3 ms·

I never said they don't spend and I do expect them to spend... but the context of the statement matters and until they do spend... they haven't. Moreover, poli

I never said they don't spend and I do expect them to spend... but the context of the statement matters and until they do spend... they haven't. Moreover, political spending, even by the rich isn't necessarily bad (and I don't think it should be legally curtailed, even when it is). It all depends on what they are supporting. I suspect that I support what the Kochs will say with their money (note this is a highly qualified endorsement and may change depending on the specifics). For example, I wonder if Soros, a 1%er that is also known for dedicating some degree of his wealth to political advocacy last I heard. I suspect that the Guardian largely agrees with his advocacy and thus would never appear in an article like this. Their goal in suggesting wasn't to point out the likelihood of spending as a fact, but rather to suggest they would use their spending for nefarious purposes... without even the benefit of my kind of qualification: they suggest a foregone conclusion. That's not factual reporting, that's opinion making.

CWuestefeld 11y ago
And while some folks might disagree with the Koch's philosophy, they haven't done anything quite as evil as has George Soros: In 1992, George Soros brought the Bank of England to its knees. In the process, he pocketed over a billion dollars. Making a billion dollars is by all accounts pretty cool. But demolishing the monetary system of Great Britain in a single day with an elegantly constructed bet against its currency? That’s the stuff of legends. -- http://priceonomics.com/the-trade-of-the-century-when-george-soros-broke/ http://priceonomics.com/the-trade-of-the-century-when-george...
- mikeyouse 11y ago
  Many people would disagree with that statement since trading against currency manipulation on a free market is arguably much more benign than running a massive polluting enterprise for decades and funding much of the bad science behind climate denial... (aside from the evidence that the elder Koch built and ran refineries for the Nazis and the Soviets.)
- gnaritas 11y ago
  Um, there's nothing remotely evil about that trade and trying to paint Soros as a bad guy in the same vein as the Koch's is rather disgusting; they aren't in the same league. Soros was doing something good there, he stopped the bank of England from manipulating their currency and forced them to accept the markets opinion of the value of it. The Koch's are literal villans, Soros is not.
  - CWuestefeld 11y ago
    This is kind of funny. You're saying that Soros should be heralded for forcing market rates, but that the Kochs are evil, because, umm, they're champions of the free market? In any case, the information I have doesn't paint the picture the same way you do. Drawing from the same link I posted above [1]: each country set their currency’s value in Deutschmarks. They agreed to maintain the exchange rate between their currency and the Deutschmark within an acceptable band of plus or minus 6% of the agreed upon rate. ... The British government was obligated to keep the exchange rate within 2.78 DM to 3.13 DM. ... while the people of Great Britain dealt with a recession, the government’s hands were tied; they’d just have to ride it out. You'll note the word "obligated" there. By 1992, it wasn't their right to decide whether to follow the market or not. They were bound by international agreements to maintain the exchange rate to the Deutschmark. Soros retorted with a different strategy: “Go for the jugular.” If Schlesinger’s quote could be used as the catalyst for the pound to devalue, why shouldn’t today be the day it happened? Instead of slowly building up a short position against the sterling, [Soros's] Quantum Fund could short sell sterling on an unprecedented scale today. Doing so would not only help hasten the tumble of the sterling, but also increase the fund’s profit. It was this decision to “go for the jugular” that netted Soros’s firm over a billion dollars, toppled the Bank of England’s currency regime, and ultimately led to the disgrace of the Prime Minister. It also cost the British taxpayers billions. ... As Europe slept, Soros borrowed and sold pounds from anyone that he could. The Quantum Fund’s position exceeded $10 billion shorting the pound. Other hedge funds got wind of the the trade and the report from the Bundesbank and started following suit, also borrowing and selling pounds. By the time London markets opened for business and British treasury officials started their day, tens of billions of pounds had been sold and the the pound was dangerously close to trading below the levels mandated by the ERM. The Bank of England was about to have a very shitty day. ... At 7:30 PM that night, Lamont held a news conference to announce that Britain would be exiting the ERM and floating its currency on the market. Soros and the speculators won. So this wasn't some inevitable disaster. Soros largely caused the problem, manipulating the market by shorting 15 Billion GBP. In a market that was already shaky, Soros was the one to kick the animal spirits (to steal a Keynes meme) into action. It was likely that something would have happened, but Soros maximized the damage for his own profit. Now, in what way are the Kochs literal villains? [1] http://priceonomics.com/the-trade-of-the-century-when-george-soros-broke/ http://priceonomics.com/the-trade-of-the-century-when-george...

CWuestefeld 11y ago

And while some folks might disagree with the Koch's philosophy, they haven't done anything quite as evil as has George Soros: In 1992, George Soros brought the Bank of England to its knees. In the process, he pocketed over a billion dollars. Making a billion dollars is by all accounts pretty cool. But demolishing the monetary system of Great Britain in a single day with an elegantly constructed bet against its currency? That’s the stuff of legends. -- http://priceonomics.com/the-trade-of-the-century-when-george-soros-broke/ http://priceonomics.com/the-trade-of-the-century-when-george...

mikeyouse 11y ago
Many people would disagree with that statement since trading against currency manipulation on a free market is arguably much more benign than running a massive polluting enterprise for decades and funding much of the bad science behind climate denial... (aside from the evidence that the elder Koch built and ran refineries for the Nazis and the Soviets.)
gnaritas 11y ago
Um, there's nothing remotely evil about that trade and trying to paint Soros as a bad guy in the same vein as the Koch's is rather disgusting; they aren't in the same league. Soros was doing something good there, he stopped the bank of England from manipulating their currency and forced them to accept the markets opinion of the value of it. The Koch's are literal villans, Soros is not.
- CWuestefeld 11y ago
  This is kind of funny. You're saying that Soros should be heralded for forcing market rates, but that the Kochs are evil, because, umm, they're champions of the free market? In any case, the information I have doesn't paint the picture the same way you do. Drawing from the same link I posted above [1]: each country set their currency’s value in Deutschmarks. They agreed to maintain the exchange rate between their currency and the Deutschmark within an acceptable band of plus or minus 6% of the agreed upon rate. ... The British government was obligated to keep the exchange rate within 2.78 DM to 3.13 DM. ... while the people of Great Britain dealt with a recession, the government’s hands were tied; they’d just have to ride it out. You'll note the word "obligated" there. By 1992, it wasn't their right to decide whether to follow the market or not. They were bound by international agreements to maintain the exchange rate to the Deutschmark. Soros retorted with a different strategy: “Go for the jugular.” If Schlesinger’s quote could be used as the catalyst for the pound to devalue, why shouldn’t today be the day it happened? Instead of slowly building up a short position against the sterling, [Soros's] Quantum Fund could short sell sterling on an unprecedented scale today. Doing so would not only help hasten the tumble of the sterling, but also increase the fund’s profit. It was this decision to “go for the jugular” that netted Soros’s firm over a billion dollars, toppled the Bank of England’s currency regime, and ultimately led to the disgrace of the Prime Minister. It also cost the British taxpayers billions. ... As Europe slept, Soros borrowed and sold pounds from anyone that he could. The Quantum Fund’s position exceeded $10 billion shorting the pound. Other hedge funds got wind of the the trade and the report from the Bundesbank and started following suit, also borrowing and selling pounds. By the time London markets opened for business and British treasury officials started their day, tens of billions of pounds had been sold and the the pound was dangerously close to trading below the levels mandated by the ERM. The Bank of England was about to have a very shitty day. ... At 7:30 PM that night, Lamont held a news conference to announce that Britain would be exiting the ERM and floating its currency on the market. Soros and the speculators won. So this wasn't some inevitable disaster. Soros largely caused the problem, manipulating the market by shorting 15 Billion GBP. In a market that was already shaky, Soros was the one to kick the animal spirits (to steal a Keynes meme) into action. It was likely that something would have happened, but Soros maximized the damage for his own profit. Now, in what way are the Kochs literal villains? [1] http://priceonomics.com/the-trade-of-the-century-when-george-soros-broke/ http://priceonomics.com/the-trade-of-the-century-when-george...