Surprise, surprise, a good solution to fighting against PE is people, individuals taking a stand and relentlessly demanding a change. No matter how you look at it, it always comes down to us, fighting back, in any way we can. Nothing will change otherwise.
Greenwell is very articulate and plainly explains PE, so even dummies like me can understand the basics.
"... it always comes down to us, fighting back, in any way we can. Nothing will change otherwise." This equates to "write your congressperson". It is not a solution. These authors do phenomenal research on issues. Then crickets.
People are not taught how to solve problems in a durable manner. This is unacceptable in the Internet age as we can work collectively to do so. We need to take the solutions proposed by authors (and other experts) and implement them in local communities. And we can. The tech and processes are available to us. If you want to 1. play a part in that, 2. make money in the process, and 3. do so in a non-violent manner, dm me at dgbsubs@gmail.com.
"... it always comes down to us, fighting back, in any way we can. Nothing will change otherwise." This equates to "write your congressperson". It is not a solution. These authors do phenomenal research on issues. Then crickets.
People are not taught how to solve problems in a durable manner. This is unacceptable in the Internet age as we can work collectively to do so. We need to take the solutions proposed by authors (and other experts) and implement them in local communities. And we can. The tech and processes are available to us. If you want to 1. play a part in that, 2. make money in the process, and 3. do so in a non-violent manner, dm me at dgbsubs@gmail.com.
For some reason I've long seen "Up in the Air" as a textbook example of corporate greed and insensitivity, and despite *not* being PE-specific (IIRC Clooney just plays a general corporate downsizer), the plot's nearly identical if you instead assume a PE firm acquired Clooney's character's company and demanded mass layoffs.
Point being: it shows off the devastating human side of being shitcanned for literally no reason other than boosting shareholder returns. (One I imagine isn't dissimilar in feel to being shitcanned from a federal agency by DOGE, but to boost tax cuts for billionaires.) Sadly, far too many people – the ones "cheering on" needless federal layoffs, based on an assumption of pretextual "bureaucratic bloat" (never mind there being no "fat" to cut in the reality-based world) – seem to be devoid of empathy with regards to either mass layoffs or mass deportations.
Finally, PE has about as much place in healthcare as RFK Jr.: both make it worse, not better, in nearly every way. (At least PE execs aren't anti-science.) But in general the industry needs to be far more heavily regulated, which of course is very unlikely to happen until at least 2029.
I started reading Deadspin when it was an independent blog in 2006 or so. It was fun to follow the meteoric rise of blogs in the 2010s, and interesting to witness the aftermath. Thanks for the interview. I pre-ordered the book; looking forward to reading.
I wasn't really into Deadspin since I'm not into sports, but I've certainly been appalled by other similar actions forced into being by billionaire assholes. Being acquired by a PE firm ain't great, but the Peter Thiel-funded Gawker lawsuit was just flat-out revolting.
Whatever you might think of Warren, she’s right about this much — private equity is looting.
It’s not helping either that the classical political economy distinction between earned and unearned income has been comprehensively obliterated by the neoclassical economic orthodoxy such that the public discourse finds itself utterly absent of the language necessary to discuss, let alone understand, the socioeconomic blight that is private equity.
Surprise, surprise, a good solution to fighting against PE is people, individuals taking a stand and relentlessly demanding a change. No matter how you look at it, it always comes down to us, fighting back, in any way we can. Nothing will change otherwise.
Greenwell is very articulate and plainly explains PE, so even dummies like me can understand the basics.
"... it always comes down to us, fighting back, in any way we can. Nothing will change otherwise." This equates to "write your congressperson". It is not a solution. These authors do phenomenal research on issues. Then crickets.
People are not taught how to solve problems in a durable manner. This is unacceptable in the Internet age as we can work collectively to do so. We need to take the solutions proposed by authors (and other experts) and implement them in local communities. And we can. The tech and processes are available to us. If you want to 1. play a part in that, 2. make money in the process, and 3. do so in a non-violent manner, dm me at dgbsubs@gmail.com.
"... it always comes down to us, fighting back, in any way we can. Nothing will change otherwise." This equates to "write your congressperson". It is not a solution. These authors do phenomenal research on issues. Then crickets.
People are not taught how to solve problems in a durable manner. This is unacceptable in the Internet age as we can work collectively to do so. We need to take the solutions proposed by authors (and other experts) and implement them in local communities. And we can. The tech and processes are available to us. If you want to 1. play a part in that, 2. make money in the process, and 3. do so in a non-violent manner, dm me at dgbsubs@gmail.com.
For some reason I've long seen "Up in the Air" as a textbook example of corporate greed and insensitivity, and despite *not* being PE-specific (IIRC Clooney just plays a general corporate downsizer), the plot's nearly identical if you instead assume a PE firm acquired Clooney's character's company and demanded mass layoffs.
Point being: it shows off the devastating human side of being shitcanned for literally no reason other than boosting shareholder returns. (One I imagine isn't dissimilar in feel to being shitcanned from a federal agency by DOGE, but to boost tax cuts for billionaires.) Sadly, far too many people – the ones "cheering on" needless federal layoffs, based on an assumption of pretextual "bureaucratic bloat" (never mind there being no "fat" to cut in the reality-based world) – seem to be devoid of empathy with regards to either mass layoffs or mass deportations.
Finally, PE has about as much place in healthcare as RFK Jr.: both make it worse, not better, in nearly every way. (At least PE execs aren't anti-science.) But in general the industry needs to be far more heavily regulated, which of course is very unlikely to happen until at least 2029.
As we used to say, “right on!”, “fucking A!”.
Just ordered her book.
I started reading Deadspin when it was an independent blog in 2006 or so. It was fun to follow the meteoric rise of blogs in the 2010s, and interesting to witness the aftermath. Thanks for the interview. I pre-ordered the book; looking forward to reading.
I wasn't really into Deadspin since I'm not into sports, but I've certainly been appalled by other similar actions forced into being by billionaire assholes. Being acquired by a PE firm ain't great, but the Peter Thiel-funded Gawker lawsuit was just flat-out revolting.
Whatever you might think of Warren, she’s right about this much — private equity is looting.
It’s not helping either that the classical political economy distinction between earned and unearned income has been comprehensively obliterated by the neoclassical economic orthodoxy such that the public discourse finds itself utterly absent of the language necessary to discuss, let alone understand, the socioeconomic blight that is private equity.
Please don't end up like Matt taibbi
Too bad
"who's" should be "whose"