|
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.)
| 
