Soros : Hero or Villain

[simvastatin]

4 hours ago, iamnumerate said:

I think the people on the whole are the problem

1) We have HPI because a lot of people think it is good for them and don't care about those who lose

2) We have grooming gangs because people are more worried about being called racist than stopping rape.  Look at Naz Shah MP, there was no outcry about her, but when some nobody is racist on a flight people do care.  Racism in parliament is far more important than when it is Joe Bloggs, but it seems to be the other way round.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/tvandshowbiz/7585770/sinead-oconnor-islam-muslims/amp/

 

you are. Sinead O Connor

 

[simvastatin]

23 hours ago, iamnumerate said:

I think the people on the whole are the problem

1) We have HPI because a lot of people think it is good for them and don't care about those who lose

2) We have grooming gangs because people are more worried about being called racist than stopping rape.  Look at Naz Shah MP, there was no outcry about her, but when some nobody is racist on a flight people do care.  Racism in parliament is far more important than when it is Joe Bloggs, but it seems to be the other way round.

You say you have a daughter 

say she comes up to you and says she is thinking of marrying a Muslim what advice would you give 

[iamnumerate]

8 hours ago, prozac said:

You say you have a daughter 

say she comes up to you and says she is thinking of marrying a Muslim what advice would you give 

I don't think that is very likely, she is more likely* to win Wimbledon than say that.

 

* I can't say why it is unlikely.

[simvastatin]

1 hour ago, iamnumerate said:

I don't think that is very likely, she is more likely* to win Wimbledon than say that.

 

* I can't say why it is unlikely.

Do not forget 

...this truth

 

[disenfranchised]

Being a successful speculative investor like Soros means being pretty much entirely amoral and apolitical in your decision making. 

As an "investor" (speculator) Soros exploited the stupidity evident in a political project masquerading as a great liberal economic leap forward to make billions by "bringing down the BoE", and now as an old man who will meet his maker shortly, he squanders fragments of what he made on trying to undo the geopolitical consequences of events like that and the corrupt mess capitalism has become thanks to men like him.

Quite amusing really. What's that old adage about a camel passing through the eye of a needle? Good job he claims to be an atheist really.

 

[zugzwang]

6 hours ago, disenfranchised said:

Being a successful speculative investor like Soros means being pretty much entirely amoral and apolitical in your decision making. 

As an "investor" (speculator) Soros exploited the stupidity evident in a political project masquerading as a great liberal economic leap forward to make billions by "bringing down the BoE", and now as an old man who will meet his maker shortly, he squanders fragments of what he made on trying to undo the geopolitical consequences of events like that and the corrupt mess capitalism has become thanks to men like him.

Quite amusing really. What's that old adage about a camel passing through the eye of a needle? Good job he claims to be an atheist really.

 

On the other hand it could be argued that by forcing the UK out of a disastrous and unworkable monetary union when he did Soros saved the country from far greater hardship down the road, potentially including national bankruptcy and 50% youth unemployment a la Greece. Plus, he's been warning in print about the corrupting menace of laissez faire capitalism for more than thirty years, while lending financial support to those individuals and institutions he feels most capable of arresting its advance. Which is why he draws so much ire from the American Right. Mixed motives, perhaps, but neither amoral or apolitical.

[iamnumerate]

13 hours ago, zugzwang said:

On the other hand it could be argued that by forcing the UK out of a disastrous and unworkable monetary union when he did Soros saved the country from far greater hardship down the road, potentially including national bankruptcy and 50% youth unemployment a la Greece. Plus, he's been warning in print about the corrupting menace of laissez faire capitalism for more than thirty years, while lending financial support to those individuals and institutions he feels most capable of arresting its advance. Which is why he draws so much ire from the American Right. Mixed motives, perhaps, but neither amoral or apolitical.

True, although it does seem strange that he supports the EU when he probably did it more harm in the UK than Nigel Farage.

[darkmarket]

13 hours ago, zugzwang said:

Plus, he's been warning in print about the corrupting menace of laissez faire capitalism for more than thirty years, while lending financial support to those individuals and institutions he feels most capable of arresting its advance.

This is a complete mischaracterisation of his work, which is to stop protectionism and ensure freedom of capital.

In the 80s, he supported U.S. Republicans when he considered the Democrats protectionist. Now he supports the Democrats there because he considers the Republicans protectionist.

The point of the Soros vision of the Open Society is he places freedom of capital above all else. He then supports all kinds of organisations that he considers to further that aim, and people end up thinking he cares about diversity and inclusion.

[zugzwang]

6 minutes ago, darkmarket said:

This is a complete mischaracterisation of his work, which is to stop protectionism and ensure freedom of capital.

In the 80s, he supported U.S. Republicans when he considered the Democrats protectionist. Now he supports the Democrats there because he considers the Republicans protectionist.

The point of the Soros vision of the Open Society is he places freedom of capital above all else. He then supports all kinds of organisations that he considers to further that aim, and people end up thinking he cares about diversity and inclusion.

