"HeyBub" <hey...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message
news:CZ-dnQ93mb4y8wHN...@earthlink.com...
Uhhh, that you bowed and curtsied to a bevy of credentials??? LOL
> My post was meant to illustrate that the snappy accusation can often
> backfire.
OK.....
And I showed that the credentials themselves can often backfire.... LOL
>
> It's easy, in rhetoric, to pull out the chestnut of "Appeal to Authority."
> I wasn't doing that. My observation was the opposite, that the "Appeal to
> Non-Authority" often fails.
In Trader4's case, he fails on all counts.
Consider his economics degree, and declaration thereof, that his economics
degree makes him better qualified to evaluate Bain than anyone without an
economics degree.
Well, right away, you know this asshole is fullashit, because just WTF do
you need to know about Bain, escept how to fucking COUNT????
Bain created a few no-show jobs for their investors/friends (say 10), and
cost 25,000 jobs.
Hmmm, lessee, that's a net loss of 24,990 jobs.... See?? No economics
required!!
In point of fact, the ONLY skills necessary to unveil the economic carnage
of the Bain's of the world are 1. some forensic accounting skills, and 2.
Investigative reporting skills, one of which I cited.
The REAL problem is finding the REAL data.... but, as you will see below,
you don't even need data if you understand the theory.
But, putting theory aside for a moment.....
Just what kind of economic theory do you need to understand 1. leveraged
buyouts, 2. finagling crushing new loan obligations, and 3. Then running
off with the loan money, making instantaneous hundreds of millions for the
investors, while leaving the company crushed with the debt?? (Ergo the
article American Parasite.)
Dats accounting, not economics.
Now, having said that, here's where economic theory MIGHT shed some light on
WHY the Bain's of the world are a priori *necessarily* predatory and
destructive.
The fundamental reason is almost thermodynamic in nature. In thermodynamics
(and, btw, I mentioned the Black-Scholes option pricing formula earlier,
where the asshole Scholes went belly up in his hedge fund. Black, on the
other hand, was a physicist/thermodynamicist and the Black-Scholes formula
is actually *derived* from statistical thermodynamics.... but I'll bet
Trader4 already knew that.... right....), you can argue *a priori* and with
*absolute certainty* that any process that does not follow the prescribe
thermodynamic process *automatically* results in reduced efficiency --
regardless of what system you are considering. OK....
In bidniss, there is a similar notion reflected in the concept of an
"efficient market", which has not much to do with "efficiency" in the normal
bang-for-the-buck sense, but rather the equilibrium, the "dust-settling" of
entrants and players in a given sector of bidniss.
In a nutshell, an "efficient market" is one where the market becomes
"saturated" in the sense that all players are making a similar ROI or
%-net-after-expenses (which turns out to be on the order of 8-10%, according
to Harvard Bidniss Review), and that "pool" of players (and ROI rate) will
remain stable, because if the return rises, more players will enter the game
causing the rate to fall, and if that return falls, more players will leave
the game (or business sector), allowing the rate to rise.
Ergo, an inherent stability to the system.
THEN, along comes Bain, seeking not 8% return, or 10% return (per year,
which keeps everyone happy, employed, and CEOs well-compensated), but 8,000
% and 10,000%.... iow, Bain wants a fucking KILLING, and a super-quick
killing.
Well, how do you make a killing? Easy....
You destroy the equilibrium of the system.
In the case of predatory corpirate raiding, you destroy the business, the
jobs, any economic "quality of life", sending the company -- or what's left
of it -- into a scrambling tailspin, crushed by the debt left by the
investor/pirates -- who basically ran off with the money.
It's as if you refi'd yer house, took out an add'l $100K for repairs, new
kitchen, etc, but someone else cashed the check. Now YOU are stuck with a
whopping refi'd mortgage, and nothing to show for it. Bain in action. .
The thermodynamic equivalence is this:
Thermodynamics may say that a quasi-static process can produce only so much
power..... say, 10 hp in a steady state, with a corresponding efficiency,
say, 50 mpg's.
Does that mean you can't have more than 10 hp? Of course not. You could
get 500 hp out of that same system.... but now, the price you pay is
instead of 50 mpg's, now you get 0.5 mpg's.... you have essentially
squandered the entire notion of efficiency (or tank of fuel) for a quick
blast of horsepower. OK for dragsters, I spose, but not for commuting
Corollas.
DAT is the nitty-gritty of the Bain system, in basic scientific terms,
pardoning the thermodynamic metaphor, but really an apt metaphor.
Now, you can also analyze Bain very complicatedly with game theory, or all
kinds of other theories, some of which you'll find here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nash_equilibrium
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_theory#Economics_and_business
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economics
Basically you choose yer pet model/fav game theory (mine is the Nash
equilibrium Prisoners Dilemma), and hammer data'n'shit until it fits yer
chosen model -- which sort of makes economics the junkiest of sciences, but
disguised with sophisticated math -- iow, tailor-made for the Trader4s of
the world, ceptin Trader don't know no math.
In fact, the very first sentence in the last article calls economics a
"social science".... at which I think most economists would take distinct
umbrage. But is basically telling it like it is. Economics is a social
game, and you'n'me are losing..... BIGtime. Cuz the game is corrupt....
just ax yer Congressperson, eating his $450 steak, with his fav lobbyist....
Imo, a game theoretic analysis of Bain would show Bain to be in simply a
game of cheating: cameras looking at your cards in poker, or swiping your
chess pieces off the board, with sleight of hand. DATS how Bain does
bidniss.
So there you have SOME of it.... the point being to illustrate the fact
that any asshole who thumps his chest, declaring that only an economist can
understand Bain is totally fullashit -- all's you need to know is how to add
and subtract.
BUT, to understand *why* Bain is a priori an OBLIGATORY EVIL, you need to
know a little economic theory, as described above, most of it centering on
the relatively simple notion of efficient markets.
So really, you no need no Village Voice exposes on Bain to know that it is a
fundamentally destructive entity.
But, for those not comfortable with "economic axioms" (or thermo), God Bless
the investigative reporter.
Sorta like perpetual motion machines:
You can dismiss them the easy way, thru the laws of thermo, or you can
dismiss them the hard way, by hiring "forensic engineers" to spend a fukn
month taking them apart to find the con.
Either way is OK, just the first is a lot quicker/cheaper -- and what the
USPTO uses.
Regardless, blowhard assholes like Trader4 are incapable of either the
theoretical understanding, or the empirical/experimental skills. They will,
instead, fellate the Romneys of the world, largely because, well, Romney is
good-looking and richer than God.... which is all people like Trader4
understand.
No hard feelings, Trader.... Hey, since you proly will never be able to
REALLY fellate the Mittster, I'm not too far away in NY, you can come on
over and fellate me.... Ahm not rich, but I am good-looking.....
--
EA
>
>