By CARL GINSBURG
Of
all the farcical notions put forth during this time of high farce,
casting America as “broke” places way up there on the list, as
trillions of dollars are being stockpiled in the face of a national
downsizing and its attendant growth in misery. Here we sit, a captive
national audience to the president’s seemingly daily farce, “We are all
in this together”.
Instances of hoarding in
U.S. history are many, but the current example stands out for its
enduring quality, as Congress reaches deep into corporate pockets, with
occasional forays into legislation of the extreme incremental
variety. Profits are up 41 percent since Obama’s election; yet half
of American workers have suffered a job loss or a cut in hours or wages
over the past 30 months--- hardly the recipe for togetherness.
More
farce: that irresponsibility is the root of poverty, a stalwart theme
in American political theater, with the latest reminder from Treasury
Secretary Geithner in a New York Times op-ed this month, saluting
Americans for “saving more” and “borrowing more responsibly”. These
instructions from the government’s top economic point man were imparted
in the face of continued wage stagnation, high foreclosure rates and
new forms of financial foolery.
Now enter stage left: the ”Great Givers”, they come in the form of American billionaires proposing to give away half their wealth. Beware strangers bearing gifts.
The
billionaire pledge – a broadside of noblesse oblige – was formulated by
none other than two of the planet’s leading mega-billionaires, Warren
Buffett and Bill Gates. These two American moneybags are imploring
fellow prophets of profit to address global suffering by earmarking not
less than fifty per cent of personal wealth for charity. First
discussed at a dinner in May 2009, the specifics are just now surfacing
thanks to Carol J. Loomis in the June 16 issue of Fortune.
According
to Loomis, Buffett and Gates, who share a commitment to charity and to
the Democratic Party, summoned a group of billionaires to dinner in New
York City. David Rockefeller -- whose granddad cornered the market in
kerosene, then gasoline – played host and invited this billionaire boys
club to share their calling. Two subsequent dinners were held,
expanding the group invited to take the plunge to about thirty. Areas
of charitable concern shared by America’s very richest, Loomis says,
include “education, culture, hospitals and health, the environment,
public policy, the poor generally.” Generally.
Details
are scarce because participating billionaires were promised privacy --
privacy being a constitutional commitment to enormous wealth. One
detail that did get out was the name Buffett assigned his file on this
new initiative: “Great Givers”.
It would
appear that the ability to give greatly stops at the factory door.
Buffett’s billions, for example, include holdings in Wal-Mart, a
company fresh from victory in Chicago where, after years of resistance
by community forces, construction of its first mega-store was just
given a green light. Times as they are, with “jobless recovery” taken
to new heights and millions looking for work, Wal-Mart offered a wage
of $8.75 per hour to seal the deal. The amount Wal-Mart agreed to pony
up is 50 cents over the Illinois minimum; still, at under $20,000 per
year gross, no one would argue that it constitutes a living wage. Such
are the elements of Great Giving.
Buffett’s
profits are not tied exclusively to low wages stateside; his Wal-Mart
earnings are a result of paying the lowest garment wages in the world,
according to labor rights advocates. Wal-Mart has started moving some
of its garment factories out of China, where garment workers have been
making the princely sum of $147 per month, to Bangladesh, where monthly
earnings total $64, the lowest wage of its kind. In this world of
farce these wages are linked to Bangladesh’s low literacy rate—55
percent. Had workers only acquired educations, the master thespians of
farce would say, wages would be higher.
It’s not fair, however, to solely tie Buffett’s billions to uneducated Bangladeshis.
This
Great Giver also bought a stake in Goldman Sachs and its Ivy-educated
money managers, doing his part to rescue the financial system by
transferring $5 billion to America’s gilded investment bank (in
exchange for a 10 percent per annum return). Yes, this is the same
Goldman that last month admitted “a mistake” in selling subprime
mortgage bonds destined to collapse; the same Goldman that set aside
$9.3 billion the first half of this year for salary and bonuses; and,
yes, the same Goldman that orchestrated speculation in the world wheat
crop with disastrous results, according to Frederick Kaufman’s cover
story in the July issue of Harper’s, “The Food Bubble.” Undoubtedly,
Buffett’s due diligence uncovered the following when sizing up the
Goldman investment:
“The history of food took an ominous turn in 1991, at a time when no one was paying much attention. That was the year Goldman Sachs decided our daily bread might make an excellent investment…. [W]ith accustomed care and precision, Goldman’s analysts went about transforming food into a concept. They selected eighteen commodifiable ingredients and contrived a financial elixir that included cattle, coffee, cocoa, corn, hogs, and a variety or two of wheat…. They weighted the investment value of each element… that could be expressed as single manifestation, to be known thenceforward as the Goldman Sachs Commodity Index….“Since Goldman’s innovation, hundreds of billions of new dollars had overwhelmed the actual supply of and actual demand for wheat….“In 2008, for the first time since such statistics have been kept, the proportion of the world’s population without enough to eat ratcheted upward. The ranks of the hungry had increased in a single year, the most abysmal increase in all of human history.”
(pp. 27-28)
Clarifying what the Great Giver Buffett means by the poor generally.
Buffett’s
Goldman investment remains solid, as the SEC fined Goldman for its
“mistake” what amounted to little more than petty cash -- $550
million. It was, according to finance professor Charles Geisst, “like
passing around the church collection plate and collecting a few extra
bucks for sins.” Geisst summed it up this way: “This is unlikely to
change much at all. I think it will be business as usual right away.”
More money for Buffett to give greatly.
Warren
Buffett’s fellow Giver of Great Gifts, Bill Gates, has diversified his
holdings as well. But his tens of billions result chiefly from the
company he co-founded and led for decades, Microsoft, where profits
remain very strong. “Microsoft Still Earnings Powerhouse,” barked the
headline in USA Today, July 23, 2010. In its fledgling years, profits
on Gates’ software were reportedly 70 per cent annually. Otherwise,
after all, you don’t make upwards of $50 billion charging cost plus
five percent.
Current returns for this
scion of the responsible class were reported at 48 per cent, as Windows
7, the latest software batch out of Microsoft, led the company’s
product pack. “It certainly shows that Office and Windows franchises
are as strong as ever and delivering huge revenue,” analyst Brendan
Barnicle told the Wall Street Journal recently. Indeed, annual sales
have hit new records year after year, tripling to $62.5 billion in
fiscal 2010. Net income for Gates’ Microsoft grew from $9.4 billion
per year a decade ago to $24.1 billion this year.
Another
way to gauge Gates’s billions is by catching a glimpse of the
multitudes of students priced out of the computer market – thanks in
part to that Great Giver’s expensive software – lined up daily at
community college libraries for some free access to computers, each
machine an expression of Gates’ creative commitment to profit in the
+40 percent range – a gift Gates gave himself that keeps on giving. As
Gates told Fortune: “The diversity of American giving is part of its
beauty.”
Carl Ginsburg is a journalist in New York City. He can be reached at carlginsburg@gmail.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment