idk why but looking at it that way resolves a lot of bullshit for me, even if I may be uncomfortable with the framing. It's definitely not "starve the beast" -- that's way too charitable. It's just distribute cash to the preferred shareholders, then refinance and fuck the common.
-
-
Show this thread
-
(Also, while I'm a big fan of "most things just emerge by accident instead of a smoke-filled room" I'm having a lot of trouble not yelling "you dumb sack of shit, of course this is how it works, what do you expect to happen with the wall street-ification of everything?")
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
also: fire sale on assets! give away the 'profitable' parts of the enterprise for peanuts!
-
Yea. Like, oh, neat, I'm flush going into a recession where everyone else was squeezed before it, this is going to work out really well and totally means my subsequent alpha is merit-based and not some artifact of a structural rule that massively privileges me.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
If it's run like a business, it's run less like a sustainable business that provides direct consumer value than, say, 1990s Enron or late 1980s Drexel Burnham Lambert. (And I wouldn't be surprised if there are people involved with one or both of them having a role these days.)
- End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Maybe a venture capital model could be applied given the level of investment given to seed interest in pet projects. And lobbyist demands amounting to ‘seat on the board’. But yes. Investment/return is the game the right is playing.
-
Evangelicals are seeing returns from decades of investment. Though theirs was more of a kickstarter.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
John go on chapo
-
Hah. This may be suprirsing, but I have never listened to them once yet. Should I?
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.