Short Quiz

Post Reply
johnkarls
Posts: 2034
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 8:43 pm

Short Quiz

Post by johnkarls »

.
1. Who is Nitin Nohria?

2. Before becoming Dean of the Harvard Business School in 2010 (and previously serving in many other capacities on the HBS Faculty after receiving his PhD from the MIT Sloan School of Management), did Nitin Nohria grow up in India where his father was CEO of one of India’s largest corporations?

3. In his book review of Makers and Takers (our focus book) which is posted under Reference Materials for our 12/14/2016 meeting on http://www.ReadingLiberally-SaltLake.org, does Dean Nohria criticize our author for criticizing financial markets by pointing out that his father was NEVER able to realize his dream of forming his own company and, indeed, was NOT EVEN able to buy his own home until age 60 -- both problems caused by India’s COMPLETE LACK of any financial markets?

4. If Dean Nohria is correct that the lack of any financial markets means that (A) even the most important executives are forced to assemble 100% of the cost of a home for which they must pay cash, and (B) new businesses can only be formed by the super-wealthy who can afford to pay cash for 100% of the initial investments including start-up costs -- who are the owners of the capital that forms America’s financial markets?

5. If the owners of capital that forms America’s financial markets (looking through the intermediary financial institutions) are predominantly pension funds and university endowment funds, are critics of financial markets often presumptuous in suggesting that the profits on that capital be restricted or re-distributed? In other words, isn’t it easy to suggest restricting or re-distributing wealth when one is oblivious regarding who bears the cost of the suggestion?

6. Does our author, Rana Foroohar, correctly analyze that the growing gulf between the wealth/income of the top tier of American society, and the wealth/income of the rest of society is due to the War on American Workers that has been waged by The Establishment at least since the 1990’s?

7. Each time we encounter this issue, do we define The Establishment as the billionaires who “own” virtually all the pols of both political parties as a result of campaign contributions and who “own” many members of the media and who “own” many members of academia?

8. And each time we encounter this issue, do we recognize that the War on American Workers waged by The Establishment has taken the form of Exporting American Jobs which began in earnest with Bill Clinton negotiating and signing (1) NAFTA -- aka the North Atlantic Free Trade Agreement pursuant to which so many American jobs have been exported to Mexico; (2) a free-trade agreement with China -- pursuant to which so many American jobs have been exported to China, (3) the Worldwide Free Trade Agreement creating the World Trade Organization -- pursuant to which so many American jobs have been exported to third-world countries; and (4) approximately 300 additional free-trade agreements?

9. And do we also recognize that the War on American Workers also takes the form of Importing Illegal Aliens to compete for American jobs that cannot be exported geographically?

10. And have we studied on numerous occasions how Illegal Aliens are de facto slaves because their labor is NOT subject to any minimum-wage laws as a practical matter because (A) employers are free to deduct from the minimum wage whatever they please for meals and housing, and (B) illegal aliens cannot, as a practical matter, complain about anything for fear their employers will report them to Immigration?

11. And haven’t we always recognized that unless action is taken, the War on American Workers will not end until American wages have been driven down to third-world poverty levels, since it is impoverished third-world workers who are being given the American jobs? And in fact these third-world poverty levels include child labor, no workplace safety rules and, for manufacturing, no environmental rules?

12. So isn’t the real solution to the War on American Workers simply halting the War on American Workers???

13. Isn’t the simplest way to halt the War on American Workers renewing 1968 Executive Order 11387 which prohibited the Export of American Capital for the last year of Lyndon Johnson’s Presidency AND THE FIRST FIVE YEARS (!!!) of Richard Nixon’s Presidency?

14. Didn’t we implore President Obama in our 2/12/2014 Six-Degrees-Of-Separation E-mail Campaign only a month after his “I Have A Pen And A Phone” solicitation of suggestions for Executive Orders, to renew 1968 Executive Order 11387 because (A) the retention of more American capital in the U.S. would mean that the additional capital would have to be invested in domestic projects that would employ more American workers, thereby reducing or eliminating American unemployment; and (B) the resulting increase in the ratio of capital employed per American worker would cause the real income of American workers to rise once more?

