Ed Driscoll

By Ed Driscoll

Bio

Get Updates From Ed Driscoll

toon062509
And thus, corporatism comes full circle. Under the old definition of corporatism, the government simply got in bed with a seemingly private corporation once it became sufficiently large and/or unions made it sufficiently hidebound and sclerotic, as GE, GM, Chrysler, public utilities, defense contractors, etc. Or it took over a corporation that failed, such as 1971′s Amtrak, formed by Congress to run the nation’s passenger trains, which had been rendered outdated by jet air travel, and Conrail in 1976 to absorb Penn Central and other bankrupt northeast railroads (which eventually went private under the Reagan administration).

The Obama administration now jump starts the process by shoveling ginormous amounts of start-up money (courtesy of you and I) at future businesses they wish to control, such as Solyndra. As Stephen L. Carter, a Yale law professor, writes at Bloomberg.com:

That relatively high expected failure rate, together with the fact that the Energy Department’s portfolio of green-loan guarantees stands near $30 billion, has led some observers to argue that the program should be considered as analogous to a venture capital shop. The department, after all, is putting money into lots of startups, knowing that some will fail, but betting that a few will hit it big.

Advertisement

Government Making Bets

True, the program deals with loans rather than making investments — but we are speaking here of an analogy, not an identity.

Like the Energy Department program, the venture capitalist makes bets, many of them very high risk, on many companies that otherwise would have trouble raising capital, except perhaps at prohibitive cost.

Yet the analogy fails because the venture capitalist is disciplined in his lending by two forces that government does not face. First, if the venture capitalist makes too many bad bets, he will lose his investors. Government loan guarantee programs, on the other hand, can be refunded by Congress as often as politically convenient, and have been known to grow larger after making bad bets.

“No wonder many Democratic strategists predicted their party’s 2008 landslide win would usher in a generation of political dominance,”  James Pethokoukis discussed earlier this month in a column titled, “Solyndra, the logical endpoint of Obamanomics:”

 Obamanomics, essentially, would divert taxpayer dollars to the Green Lobby – and then into the campaign coffers of the Democratic Party. This is what crony capitalism is really all about: politicians enriching favored businesses, who then return the favor. Or maybe it’s the other way around, Who cares, really. It’s an endless, profitable loop for both.

And Obama almost pulled it off. The Great Recession conveniently allowed the president to start the spendathon under the guise of economic stimulus. (“You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that is an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before.” – White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, 2009). As it turns out, the $38.6 billion loan program for clean energy firms that Solyndra benefited from has created just 3,545 permanent new jobs after parceling out half its dough. That works out to around $5 million a job.

Unfortunately for the Obamacrats, the financial meltdown also undercut political support for cap-and-trade on Capitol Hill. Voters worried the scheme would slow growth and cost jobs. But without permanently and continually raising the price of carbon-based fuels, many green businesses can’t make the numbers work.

The piece we quoted above from Stephen L. Carter at Bloomberg is titled, “Energy Department Is No Venture Capitalist.” Republican Sen. Jim DeMint concurs — he calls it a case of “Venture Socialism.” Writing in the Washington Times, DeMint notes that “The Obama economy is littered with billion-dollar busts. Yet Mr. Obama is advocating massive tax increases that would, in part, pay for more of his ‘investments.’ If his new jobs bill were made law, it would create a new, permanent National Infrastructure Bank to fund even more green energy projects — a permanent venture socialism fund:”

The demise of Solyndra, the bankrupt solar panel company showered with more than a half-billion dollars in stimulus loans, exposes the fatal flaw of President Obama’s jobs plans.

Government officials rushed $535 million to Solyndra because the Obama administration was determined to make the company the centerpiece of its green agenda regardless of the law of supply and demand. Billions more have been wasted by politicians betting on favored companies and making Washington bigger, using the brute force of government to force liberal preferences into the economy. Mr. Obama calls them “investments,” but this is really venture socialism.

The entire purpose of the $825 billion stimulus bill was to sink government money into politically advantageous projects. Once the federal coffers were opened, the venture vultures eagerly descended. Obama bundler and major Solyndra backer George Kaiser, who splits his time between Oklahoma and California, explained it this way in a July 2009 speech in Tulsa: “There has never been more money shoved out of the government’s door in world history and probably never will be again than in the last few months and the next 18 months. And our selfish, parochial goal is to get as much of it for Tulsa and Oklahoma as we possibly can.”

Mr. Kaiser was right: The government was shoveling money to various projects faster than the country had ever seen.

Read the whole thing.

Related: “Obama’s Acting Commerce Secretary: U.S. ‘Can’t Afford’ Not To Spend Taxpayer Dollars Subsidizing Green Tech,” the Weasel Zippers write. “Leave it to someone in this administration to say we can’t afford not to spend money.”

What a Krugmaniac.

PJ Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:

1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.

2. Stay on topic.

3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.

4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.

5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.

These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that PJ Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. Please note that comments are reviewed by the editorial staff and may not be posted immediately. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pjmedia.com.

6 Comments, 6 Threads, 3 Trackbacks

  1. 1. Steven

    It is corruption through control. In Texas, there is another disturbing story about Obamajustice– A Dallas business owner, who was involved in a civil dispute and paid millions of dollars to lawyers, and when he objected to their fees, they had a “friendly” judge seize all of his property, without any notice or hearing, and essentially ordered him to be an involuntary servant to the lawyers. The business owner has been under this “servant” order for 10 months and among other things is prohibited from working, from owning any possessions, etc..

    http://www.lawinjustice.com has an explanation of this really disturbing case.. The frequency of instances like these seems to be increasing exponentially even though they get little media attention

  2. 2. BlogDog

    Not to toot my own horn but I used the term “venture socialism” in a letter to Forbes in 2006 about Vinod Khosla: http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2006/0724/022.html

    Not that it matters but I am claiming credit.

  3. 3. JimGl

    Yeah, “venture socialism:” is a good term, the old fashioned term was “Fascism”. Mussolini’s great idea, I haven’t heard how that came out, but I’m sure it was a great success.

  4. 4. richard40

    It is actually worse than venture socialism. Venture capitalists do not go for loans or loan guarantees, they go for equity. This allows them to occasionally fail, because their successes allow them to sell their equity in an IPO and pay off their investment 4-5 times, thus also covering their failures. But the Obama loan guarantees return nothing to the gov if they succeed, while losing everything if they fail. From an investment standpoint, since the gov has no upside but a huge downside, that is not venture capitalism, or even a good gamble, it is pure idiocy. The only justification for it is pure graft, thus all the money going to dem cronies.

  5. 5. warlord

    Call it like it is,robbery and treason.

  6. 6. Ghost@imasocialista@gmail.com

    WE THE PEOPLE of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
    The idea… was not that corporations or kings….or some political party would run this land..but yet..WE THE PEOPLE, would form a union to help one another. This is the bases of our country’s founding….to be a ” MORE PERFECT ” union.This is a socialistic idea that is now dead in this country.The issue should not be weather government is big are small…but weather it is a government of the PEOPLE.
    What we have now in this country is a “dictatorship of the corporation” ran by the rich and super rich. I know that some will say that I’m wrong…but if I am…how is it that EVERY YEAR I pay more per-dollar taxes than multi-billion dollar companies like ExxonMobile or GE,which pay almost none, and yet they get benefits, loans, and subsidies from what use to be OUR GOVERNMENT.
    No SIR ! The idea was to promote the general welfare of the PEOPLE, and then somebody along the way came up with the notion that WE THE PEOPLE could be better helped if corporations were allowed into the loop…Ronald Reagan called this the “Trickle Down Theory”….Well it works,because that’s all that WE THE PEOPLE ever see of the billions of dollars in wealth that is produced in this country….A TRICKLE ! Now, I’m not saying that people should not be allowed to make money…or even corporations, but everyone should MAN-UP and pay there share and that whatever good things that corporations get from OUR government the PEOPLE should get as well…including fair representation,which brings us full-circle and why OUR constitution begins; WE THE PEOPLE of the United States, in order to form a more perfect UNION….