|
OCTOBER 27, 2003 – Publicly-held
corporations know to keep profits low and cash-on-hand at an
absolute minimum.
Why? Because if there is a nice cash
profit each year or there is a lot of cash in the company’s coffers,
they become a prime target for what is called a hostile corporate
takeover.
You see, all that cash sitting around
and cash income becomes a target that is too inviting to pass up.
And so predators undertake hostile takeovers, purchasing a majority
share – against the will of the current ownership – of the company’s
stock. They do this by offering an excessively high price for the
shares, and so get enough small stock holders to sell out, giving
them a majority share.
Why would they overpay for the stock?
Well, here is how the scam goes.
As soon as they get control of the
company, the first thing they do is take all the money sitting
around in the company coffers and stick it directly in their pockets
and the pockets of their co-investors.
Next, they look at the company’s assets
and see what else they can sell off or use to put cash in their
pockets. They spin-off, sell-off, and then, when the company is just
a skeleton of what it once was, they sell off the remainder by
selling off their stock. This puts money on top of all the other
money they just made.
Remember the movie Pretty Woman?
Richard Gere’s character made his fortune by buying up companies,
selling off all assets that could put cash in his pocket., and then
selling what was left over. That is exactly what we are talking
about – that is the textbook hostile takeover.
Now, look at what Bush/Cheney and
company did.
The nation had a surplus – a lot of
money sitting around in the company’s coffers. It also had a high
profit – excess tax revenues over expenditures.
So, they decided to try and take over
the company (i.e. American corporation) so that they could loot the
coffers, line their pockets, exploit any other assets that might
bring them profits, leaving the country but a skeleton of what it
was.
It was no secret. George Bush said
himself during the debates three different times that the President
was a “Chief Executive Officer,” and that he was qualified because
he had experience in different capacities as a CEO.
He also was clear that if elected, he
would take all of the money sitting in the country’s coffers and
hand it directly to his co-investors (i.e. campaign supporters,) the
rich people who had each given him the max allowed by campaign
finance laws, knowing they would get more than that by far returned
via the tax cuts.
As President
Bush said during the second Presidential debate in St. Louis on
October 17, 2000:
MODERATOR:
Governor -- yeah, hold on one second here, though. The governor
just reversed the thing. What do you say specifically to what the
vice president said tonight, he said it many, many times, that your
tax cut benefits the top 1% of the wealthiest Americans, and you've
heard what he said.
BUSH: Of course
it does.
In addition, he made it clear that he
wasn’t just going to take all of the cash and profits – the surplus,
as it was called – and stick it in the hands of his rich investors,
but that he was going to tap all possible resources to line his
co-investors’ pockets, such as the Arctic Wildlife Preserve he
promised to drill in, or the pricey pollution control regulations he
promised to roll back, putting cash directly into his buddies’
hands.
So, as with most attempted takeovers,
first, they tried to do it the nice way. As a company would make an
offer to purchase a majority share in a direct, decent manner, the
Bush/Cheney ticket made an attempt to win the election in a legal,
democratic manner.
However, as when cash-loaded companies
rebuff the takeover offers of predatory would-be purchasers, the
American people did not give in and go along.
So, the Bush/Cheney ticket did what any
takeover CEO would do, resort to a hostile takeover. That’s, quite
simply, what Florida was all about.
And as soon as they got in control, the
hostile takeover successful, they did what all hostile takeover
artists do: ignoring the things that are vital to the company’s
(i.e. country’s) survival, such as world affairs and national
security, they set about instead with a single-minded focus on
putting all of the surplus cash and profits in their pockets and the
pockets of their co-investors by making sure their tax cut went
through.
Then, instead of getting back to taking
care of the vital functions of the company (i.e. country,) they
looked at all the other possible cash-producing assets, and, still
ignoring things like world affairs (i.e. vital company functions,)
pushed things like drilling in the Arctic Wildlife Preserve,
reductions in pricey (asthma-preventing) pollution controls, backed
out of the Kyoto global warming treaty, putting yet more cash in
their co-investors’ pockets, rolled back arsenic rules, ergonomic
rules for the workplace, etc., etc…
But even that wasn’t enough. They were
still in control of the company, and there was lots more cash to be
had. Iraq sat there a bounty of wealth beyond anything they could
ever dream of – the second largest oil reserves in the world, and
largely untapped.
I don’t need to go on further, we all
know the rest of the story. Remaining perfectly clear about their
intentions by immediately, during the very first week of the current
Iraq war, giving Dick Cheney’s old (and still current) company
Halliburton billions of dollars in contracts (no-other bidders
allowed,) the Bush team has lined their pockets and those of their
co-investors (i.e. campaign financers) with the company’s (i.e.
country’s) money even before they get to loot the immeasurable
wealth of Iraq’s oil reserves.
The parallels between what this
administration has done and a simple hostile corporate takeover are
absolutely clear and indisputable. These CEO’s (i.e. Bush, Cheney,
and friends, who each were CEO’s before they ran for President) saw
the country’s excess cash-on-hand and high profit margin, as well as
other potentially cash producing assets, and so rounded up a group
of investors – putting together more money than anyone ever imagined
possible – and initiated a hostile takeover.
The returns have been massive, the
devastation to the company (i.e. country) massive. Yet, they are
not done.
No, there is a lot more cash to be had –
in particular, the massive oil reserves of Iraq have not been tapped
and, more importantly, contracted out yet. And so the investors’
cash continues to pour in, hundreds of millions of dollars,
unprecedented cash, so that they can maintain the hostile takeover
until this last, massive payoff occurs.
Now that we have put the re-election bid
in its proper context, people can begin to assess whether or not
they want to support the continuation of this hostile takeover or if
they, in fact, care to change course for the sake of ensuring the
company’s (i.e. country’s) survival. Taking the money and running
is an option, and for those who get enough the remaining condition
of the nation won’t matter much.
But for those who might actually care to
prevent the nation from being a flesh-torn skeleton of what it was,
decimated and broke, having been raped and robbed by the piratic
Bush/Cheney-led corporate raiders, you get one more crack at things
in the coming year. But make no mistake, it will be a hostile
campaign you will confront in attempting to save your company (i.e.
country.)
|