15. And weren’t we disappointed that even a Lame Duck that will never fly again is still “owned” by The Establishment because he believes that it is more important to raise campaign contributions for other politicians in the 2014 and 2016 elections, than to (as we put it) “lift a finger (or at least a pen) on behalf of American workers”?

16. Does our author claim that the cause(s) of the 2008 Economic Meltdown has/have not been addressed?

17. Does our author even know what the cause of the 2008 Economic Meltdown was? Or does she just mindlessly “follow the herd” in embracing the myth that it was caused by subprime mortgages and by old-fashioned insurance of the value of mortgage pools (called “credit-default swaps” in order to fool the NY Insurance Commissioner into believing that such insurance should not require adequate insurance reserves)?

18. Haven’t we studied and concluded many times that the real cause of the 2008 Economic Meltdown was the sudden one-time reduction of the 35% income tax on repatriating dividends from the tax-haven subsidiaries (primarily non-resident Singapore companies) of the approximately $5 TRillion of earnings that had piled up there FROM EXPORTING AMERICAN JOBS?

19. And that since the U.S.-based Multi-National Companies (“US MNC’s”) that had exported American jobs were NOT stupid enough to STUFF THE $5 TRILLION IN SINGAPORE MATTRESSES, they had done the only thing effectively permitted by the U.S. tax law, which was to loan the $5 TRillion to the CHUMP American companies that had NOT exported American jobs?

20. So when the 35% income tax on dividends from tax-haven subs was suddenly reduced on a one-time basis to 5.25%, the tax-haven subs immediately demanded that the CHUMP American companies that had NOT exported American jobs REDUCE AMERICAN PAYROLL AND AMERICAN CAPITAL EXPENDITURES by $5 TRillion so that they could repay the tax-haven subs?

21. So why is there any mystery that newspaper headlines during the 2008-2010 Economic Meltdown were screaming that The Federal Reserve was trumpeting the tragedy that the CHUMP American companies that had NOT exported American jobs were in desperate need of loans, and nobody was loaning them any money?

22. And why does any economist with a positive IQ (as opposed to a negative IQ if that is possible) believe for a moment that the economy would not have tanked in 2008 EVEN IF THERE HAD NEVER BEEN A SUB-PRIME MORTGAGE??? Since the $5 TRillion that was extracted from the CHUMP companies was NEVER invested by the U.S.-MNC’s that Exported American Jobs in U.S. bricks and mortar (vs., primarily, used for stock redemptions) AND DID NOT (PER THE LAMENTS OF THE FED) MAKE ITS WAY BACK TO THE CHUMP COMPANIES???

23. Have the U.S. MNC’s piled up another $5 TRillion in their tax haven subsidiaries from Exporting American Jobs?

24. And have they fooled the pols and the American news media once again into falsely believing that the $5 TRillion is “offshore” rather than long-since loaned to the CHUMP American companies that have NOT exported American jobs?

25. So are we poised for another Economic Meltdown on the order of 2008 as the pols, once again, lower the U.S. corporate tax on repatriating dividends from the tax-haven subs which will then immediately, of course, require the CHUMP American companies that have NOT exported American jobs to ONCE AGAIN REDUCE AMERICAN PAYROLL AND AMERICAN CAPITAL EXPENDITURES by $5 TRillion?

26. Have we recognized on at least two occasions (our 7/13/2016 meeting and our 10/14/2015 meeting) that the only way to avert another Economic Meltdown is to SHAME THE FED into printing dollars (aka quantitative easing) in order to loan as much as $5 TRillion to the CHUMP American companies so that they do NOT have to reduce American payroll and American capital expenditures by $5 Trillion?

27. BTW, was Yours Truly hoping that we would not achieve our minimum quorum for our Dec 14 meeting so that he would have time to write letters to each of the Presidents of the 12 Regional Federal Reserve Banks to put them on notice to be ready to loan $5 TRillion to the CHUMP American companies, similarly to the way the Regional Federal Reserve Banks loan substantial amounts to other companies in their regions in order to keep their regional economies healthy?

Post Reply

Return to “Participant Comments - Makers and Takers: The Rise of Finance and the Fall of American Business – Dec 14”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest