By Cliff Kincaid
Michael Bloomberg’s fellow Democrats didn’t want to talk about how he has made his billions through an extremely successful computer program that analyzes global financial markets. His Bloomberg terminals represent innovations in financial technology that emerged in 1982 and have made him a billionaire. He has generated wealth for many people.
But he didn’t grasp the socialist hatred for successful people.
Led by a fake Indian, Senator Elizabeth Warren, his opponents used the politics of personal destruction against the only one on the stage who had started a business.
“I can’t think of a way that would make it easier for Donald Trump to get re-elected than listening to this conversation,” said Bloomberg about the socialist tone of the debate. “We’re not going to throw out capitalism…Other countries tried that. It was called communism, and it just didn’t work.”
He was even asked by one of the moderators if as a billionaire he should exist. “I can’t speak for all billionaires,” he said. “All I know is I’ve been very lucky, made a lot of money, and I’m giving it all away to make this country better. And a good chunk of it goes to the Democratic Party, as well.”
It looks like he has failed to buy the party. But there are many more contests to go. And he still has billions to spend.
His other zinger was directed at Senator Bernie Sanders, whose honeymoon was in the old Soviet Union. “What a wonderful country we have,” said Bloomberg. “The best-known socialist in the country happens to be a millionaire with three houses.”
While Bloomberg makes computer products that are useful to people, especially investors, Sanders is a professional politician who peaches hatred of business people who make it big in society. He attacks billionaires but is selective in his outrage. Billionaire hedge fund operator George Soros, who manipulates and exchanges currencies, has escaped his wrath. Convicted of insider trading in France, his currency manipulations against the Bank of England damaged the British Pound and hurt the investments of ordinary people. With much of his wealth in the hands of tax-exempt foundations, he now says he supports Sanders’ proposal for higher taxes on the “wealthy.”
Bloomberg was supposed to be different. He actually worked hard and produced useful products. At the University of Maryland last year, in a commencement address, Bloomberg described how he started out on Wall Street and got fired. But he had an idea for what became the computerized Bloomberg terminals. “I had to build a new computer from parts you could just go buy from Radio Shack,” he said. “I had to write the code to run it. And I had to string telephone lines across the country to connect them, creating the first intranet. There were a million reasons why people told me: you can’t. But I sucked it up and assembled a small, young team that believed in the idea, and together we said: we will. And we did.”
Bloomberg’s main problem is that his money has gone to his head, convincing him that being a billionaire qualifies him to manage the affairs of the United States and the world. Through his massive financial “contributions,” he has major influence over such elite organizations as the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and the Trilateral Commission. He works closely with the United Nations and funds groups such as Planned Parenthood. He opposes Second Amendment rights and says, “I do think there are certain times we should infringe on your freedom.” His wealth has led to a demand for power over others.
As we saw in Las Vegas, Bloomberg is not a socialist. But he has become something similar — a technocrat. These are people who believe their superior financial standing — and alleged superior intelligence — should qualify them as managers of our future. Like many technocrats, they admire Communist China’s method of controlling people. “Xi Jinping is not a dictator,” says the candidate.
A truly frightening aspect to this attitude is what has occurred in Bloomberg’s news operation.
Bloomberg, who is worth over $60 billion, is not on the “Bloomberg Billionaires Index,” distributed by Michael Bloomberg’s news service. Out of deference to his status as the billionaire owner of the Bloomberg news service, his subordinates in the organization have left him off a factual listing of billionaires in America and around the world. That’s because Bloomberg News declares that its editorial policy is to not cover Michael Bloomberg, the founder and majority owner of Bloomberg L.P.
This is a dishonest approach to politics and makes his “journalist” employees into propagandists.
Before the Vegas debate, Bloomberg released a plan for Wall Street that included a financial transactions tax. He thought this would protect him from socialist attacks on his wealth. Instead, his fellow Democrats went after him on personal grounds.
Today, he’s under personal attack for comments about women and minorities, while his Wall Street tax has been exposed as affecting the stock trades of small investors with IRAs, Mutual Funds and pensions. It is also a back-door approach to a global tax. Indeed, a global financial transactions tax has been under discussion for many years among left-wing groups promoting more foreign aid or “action” on climate change. (Sanders also favors such a tax).
Bloomberg is a pathetic figure who could have rallied voters under a banner of capitalism and freedom. Instead, he is trying to make a socialist political party into a personal vehicle for a power grab. His “mini” nature is not his height but his own mythical status as a great political thinker. Still, on many issues, he and Bolshevik Bernie see eye to eye.
Whatever the future holds, he will undoubtedly pledge millions or even billions to the Democratic Party.
Antony Sutton wrote about this kind of relationship in his classic 1974 book, Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution, documenting a link between certain financial and banking interests and the Bolshevik cause. This year, the target is America, and Bloomberg is apparently counting on backing from China, having collaborated with Beijing on an event titled the “New Economy Forum.”
In the same way that Barack Hussein Obama emerged as the favorite of Wall Street interests in 2008, Sanders could become their perfect front man in 2020. Such a scenario may require the same kind of financial meltdown that happened just six weeks before the 2008 presidential election. China could make that happen.
*Cliff Kincaid is president of America’s Survival, Inc. www.usasurvival.org