Obama: A place for private capital, but not part of his job

There was a presentation of some sort by Obama (about the big Camp David meeting I think) and I was not paying close attention. Then he took a question about private capital. The answer was carefully fuzzed in specially chosen verbiage, but the intent was rather stunning.

If anyone can find a copy of his Q&A from today, I’d love to get the exact wording.

In essence, what he said was “There’s a place for private capital in our economy, but he doesn’t see it as very important to his job, which is to fund “investment” in infrastructure, research, and building our future economy. In other words, “The business of America is Big Government running everything”… oh, “and a tiny bit of private capital for the uninteresting bits”.

He went out of his way to say that promoting private capital was NOT part of “His job” and that R&D, Education (I think), and Infrastructure belonged to the government, so were his job.

This means that any statement of the form “That will kill private jobs” or “that will kill private capital” or “that will kill private energy” or… are all “not his job”. It also means that anything of the form “that will employ a lot of folks in government” or “that will fund a lot of politically controlled R&D” or “that will build a lot of stuff under government control” is what he sees as “His Job”.

Just amazing.

Perhaps someone ought to point out to him that the telephone and internet infrastructure is largely funded by private capital and that the R&D that made all the military toys we have including GE Jet Engines was done by private capital. No, on second thought, don’t tell him. We don’t need more nationalization of industries…

I’m pretty sure he had some words about the need to for even more regulatory burden as being part of His Job, but can’t say for certain.

Somehow I’d never expected him to be so explicit about it. Though it was couched in carefully selected fuzzy positive words. ( Like “research” and “investment”). It was just so explicitly backwards from the classical line: “The business of America IS business!”


Would Obama agree with:

“The chief business of the American people,” he said, “is business.” But, for Coolidge, business was more than business; it was a religion; and to it he committed all the passion of his arid nature. “The man who builds a factory,” he wrote, “builds a temple. The man who works there worships there.” He (Coolidge) felt these things with a fierce intensity.

No, now for Obama, “The chief business of the American people is to fund his growing government” and “The man who builds a factory is a despoiler and exploiter of the poor. The man who works there is an oppressed proletariat.” And while there is a place for private capital, the distinct feeling I got was that he saw that place as a small corner of the museum / mausoleum he was building…

I do hope someone can find that on video as I’d like to listen to it slowly and carefully a couple of times and see what other hidden visioning he leaks during that presentation.

Subscribe to feed

About E.M.Smith

A technical managerial sort interested in things from Stonehenge to computer science. My present "hot buttons' are the mythology of Climate Change and ancient metrology; but things change...
This entry was posted in Political Current Events and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to Obama: A place for private capital, but not part of his job

  1. Ian W says:

    in that economic model – where does all the tax income required for big government come from? Sounds like the economic equivalent of a perpetual motion machine.

  2. Power Grab says:

    Sounds like an excuse to take ever-increasing amounts of funds from the workers and shove it where the sun don’t shine…in other words, in gummint programs that we shouldn’t expect to see a return from. Totally unaccountable. Kinda like so-called “health insurance” that has death panels built in.

  3. Randall says:


    Go to,
    Hans Nichols. Where is Hans?
    Q Yes, thank you, Mr. President. Yesterday, your friend and ally, Cory Booker said that an ad that you released, that your campaign released was nauseating. And it alleged that Romney at Bain Capital was “responsible for job losses at a Kansas City steel mill.” Is that your view that Romney is personally responsible for those job losses? Will comments from Booker and your former auto czar Steve Rattner that have criticized some of these advertisements call on you to pull back a little bit? And, generally, can you give us your sense — three part, Mr. President. Could you give us your sense of just what private equity’s role is in stemming job losses as they seek a return on investment for their investors? Thank you.

  4. Randall says:

    Apparently, his job is not to maximize profits, but to make sure everybody has a “fair shot” (at winning the lottery I would guess).

  5. Pascvaks says:

    shhhhhhh… he’s listening

    (Well he is! He doesn’t like people who don’t like what he likes, especially when he’s running for a second term for life. The next four years will be his Masterpiece. You know how artists are;-)

  6. philjourdan says:

    I am no longer surprised by Obama and his ignorance of economics. He suffers from extreme narcissism, so it is not that he does not have the capacity to learn, he just does not have any incentive to.

    What surprises me is the ignorance and obstinance of his parrots. They cannot make a rational argument on his effectiveness, simply repeating his talking points and expect that to the the rebuttal of any charges against him. When did these people lose the ability to debate simple facts? Perhaps they are merely the product of our failed education system. in the 50s, if you did not make the grade, you FAILED, and those that failed, knew it. And do not pretend to be great thinkers.

    From the 70s on, no one was allowed to fail, so the stupids think they are great thinkers.

  7. Pascvaks says:

    @philjourdan- “the stupids think they are great thinkers.”

    RELIGION – “a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe,
    especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies
    , …”


    We tend to redefine words that have ‘little’ differences as something else. But.. really, think about it, there are many, many more ‘religions’ than we traditionally define as such. Political, Scientific, Astronomical, Biological, Social, Economic, Climate Change, etc., etc., people LOVE religions. We think, therefore, we believe in all kinds of things; and each of us believes a little differently about pretty much everything there is, and may be, and otta’ be, etc.

    Word to the wise: “Beware the Crusaders of every Faith!”

  8. u.k.(us) says:

    JPM lost 2 billion, who gained 2 billion ?

Comments are closed.