First Cup of Coffee: Mitten’s Former Bain Partner Says Wealth Concentration at Top Ought to Be Twice as Extreme

ImageIn his new book (which I won’t link to here) 51-year-old .01%er Ed Conard, retired, makes a case for greater economic inequality.  Yeah — he wants the top 10% to control more than 2/3 of America’s net worth.  Conard argues increased wealth concentration at the top is necessary to drive nonproductive “art history majors” (a term he uses to describe lawyers and pretty much anyone he sees as adverse to competition and risk) from the sidelines. Ed hopes that, once we’ve got these wallflowers moving, they’ll get involved with socioeconomically productive endeavors, such as high-leverage (debt-laden) buyouts of companies followed by massive cost-cutting layoffs so that the businesses can be flipped like so many foreclosed properties.

“It’s not like the current payoff is motivating everybody to take risks,” he said. “We need twice as many people. When I look around, I see a world of unrealized opportunities for improvements, an abundance of talented people able to take the risks necessary to make improvements but a shortage of people and investors willing to take those risks. That doesn’t indicate to me that risk takers, as a whole, are overpaid. Quite the opposite.” The wealth concentrated at the top should be twice as large, he said. That way, the art-history majors would feel compelled to try to join them.  Adam Davidson — NY Times

Let’s be honest here — private equity firms get cash-rich institutions (e.g., teachers’ pension funds) and ultra-rich individuals to front the capital to purchase an underperforming venture.  This limited-partnership legal entity has investors essentially betting on the firm’s management strategy to produce a turnaround or notable growth.  The PE firm comes in and “cuts the fat” (often on the backs of the labor force), executing an extreme bottom-line-focused strategy, and each of its management decisions is informed by the desire to exit the investment.  The format is both exclusive — you’d typically need upwards of $1M to invest — and short-term focused.  There’s zero incentive to think of healthy long-term growth for the asset, as the only goal is to reach IPO or acquisition.

At its best, Conard’s thought grants us a fairly honest portrayal of the inner machinations of his former partner’s take on distributive justice.  It’s a scary sight.  The fact that this set of folks is so eager to advocate for greater risk just four years after risk nearly destroyed our economy — and after we’ve seen only mixed recovery — tells me that the risk-takers responsible for the economic crisis saw little downside (punishment) to their behavior.  Conard, Romney, and their ilk are the outcome of moral hazard.

Tagged , , , , , ,

3 thoughts on “First Cup of Coffee: Mitten’s Former Bain Partner Says Wealth Concentration at Top Ought to Be Twice as Extreme

  1. bdy says:

    We’ve seen this conflation before: Personal profit = Universal well being. There’s free money just laying around for whoever can defer the most risk – not enough hours in the day to collect it. But hey, there are thousands of out of work loan originators out there who know how to party. We just need a bigger carrot to coax them out of Mom’s basement.

    Rational Self Interest sucks.

    • Right — the whole system is predicated on rational self interest and anyone who’s not willing to drop their art history text books and get on board with the Greed is Good Gordon Gecko express deserves their mother’s basement or worse or some-such. It never ever enters in to their brains — these rational self-interest-ers — that other folks lives might not be centered upon wealth amassment, you know? That there may be another way. I’ve been thinking about that, actually… the whole “other way” notion and, historically, totalitarian regimes have had to destroy all sects who posed “another way”. I think that’s what’s slowly happening now. We see it with the devaluation of college education coupled with the concurrent rising costs of tuition — not natural market behavior, btw. We see it with conspicuous austerity in the face of general economic hardship for the masses. It’s all happening right under our noses — on bill-turned-law or one legislative deadline for student loan interest rate extension at a time.

  2. I wonder what has to happen to make the Greed is Good contingent rewire their brains. Does anarchy have to come for them to see rampant greed is creating an unsustainable society?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: