

Verizon

$19,320,192

55%

43%

34

General Electric (they don’t just sell light bulbs)

$19,102,517

60%

38%

35

Pfizer

$18,816,803

56%

42%

36

FedEx

$18,431,040

45%

52%

37

AFL-CIO

$18,418,996

90%

9%

  

38

Credit Union National

$18,254,729

55%

43%

39

Bank of America

$17,920,978

38%

60%

40

Ernst & Young

$17,695,174

52%

47%

41

NRA

$17,661,946

28%

71%

 

42

Blue Cross

$17,494,283

41%

58%

43

Sheet Metal Union

$17,443,563

98%

0%

  

44

Plumbers & Pipefitters

$17,208,076

94%

3%

  

45

American Dental

$17,174,379

50%

48%

46

American Hospital

$17,159,429

70%

29%

 

47

Fire Fighters

$17,147,743

81%

18%

 

48

Deloitte Touche

$16,926,261

43%

55%

49

Operating Engineers

$16,460,265

89%

10%

 

50

Pricewaterhouse Coopers

$16,237,227

43%

56%

51

Air Line Pilots

$16,143,447

87%

12%

 

52

UBS

$16,132,574

38%

61%

53

AFLAC

$15,635,319

46%

53%

54

Nat’l Ins & Fin. Advisors

$15,464,854

50%

48%

55

Boeing

$15,101,349

58%

40%

56

Union Pacific

$14,711,598

51%

47%

57

Merrill Lynch

$14,286,110

0%

0%

58

United Steelworkers

$14,176,151

100%

0%

  

59

United Transportation Union

$14,122,960

89%

11%

 

60

Ironworkers

$14,002,675

97%

2%

  

61

Reynolds

$13,588,078

7%

92%

  

62

Northrop Grumman

$13,300,564

53%

44%

63

American CPAs

$13,244,347

45%

52%

64

BellSouth

$12,993,782

0%

0%

65

Credit Suisse

$12,858,973

49%

50%

66

Anheuser-Busch

$12,775,021

61%

38%

67

Nat’l Rural Electric Cooperative

$12,715,821

51%

48%

68

Postal Union

$12,627,473

98%

1%

  

69

General Dynamics

$12,262,457

62%

37%

70

Disney

$11,614,912

60%

37%

71

American Financial Group

$11,524,337

10%

89%

 

72

GlaxoSmithKline

$11,448,990

45%

53%

73

KPMG

$11,225,845

46%

52%

74

Chevron

$11,223,599

18%

80%

 

75

Air Traffic Controllers

$11,210,838

83%

15%

 

76

Comcast

$11,185,687

62%

36%

77

DLA Piper

$11,129,757

69%

28%

78

Exxon Mobil

$11,103,878

16%

81%

 

79

News Corp

$10,998,353

60%

37%

80

Raytheon

$10,982,771

54%

44%

81

Active & Retired Fed Employees

$10,645,000

60%

40%

82

Club for Growth

$10,429,413

0%

89%

 

83

Human Rights

$10,363,479

97%

2%

  

84

Honeywell

$10,286,130

52%

47%

85

Saban

$10,140,585

100%

0%

  

86

MBNA

$10,029,256

0%

0%

87

National Restaurant

$10,009,295

36%

63%

88

Southern Co

$10,008,830

46%

52%

89

Koch

$9,991,672

12%

86%

 

90

New York Life

$9,980,923

58%

41%

91

UST

$9,950,761

0%

0%

92

Wal-Mart

$9,886,854

47%

51%

93

Prudential

$9,860,156

78%

20%

 

94

Freddie Mac

  $9,815,240

61%

38%

95

Builders & Contractors

$9,777,058

1%

96%

  

96

Academy Ophthalmology

$9,774,208

56%

43%

97

AIG

$9,761,084

41%

57%

98

American Health

$9,760,879

62%

36%

99

MetLife

$9,748,477

54%

45%

100

News Web Corp

$9,674,850

100%

0%

  

101

Anesthesiologists

$9,583,037

43%

55%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Lehman Brothers: 1990-2010 Individual Contributions

$50,000+ Federal Candidates/ Parties during time at Lehman.

Donor

Total

Soft

Dem

Rep

 Dem

  Reps

Chancellor, Steve 

$297,000

$211,750

$10,250

$286,750

     4%

   97%

Collerton, Tony

$242,140

$0

$242,140

$0

   100%

   0%

DeMuro, Dave 

$174,350

$0

$174,350

$0

   100%

   0%

Fuld, Dick

$297,900

$1,000

$259,600

$29,300

   87%

   10%

Goldfarb, Dave

$94,400

$0

$88,400

$4,000

   94%

   4%

Krueger, Harry 

$336,480

$0

$331,230

$4,000

   98%

  1%

Lessing, Steve

$357,075

$0

$17,300

$337,775

    5%

95%

Schwartz, Marv

$313,713

$0

$4,500

$308,013

    1%

98%

FEC 9/13/10

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now HERE’S SOMEONE you won’t meet everyday:

James A. Johnson (Partial CV)

Faculty, Princeton

Senate staffer 

Director, Public Affairs,  Dayton-Hudson (Target)

Carter Admin, asst. Walt Mondale

Founder, Public Strategies (has to be some kind of lobbyist)

1985-90 Managing Director, LEHMAN (Think maybe Hank didn’t like him?)

1991-8 Chair, CEO, Fannie Mae 

2001- Vice-Chair, Perseus  (hmmm…wonder does he know Norm Selby?)

2004- OFHEO finds Johnson improperly defers $200m of Fannie expenses (he’s not the one who committed suicide, is he?)

2006- OFHEO (Oops! Guess not!)  finds Fannie has significantly underreported Jim’s income. 

Not a paltry $6 million---$21 million (who said you can trust an accountant?)

June 4, 2008- Obama anoints Jim “Head Chimeara” of a three-headed formation that will vet his V-P;

Jim suddenly attracts a little too much controversy when it’s discovered blood bro’ Angie Mozilla gave sweetheart Jumbos to Jimbo.

May 22, 2008- Party lets it slip that Mr. Populist himself  still wanted Jim to select his VP.  (So now we know.  Our president is a masochist.)

June 11, 2008- Jim steps down (but hey, it’s not exactly jail!)  and once again, Democracy triumphs!

Jim’s is also a really good Eagle Scout.  Just have a look at all of those badges! 

Board Member:  Goldman, Gannett, KB, Target, Temple-Inland Director (past,) United Health

1996-2004- Chair, Kennedy Center     1994-2003- Chair, Brookings

Member in good standing: (anybody but me think these guys are connected?)

American Friends of Bilderberg  Trilateral Commission   Council on Foreign Relations

My goodness! Such an industrious fellow!  Who wouldn’t want someone like him on their team? 

 

 

 

Wed, 07/27/2011 - 19:32 | 1499867 Fukushima Sam
Fukushima Sam's picture

Thanks a lot for screwing up the comments section with your craptastically long and off-topic post... twice!

Thu, 07/28/2011 - 05:49 | 1500522 V in PA
V in PA's picture

FAIL!!!

Wed, 07/27/2011 - 19:56 | 1499923 sqz
sqz's picture

Why are (more than) page long individual comments allowed on this site?

Is there any way to ignore spam posters, e.g. "cara leaf", or at least completely hide individual posts so that a comment thread can be followed, please?

Thanks.

Wed, 07/27/2011 - 20:38 | 1500009 GoinFawr
GoinFawr's picture

Yes, set the 'comment viewing options threshold' dropdown at the bottom of the article to '+5', that should work (for now)

Wed, 07/27/2011 - 16:40 | 1499202 mynhair
mynhair's picture

No one?  Hughsie, have you heard of the TEA party yet?

Wed, 07/27/2011 - 17:17 | 1499374 V in PA
V in PA's picture

I am all for the TEA party that Rick Santelli started, but I fear the current TEA party is being taken over by the religious right.

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

Wed, 07/27/2011 - 19:24 | 1499840 skunzie
skunzie's picture

I think I'd be willing to have the Tea party being run by the religious right rather than the lunatic left that runs the current regime.  Just sayin'

Wed, 07/27/2011 - 21:28 | 1500102 Cathartes Aura
Cathartes Aura's picture

I'm guessing you're a guy, just sayin'.

Wed, 07/27/2011 - 16:41 | 1499208 Mercury
Mercury's picture

If I pursued only my own self-interest, I would dump the toxic effluent from my factory right into the river ( a la China's very laissez faire economy) while I lived far away in an exclusive community far from the stench and poisons. Why pay for costly remediation when the "free" river beckons? After all, it all works out wonderfully if we each pursue our own self-interest with methodical, nay maniacal, single-mindedness.

Actually, this is a better example of "Tragedy of the Commons" than pure play knock on the collective benefits of self interested individuals.

Wed, 07/27/2011 - 16:43 | 1499220 mynhair
mynhair's picture

Apt description of GE.

Wed, 07/27/2011 - 16:59 | 1499246 Mercury
Mercury's picture

Obviously the whole purpose of government is to prohibit some actions while encouraging others even if they are counter to someone's self interest but Adam Smith's nonintuitive connection between selfish and collective interest and Hayek's emphasis of the importance of decentralized incentives are essentially correct.

I think what this guy is groping towards is a realization that without overarching common values in place, things start to fall apart.  "Multi-culturalism" and the politics of group identity (and yes, over-powering corporate lobbying)  are actually more divisive to the social fabric of a country/culture than the machinations of hundreds of millions of self-interested individuals are.

Wed, 07/27/2011 - 16:59 | 1499288 njdoo7
njdoo7's picture

How's that working out? 

People can collectively deter certain actions while encouraging others without coercion.

Creating a monopolized coercive central command system, that the self interested can take over to exploit society, has failed.

 

Wed, 07/27/2011 - 17:12 | 1499340 Mercury
Mercury's picture

Optimally you don't want too powerful of a central government (I think we're well into the danger zone already).  That's why the Bill of Rights are all rights the individual has against the government (Obama is on record wanting to change that by the way - he wants rights to things from government).

 

But too-powerful, self-interested groups are more dangerous and less beneficial to the larger society than too-powerful, self-interested individuals.

 

Beware of those who want to unduly restrict individual liberty in the name of collective fairness and the common good.

Wed, 07/27/2011 - 18:56 | 1499763 njdoo7
njdoo7's picture

The life-cycle of a a restrained government:

- society is more productive

- higher productivity attracts exploiters

- exploitation goes through a long-term uptrend

- exploitation consumes productivity

- society becomes destabilized

The outcoumes can vary: societal collapse, restructuring, revolution,  and/or war

 

The morally accepted coercion is the catalyst for big government.

 

Wed, 07/27/2011 - 18:56 | 1499766 njdoo7
njdoo7's picture

The life-cycle of a a restrained government:

- society is more productive

- higher productivity attracts exploiters

- exploitation goes through a long-term uptrend

- exploitation consumes productivity

- society becomes destabilized

The outcoumes can vary: societal collapse, restructuring, revolution,  and/or war

 

The morally accepted coercion is the catalyst for big government.

 

Wed, 07/27/2011 - 18:57 | 1499767 njdoo7
njdoo7's picture

The life-cycle of a a restrained government:

- society is more productive

- higher productivity attracts exploiters

- exploitation goes through a long-term uptrend

- exploitation consumes productivity

- society becomes destabilized

The outcoumes can vary: societal collapse, restructuring, revolution,  and/or war

 

The morally accepted coercion is the catalyst for big government.

 

Wed, 07/27/2011 - 18:57 | 1499768 njdoo7
njdoo7's picture

The life-cycle of a a restrained government:

- society is more productive

- higher productivity attracts exploiters

- exploitation goes through a long-term uptrend

- exploitation consumes productivity

- society becomes destabilized

The outcoumes can vary: societal collapse, restructuring, revolution,  and/or war

 

The morally accepted coercion is the catalyst for big government.

 

Wed, 07/27/2011 - 17:04 | 1499308 pan-the-ist
pan-the-ist's picture

So... a subculture working in it's self-intersest can "wag the dog"?  I don't believe it.  Next you will be telling me that the foreign policy of a large country can effectively be controlled by the powerful lobby (and therefor national interests) of a small country... 

Wed, 07/27/2011 - 17:16 | 1499371 Mercury
Mercury's picture

...by a powerful lobby(s) within that large country, for sure.  I shouldn't need to draw a picture of that one.

Wed, 07/27/2011 - 21:33 | 1499675 Nonconformist
Nonconformist's picture

Common values is the key that allows individuals to pursue their own self interest while still maintaining a strong, vibrant society.  It puts a brake on excessive behavior and allows society to come together for the common good.  

Wed, 07/27/2011 - 19:09 | 1499794 r101958
r101958's picture

..a realization that without overarching common values in place, things start to fall apart.

-How about integrity as one of those values? Nuff said.

Wed, 07/27/2011 - 17:11 | 1499341 narnia
narnia's picture

laissez faire does not & has never meant to do whatever you want with your property irrespective of everyone else.  it means your property rights (to use your property) are no more valuable than my property rights as your neighbor (to use my adjacent property).  it's an illusion that you need the EPA or some law making bureaucracy between you and I, so that you don't poison me.  most likely, if your intent is to poison, you want some politician you greased to appoint someone in some government office to certify pollution so that I can't sue you or your damages are limited if I do.  the outcomes of this supposedly necessary agency are (1) expenses that require my taxation and (2) an infringement upon what would otherwise be unlimited property rights in a civil action should that be necessary.  

the biggest polluters in the history of the planet are governments (just in weapons testing & use alone), not individual business owners.  the best examples of exploitation & squandering of resources are governments, not individual property owners (like privately owned timber property owners who do not cut down trees unless the market price justifies doing so).

you may want to check out this presentation on Conservation & Property Rights by M. Rothbard:  http://youtu.be/kPy9j3vtKCs

Wed, 07/27/2011 - 18:27 | 1499644 LetThemEatRand
LetThemEatRand's picture

"the biggest polluters in the history of the planet are governments...."

That may be true, but generally speaking it is because of the influence of the privately run but publicly funded military industrial complex.   It is insanely naive to believe that private corporations will behave responsibly due to the "invisible hand" that has never worked in the history of mankind.  If left to their own devices, corporations such as Standard Oil monopolize and destroy competition to feed the greed (power and money) of their selfish owners.   Government suffers from the same corrupt influences as the private sector, but at least we elect government leaders.  Our biggest current problem is that corporations have taken over our media and essentially pick who we get to chose from as national candidates.   The idea that we must select between corrupt corporations and corrupt government is a Hobson's choice.  It fails to account for the possibiity that balance is the real answer.  There will never be perfection in anything run by human beings, but we can do better than giving the keys to Dick Cheney and his ilk.

Wed, 07/27/2011 - 18:32 | 1499682 GoinFawr
GoinFawr's picture

Well said, and needed to be.

Wed, 07/27/2011 - 20:43 | 1500027 narnia
narnia's picture

three quick points:

a monopoly is impossible in a free market.  it requires the force of government.  it's interesting you cite the standard oil myth (great piece by lawrence reed:  http://youtu.be/LW-GM5EPfWQ)

the personhood of the corporation & intellectual property laws as we know them are devices of government, not a device of the constitution or the free market.

a dick cheney will eventually be czar of the EPA or the FDA or insert agency here: _______.  time is the only variable. 

 

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!