I don't believe so. In the Crisis of Global Capitalism (1998) he characterises the free-market as inherently unstable, and argues (correctly) that deregulation amplifies its inherent instability. Second, that there are social needs which cannot be met by market solutions. He juxtaposes this market fundamentalism with religious fundamentalism and proposes the Open Society (regulated capitalism) instead, existing somewhere between these two totalitarian extremes, based on the recognition of human fallibility and the computational irreducibility of the market. Which isn't to say the book is without its faults. A lot of the science he quotes is trivially wrong. The book would have benefited enormously from a throrough editing by a capable physicist or engineer.

[chronyx]

Funny how these well meaning psychopaths never have to live in or deal with the shit they've created for us cattle

[Errol]

Soros Indirectly Gave $1 Million to Trump-Russia Collusion Dossier 

George Soros, a Hungarian-born US magnate and investor, is known for advancing a globalist agenda throughout the world. These liberal efforts have faced opposition in Europe, when Soros-funded Open Society Foundations was forced to leave Hungary, and when Trump's former advisor kicked off a right-wing political initiative in Brussels.

According to a New York Times report, George Soros has channeled $1 million to the Democracy Integrity Project, a civil rights organization which used the research group Fusion GPS as a contractor in a quest for dirt on Donald Trump during the 2016 presidential campaign.

https://sputniknews.com/us/201811011069412622-soros-steele-dossier-donation-report/

[darkmarket]

3 hours ago, zugzwang said:

I don't believe so. In the Crisis of Global Capitalism (1998) he characterises the free-market as inherently unstable, and argues (correctly) that deregulation amplifies its inherent instability. Second, that there are social needs which cannot be met by market solutions. He juxtaposes this market fundamentalism with religious fundamentalism and proposes the Open Society (regulated capitalism) instead, existing somewhere between these two totalitarian extremes, based on the recognition of human fallibility and the computational irreducibility of the market. Which isn't to say the book is without its faults. A lot of the science he quotes is trivially wrong. The book would have benefited enormously from a throrough editing by a capable physicist or engineer.

Even given his views on regulation, his main activity has been opposing the Soviet Union by promoting free-market economies. Those countries vary on their social policies but all share low restrictions on the movement of capital. Since the fall of the Soviet Union, he's moved to opposing protectionism in Western countries, again without influencing anything like financial sector regulation anywhere.

He may favour a role for global governance, but he is certainly a global capitalist first and foremost.

[disenfranchised]

21 hours ago, zugzwang said:

On the other hand it could be argued that by forcing the UK out of a disastrous and unworkable monetary union when he did Soros saved the country from far greater hardship down the road, potentially including national bankruptcy and 50% youth unemployment a la Greece. Plus, he's been warning in print about the corrupting menace of laissez faire capitalism for more than thirty years, while lending financial support to those individuals and institutions he feels most capable of arresting its advance. Which is why he draws so much ire from the American Right. Mixed motives, perhaps, but neither amoral or apolitical.

Yes, it did us a long term favour in my eyes, the euro is a disaster waiting to happen. 

My argument about morality / amorality was about his trading activities in markets, not his overall existance. This is supported by Soros himself: 

“I react to events in the marketplace as an animal reacts to events in the jungle.”

He described crypto as "too volatile to function as a currency" in January this year, yet started trading it in April anyway. This illustrates my fundamental issue with Soros. He effectively stiffed the Bank of England, and therefore us, for a lot of money in 1992. We are a rich powerful country and can take it, but he made a huge trade in 1997 against the Thai Bhat, which was similarly pegged to a foreign currency (USD at 25 Baht to the dollar), and scored $750m. What followed in Thailand was economic collapse, with the IMF having to issue a $17bn bailout plan.

That speculative attack on an emerging market did massive damage to the lives of ordinary people. There were widespread job losses, and many Thai workers literally had to box up their lives and return to subsistence living in the agricultural villages they came from. 600,000 foreign workers were sent away from Thailand - open society? 

What's really interesting about Soros is that having spent vast sums of money attempting to support Russia's emergence as a liberal democracy in the 1990s, when the Asian financial crisis he helped to precipitate rippled out to Russia a year later, he didn't join in on the vampire capitalist hedge fund attack on the Rouble, and lost $400m in maintaining his investments in Russia. Soros is nothing of not astute, he knew full well what was coming. Perhaps his earlier trades on Sterling & especially the Bhat should be seen in light of that?

Soros, as much as any other, created the current paradigm where the pooled resources of the wealthy are used to place vast trades that can break an economy. Soros is not a villain as such in my eyes, but you cannot seperate the man from the money.

Where I have a lot of respect for Soros is his willingness to go against the grain and criticise the "war on terror" and the powerful pro-Israel lobby, but there is a certain lack of self-awareness evident in a member of the global capitalist elite setting himself so directly against emergent nationalist tendencies in the west - he is fueling more fires than he puts out on the right.

[jonb2]

23 hours ago, zugzwang said:

On the other hand it could be argued that by forcing the UK out of a disastrous and unworkable monetary union when he did Soros saved the country from far greater hardship down the road, potentially including national bankruptcy and 50% youth unemployment a la Greece. Plus, he's been warning in print about the corrupting menace of laissez faire capitalism for more than thirty years, while lending financial support to those individuals and institutions he feels most capable of arresting its advance. Which is why he draws so much ire from the American Right. Mixed motives, perhaps, but neither amoral or apolitical.

I agree Zug, plus there are far worse billionaires out there than Soros.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/oct/30/billionaire-stealth-politics-america-100-richest-what-they-want

[zugzwang]

2 hours ago, disenfranchised said:

 

Soros, as much as any other, created the current paradigm where the pooled resources of the wealthy are used to place vast trades that can break an economy. Soros is not a villain as such in my eyes, but you cannot seperate the man from the money.

Where I have a lot of respect for Soros is his willingness to go against the grain and criticise the "war on terror" and the powerful pro-Israel lobby, but there is a certain lack of self-awareness evident in a member of the global capitalist elite setting himself so directly against emergent nationalist tendencies in the west - he is fueling more fires than he puts out on the right.

 

1 hour ago, jonb2 said:

I agree Zug, plus there are far worse billionaires out there than Soros.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/oct/30/billionaire-stealth-politics-america-100-richest-what-they-want

Personally, I'm more interested in Soros' ideas than his market positions or the dubious company he sometimes keeps. I guess like most HNW individuals he's something of a megalomaniac; interesting to have dinner with perhaps but not to work for. Clearly he's open to the charge of hypocrisy for condemning in others what he often practices in person himself. He would argue, I suspect, that his motives are somewhat different than most speculators and if he doesn't take advantage of these arbitrage opportunities then someone else inevitably will. His longstanding objections to the Efficient Markets Hypothesis and the concept of rational expectations do seem terribly prescient in light of the GFC.

 

Edited November 1, 2018 by zugzwang

[disenfranchised]

Read a couple of recent interviews with him and articles about him as a result of this thread. Definitely an interesting character. In his political positions, I think he's absolutely right about some things - the importance of free exchange of ideas in particular.

I cannot, however, see some of his recent actions in the political sphere as anything other than wrong-headed and devisive. Soros funded organisations have strongly encouraged mass migration into Europe. An organisation linked to him was found to be distributing leaflets in Arabic instructing migrants on how to best exploit the welfare systems of EU states, and Soros funded NGOs have been involved in directly assisting illegal migration across the Med. 

We have an increasing segregation between Muslims / non-Muslims, and retrenchment to deeper conservatism in some Muslim communities. This coupled with poor Africans with limited education and skills who come here illegally or as adult refugees (often failing to claim asylum in the first safe country), does nothing to break down negative attitudes to migration. Flooding Europe with both is like pouring petrol on the fire of support for the likes of the AfD and Front Nationale. It's totally counter-productive in making society more open.

Only ultra far right looneys are running around calling for their country to stop letting foreign grads from all over the world come and work there - more reasonable people might object to the outright numbers, but very few people oppose the actual concept. I've got friends from India and China and Nigeria who came here thus. That HAS promoted a mors open society, the Soros funded and fueled migrant crisis has done the absolute opposite. 

Had Europe backed the British model (we were the 2nd largest international aid donor to support Syrian refugees in neighbouring countries from where they are likely to return), rather than the failed and discredited Merkel plan to throw the doors open (which Soros backed and pushed for throughout), Europe simply wouldn't have this massive resurgence in the far right. Soros has got to carry the can for some of that in my view.

[simvastatin]

Billionaire investor George Soros sharply criticized China’s president, Xi Jinping, charging that open societies face a “mortal danger” from regimes using machine-learning and artificial-intelligence technology to reinforce one-party rule.

“China isn’t the only authoritarian regime in the world, but it’s undoubtedly the wealthiest, strongest and most developed in machine learning and artificial intelligence. This makes Xi Jinping the most dangerous opponent of those who believe in the concept of open society” Soros said, in remarks prepared for delivery in Davos, Switzerland, on Thursday, where world leaders, business executives and celebrities have gathered for the annual meeting of the World Economic Forum.

 

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/george-soros-blasts-chinas-xi-as-most-dangerous-opponent-of-open-societies-2019-01-24 

[aheadofthecurve]

Neither a hero nor a villain. A fabulously wealthy man who became rich from the trappings of what a capitalist society can offer. Unfortunately he refuses to accept that and thinks others should not be allowed to thrive in that environment - he seems to think everyone is lesser compared to him and unable to achieve what he has. He no doubt possesses incredible critical thinking abilities when it suits his own profit-making interests. Ultimately he's just a champagne socialist who is extremely capable.

Edited January 24, 2019 by aheadofthecurve

[Silverfinger]

On 24/01/2019 at 23:26, prozac said:

Billionaire investor George Soros sharply criticized China’s president, Xi Jinping, charging that open societies face a “mortal danger” from regimes using machine-learning and artificial-intelligence technology to reinforce one-party rule.

Good for Soros. I think this is spot on, and there are not that many people who openly speak out about this issue. I also think that the one thing the Trump administration has going for it is their China policy. This is not about the Chinese people, this is about the "communist" leadership and how they use the inernet and AI to cement their autocracy.

Edited January 26, 2019 by Silverfinger