11 ms·

This has been discussed many times, but there is no responsibility on Soros part ; broadly speaking, he speculated that an event would happen, and it did, thus

This has been discussed many times, but there is no responsibility on Soros part ; broadly speaking, he speculated that an event would happen, and it did, thus he benefited from it.

spacemanmatt 4y ago
And has been the subject of anti-semitic rants ever since
- epakai 4y ago
  Soros opposed Russian hegemony in Ukraine (2015). Since then he has been the popular target of conspiracy theories. Some even go as far as to call him a Nazi supporter. It mirrors exactly what we see from Russian propaganda because it is exactly that.
  - batisteo 4y ago
    Thanks, now I understand why he's in half of Fidesz's propaganda posters. In not a pleasant way of course.
    - soco 4y ago
      What a boring world will be when he passes away, all those extremists will struggle finding some new hate figure...
      - krapp 4y ago
        No they won't.
      - bencollier49 4y ago
        Musk is up next.
      - christophilus 4y ago
        My money is on Billg being the next boogeyman.
        id 4y ago
        Isn't he already?
        gadders 4y ago
        I don't know if he's a boogeyman, but spending all that time on Epstein Island and getting divorced because of it isn't a good look.
        JohnWhigham 4y ago
        How is he a boogeyman? He's already prolonged the pandemic by convincing the vaccine companies not to allow smaller biomedical companies (with markets in poorer countries) access to produce it because it makes more money for him. How is that not insidious?
      - spacemanmatt 4y ago
        Good point, everyone should just yield to the concentration of power. That's always led to peace and prosperity.
  - wiredfool 4y ago
    Soros was funding Open Society groups behind the iron curtain in the 80's, before the wall fell.
  - cloutchaser 4y ago
    He’s also funding a bunch of NGOs that claim to be independent but constantly proclaim and fight for woke values. That definitely creates a lot of enemies.
    - spacemanmatt 4y ago
      Of the anti-semitic sort, apparently.
      - Arnt 4y ago
        He did both, actually. At some point he formed an opinion that Hungarian society would be better off if vaguely political organisations had more printers and copiers. (An local organisation to oppose tearing down an old building counts as political in this context. Really anything to do with civil society.) So he bought several thousand laser printers/copiers and gave them to ~everyone. Several of the thousands went to fairly nasty organisations.
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
    - edent 4y ago
      What does "woke" mean in this context?
      - gadders 4y ago
        Open Borders, not prosecuting criminals, that sort of stuff.
        monkey_monkey 4y ago
        We really need a word for people who are so obsessed with being anti-woke that they become a parody.
        gruez 4y ago
  - orbifold 4y ago
    It is kind of interesting how deeply involved his foundation is in German political "think tanks" as well. Recently a group of intellectuals published an open letter opposing delivery of heavy weapons to Ukraine. Shortly after a different group of intellectuals lead by two former Green-party politicians, that are now heading a think-tank, published an open letter in support of it. Guess who initially provided significant funding to their think tank: The open society foundation. The German public broadcaster regularly interviews experts on Ukraine. Yesterday they ran with the headline "Regime um Putin zunehmend faschistisch” - "Putin's regime is increasingly fascistic". The guy they interviewed was Stefan Meister, employed by dgap.org (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Auswärtige Politik - German Society for Foreign Policy), sounds benign, but they are known for financing luxury trips of >350 parliamentary aides to German weapons manufacturers. The Open Society Foundation is again a major donor: https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deutsche_Gesellschaft_für_Auswärtige_Politik https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deutsche_Gesellschaft_für_Au....
  - zosima 4y ago
    Soros has been supporting a large number of NGOs since the early 1990:s at least. Many of the NGO:s have been actively working for mass-immigration, color revolutions in eastern Europe, drug-liberalization and a stronger EU. If you are against any of those things, you may very well think that Soros influence on the world is a net-negative. And he has been criticized for it, long before the first Russo-ukrainian war in 2014. Though as Soros is normally acting as a gray cardinal through his money, the criticism of him tends to become abstract and stupidly conspiratorial.
- namdnay 4y ago
  I think that's more due to his sponsoring progressive causes since
zosima 4y ago
Technically, that is not quite true. He sold $10 billion borrowed pound sterling that day, in collusion with others, which appears to have been the straw that broke the camel's back. Sure had the pound sterling been sound, that would not have been enough. But it was at the time a lot of money, and it's unclear what would have happened had he not done it. A lot of people lost a lot of money that day. Not just speculators or stock-traders, but many home-owners lost their homes, a lot of businesses defaulted and many people became unemployed as a consequence of what happened that day. So, there's some motivated resentment against him.
- bionsystem 4y ago
  It is true technically, and you get some points wrong : - 10 billions is nothing for a currency. - I don't think there has ever been proof of a collusion, if you have one I'm happy to read through it ; besides, some other people bought the currency, you don't sell to nobody ; had they be right in buying it and benefiting from a subsequent deflationary crisis, they still wouldn't be responsible for it, would they ? - A currency weakening is actually good for asset prices (btw Soros bought UK stocks and shorted DE and FR stocks at the same time as part of this trade), in particular from in-debt people (most home-owners) ; the fact that some lost their homes have to do with the recession which caused the collapse of the currency in the first place, NOT Soros' trade. In fact, the consequent inflation actually helped the UK to recover after that. - Besides, people losing their homes is always bad but it also makes for a good headline and it's always good to have a bad guy to point at, but pegging the currency meant spending all of the CB reserves for years and nobody (amongst those unfairly blaming Soros) seem to be questioning that, whereas it's actually the core issue at hand here.
  - zosima 4y ago
    This is what Soros himself said in an interview in New York Times, in 1992: "Our total position by Black Wednesday had to be worth almost $10 billion. We planned to sell more than that. In fact, when Norman Lamont said just before the devaluation that he would borrow nearly $15 billion to defend sterling, we were amused because that was about how much we wanted to sell." It seems to prove both collusion and that $10 billion was a lot of money for pound sterling at the time.

This has been discussed many times, but there is no responsibility on Soros part ; broadly speaking, he speculated that an event would happen, and it did, thus he benefited from it.

spacemanmatt 4y ago

And has been the subject of anti-semitic rants ever since

epakai 4y ago
Soros opposed Russian hegemony in Ukraine (2015). Since then he has been the popular target of conspiracy theories. Some even go as far as to call him a Nazi supporter. It mirrors exactly what we see from Russian propaganda because it is exactly that.
- batisteo 4y ago
  Thanks, now I understand why he's in half of Fidesz's propaganda posters. In not a pleasant way of course.
  - soco 4y ago
    What a boring world will be when he passes away, all those extremists will struggle finding some new hate figure...
    - krapp 4y ago
      No they won't.
    - bencollier49 4y ago
      Musk is up next.
    - christophilus 4y ago
      My money is on Billg being the next boogeyman.
      - id 4y ago
        Isn't he already?
      - gadders 4y ago
        I don't know if he's a boogeyman, but spending all that time on Epstein Island and getting divorced because of it isn't a good look.
      - JohnWhigham 4y ago
        How is he a boogeyman? He's already prolonged the pandemic by convincing the vaccine companies not to allow smaller biomedical companies (with markets in poorer countries) access to produce it because it makes more money for him. How is that not insidious?
    - spacemanmatt 4y ago
      Good point, everyone should just yield to the concentration of power. That's always led to peace and prosperity.
- wiredfool 4y ago
  Soros was funding Open Society groups behind the iron curtain in the 80's, before the wall fell.
- cloutchaser 4y ago
  He’s also funding a bunch of NGOs that claim to be independent but constantly proclaim and fight for woke values. That definitely creates a lot of enemies.
  - spacemanmatt 4y ago
    Of the anti-semitic sort, apparently.
    - Arnt 4y ago
      He did both, actually. At some point he formed an opinion that Hungarian society would be better off if vaguely political organisations had more printers and copiers. (An local organisation to oppose tearing down an old building counts as political in this context. Really anything to do with civil society.) So he bought several thousand laser printers/copiers and gave them to ~everyone. Several of the thousands went to fairly nasty organisations.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
  - edent 4y ago
    What does "woke" mean in this context?
    - gadders 4y ago
      Open Borders, not prosecuting criminals, that sort of stuff.
      - monkey_monkey 4y ago
        We really need a word for people who are so obsessed with being anti-woke that they become a parody.
        gruez 4y ago
- orbifold 4y ago
  It is kind of interesting how deeply involved his foundation is in German political "think tanks" as well. Recently a group of intellectuals published an open letter opposing delivery of heavy weapons to Ukraine. Shortly after a different group of intellectuals lead by two former Green-party politicians, that are now heading a think-tank, published an open letter in support of it. Guess who initially provided significant funding to their think tank: The open society foundation. The German public broadcaster regularly interviews experts on Ukraine. Yesterday they ran with the headline "Regime um Putin zunehmend faschistisch” - "Putin's regime is increasingly fascistic". The guy they interviewed was Stefan Meister, employed by dgap.org (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Auswärtige Politik - German Society for Foreign Policy), sounds benign, but they are known for financing luxury trips of >350 parliamentary aides to German weapons manufacturers. The Open Society Foundation is again a major donor: https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deutsche_Gesellschaft_für_Auswärtige_Politik https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deutsche_Gesellschaft_für_Au....
- zosima 4y ago
  Soros has been supporting a large number of NGOs since the early 1990:s at least. Many of the NGO:s have been actively working for mass-immigration, color revolutions in eastern Europe, drug-liberalization and a stronger EU. If you are against any of those things, you may very well think that Soros influence on the world is a net-negative. And he has been criticized for it, long before the first Russo-ukrainian war in 2014. Though as Soros is normally acting as a gray cardinal through his money, the criticism of him tends to become abstract and stupidly conspiratorial.
namdnay 4y ago
I think that's more due to his sponsoring progressive causes since

zosima 4y ago

Technically, that is not quite true. He sold $10 billion borrowed pound sterling that day, in collusion with others, which appears to have been the straw that broke the camel's back. Sure had the pound sterling been sound, that would not have been enough. But it was at the time a lot of money, and it's unclear what would have happened had he not done it. A lot of people lost a lot of money that day. Not just speculators or stock-traders, but many home-owners lost their homes, a lot of businesses defaulted and many people became unemployed as a consequence of what happened that day. So, there's some motivated resentment against him.

bionsystem 4y ago
It is true technically, and you get some points wrong : - 10 billions is nothing for a currency. - I don't think there has ever been proof of a collusion, if you have one I'm happy to read through it ; besides, some other people bought the currency, you don't sell to nobody ; had they be right in buying it and benefiting from a subsequent deflationary crisis, they still wouldn't be responsible for it, would they ? - A currency weakening is actually good for asset prices (btw Soros bought UK stocks and shorted DE and FR stocks at the same time as part of this trade), in particular from in-debt people (most home-owners) ; the fact that some lost their homes have to do with the recession which caused the collapse of the currency in the first place, NOT Soros' trade. In fact, the consequent inflation actually helped the UK to recover after that. - Besides, people losing their homes is always bad but it also makes for a good headline and it's always good to have a bad guy to point at, but pegging the currency meant spending all of the CB reserves for years and nobody (amongst those unfairly blaming Soros) seem to be questioning that, whereas it's actually the core issue at hand here.
- zosima 4y ago
  This is what Soros himself said in an interview in New York Times, in 1992: "Our total position by Black Wednesday had to be worth almost $10 billion. We planned to sell more than that. In fact, when Norman Lamont said just before the devaluation that he would borrow nearly $15 billion to defend sterling, we were amused because that was about how much we wanted to sell." It seems to prove both collusion and that $10 billion was a lot of money for pound sterling at the time.