The DQYDJ Weekender (Week of 1/9/12)

January 14th, 2012 by 
PK

Welcome to the Weekender, the highlight of everyone's week!  (And isn't that what really disappoints you during the week- the fact that DQYDJ is so far away from posting another Weekender?)

Quick updates: 173 Twitter Followers and 57 Facebook Likers currently contribute to our massive egos.  Make it worse by joining them!

First up, we're going to be blacking out the web site on The 18th (Wednesday) in solidarity with other sites protesting SOPA.  We've already written about SOPA (click that link for our official statement) and I'm sure I'll editorialize again... perhaps even on the blackout page! (Cue Twilight Zone Music).  Just know this: section 201 of the Stop Online Piracy Act makes it a crime to stream more than 10 pieces of music or movies illegally in a six-month time frame.... (talk about defining down crime and making vague laws).  Pretty much every single person who has ever gone to YouTube has violated that... likely in a single session!  Jail the entire Internet!

Carnivals and Featured Links

Weekly Reads...

Weekly Rant!

Or is it two?  How do you count the SOPA rambling above?

Let's talk about Mitt Romney and Bain Capital, because everyone else seems to be.  The silly thing?  This attack on Mitt Romney's career at Bain is coming from both sides of the political isle.

Let me pose a theoretical.  Say there is a company which has 3,000 employees and is about to go out of business if nothing is done.  A private equity firm, let's call it Lame Capital, comes in and buys the firm.  They

Picture of Mitt Romney

Sorry to Spend So Much Text on This Guy... (Gage Skidmore)

stop the bleeding by laying off 2,000 people and streamlining operations.  You see... they 'saved' 1,000 jobs, but there is now bias against the 'unseen', in this case, the unseen bankruptcy.  Years later a politically motivated hit piece can point out the struggles of some of the folks laid off, even though they would have been laid off anyway had Lame Capital not intervened.  This analysis ignores the companies that a firm like Lame Capital improved (causing net job gains) and the companies which, unfortunately, didn't make it (it happens to government investment too; see Solyndra) - but as a whole we know Mitt Romney left Bain having created more jobs on net... and that's without dubious 'saved or created' arguments, which I hope Romney doesn't stoop to.

Look, the theory of Creative Destruction means that out of the destruction of firms (Even industries!  Seen any horse-drawn carriages lately?) leads to growth elsewhere.  Private Equity firms are based on saving the most sick firms possible... if you want to invest in healthy firms, try the regular stock market.  So, to speak politically, by propping up industries which can't survive on their own (the 'seen'), we are missing out on the 'unseen' - those industries and companies which will never form because the most efficient capital allocation is short circuited by politics.

Political Calculus

Here's a zany political theory for you - what if the Republican attacks on Romney's time at Bain are actually a form of Republican support.  Am I an idiot?  I don't think so, but let me lay out the scenario (which is like a more nuanced version of James Taranto's recent column).  For the record, one of my groomsmen can verify I typed out this theory before Taranto... haha!

Ingredients: Candidate A with the 'problem' (Romney), Candidate(s) we believe really doesn't like Candidate A (Gingrich, Perry, Huntsman...).

So we know that in a general election Mitt Romney's time at Bain Capital will certainly be in the spotlight - it's a given that Barack Obama's reelection campaign will try to tie Romney to the 1% as a scheming uber-capitalist who finds glee in cutting jobs.  Here's where things get interesting - instead of laying off the Primary Capitalism Hate, other Candidates attack Candidate A while also framing the debate in terms which are easily rejected or with arguments which are easily diverted or nullified... scoring sound-byte hits, but also allowing Candidate A an out in case he wins (likely).  So the debate is framed favorably to the Republican party because Republicans start the attacks (and therefore can choose the phrasing), it helps Candidate A ready his talking points for the General Election, it comes at a time when less people pay attention (Primaries), and it's less likely the Media will pay as much attention in the General (it's "old news").

Evidence: The Democratic Party had a similar effect on their message in 2008 when Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama went 10 rounds before President Obama emerged victorious - leaving the media to focus on Candidate John McCain's odd request to stop campaigning instead of any character issues of Mr. Obama (spare me the complaints about Media bias).  Oh yeah, I seem to remember they also concentrated on one Sarah Palin.  In fact, the Republican Party is using proportional delegate awards in early states to ensure a longer Primary slog... if the primary doesn't lock up early, the eventual nominee will have a much stronger message.

What do you think?  We also saw some signs of the 'attack candidates' reversing course, perhaps to set up eventual support for Candidate Romney.

Okay, you've now read the Weekender.  You are now the farthest away you'll ever be from a new Weekender...

 

      

PK

PK started DQYDJ in 2009 to research and discuss finance and investing and help answer financial questions. He's expanded DQYDJ to build visualizations, calculators, and interactive tools.

PK lives in New Hampshire with his wife, kids, and dog.

Don't Quit Your Day Job...

DQYDJ may be compensated by our partners if you make purchases through links. See our disclosures page. As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
Sign Up For Emails
linkedin facebook pinterest youtube rss twitter instagram facebook-blank rss-blank linkedin-blank pinterest youtube twitter instagram