Miles Davis

Prince of Darkness
Joined
Jul 26, 2015
Messages
8,098
Reputation
2,060
Daps
35,405
Reppin
Bebop
His nick name is Middle/Working Class Joe:dahell:


He’s the only one who didn’t use the political office to write a book for his own personal monetary gain while in office. Unlike warren/Bernie

He refused to accept any speeches on Wall Street. He did not get a dime from them. He only would speak at Universities/colleges or civic organization/non profits

bro what r u talking about? :mindblown:

Liz was an anti bankruptcy pro corporate lawyer for almost 20 years! :dahell:
But he told rich donors, nothing will change. Practically Wall Street.
 

dora_da_destroyer

Master Baker
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
65,570
Reputation
16,302
Daps
269,510
Reppin
Oakland
Well yeah, this is my whole point. He's saying he took value away from learning the McKinsey system. I believe that system is a fukked up way to approach governing. I'm not arguing he actually believes what I believe, I'm just arguing what I believe. If someone says "I took away a lot of value from my time as a cop learning the ropes at the Chicago Police Department", I'm not just gonna be like "welp, live and let live, they have their values and I have mine!" I'm gonna interrogate that position, especially when that person is running to be the fukkin President.


It seems like we just have a difference of opinion when it comes to the laudability of McKinsey. I critique them because when I look at their record, I see fukkery. I don't revere corporate titans or believe firms like McKinsey are beyond reproach because they're havens for elites. I think that, in fact, should make them targets for scrutiny. I find these appeals to the virtue of the plutocracy to be grotesque. Basically, I fukk with Anand Giridharadas.
it seems like all you do is frame what they do in the negative. as someone who works in corp america in marketing, had i worked at mckinsey and learned their methodology for go to market plans, i'm sure i'd have a valuable framework for how to approach the product launches and market research i have to do at my company...that's a positive. just because they apply their thinking to some engagements you morally object to doesn't mean they have an inherently morally objectionable approach to business.

and i'm not lauding mckinsey nor do i think they're beyond reproach, i'm stating what it is with them, they pull from the top schools and breed and elite alumni network. you can have zero care in the world for that system, but the reality is access to these institutions provides more opportunities, so those who value that access seek places like ivy league schools, elite employers or government positions, etc. pete clearly cares about this system (harvard, rhodes, mckinsey - he chose to be amongst the "elite") and seems to be benefitting from it, so why wouldn't he look fondly at the doors opened by working at mckinsey?
 

Warren Moon

Superstar
Supporter
Joined
Jun 1, 2014
Messages
8,656
Reputation
760
Daps
25,590
But he told rich donors, nothing will change. Practically Wall Street.


Warrens got a secret pac of rich donors. He said " no one’s standard of living will change, nothing would fundamentally change" they will 100% be taxed more but their standard of living will not change
 

King Kreole

natural blondie like goku
Joined
Mar 8, 2014
Messages
15,849
Reputation
4,503
Daps
43,637
it seems like all you do is frame what they do in the negative. as someone who works in corp america in marketing, had i worked at mckinsey and learned their methodology for go to market plans, i'm sure i'd have a valuable framework for how to approach the product launches and market research i have to do at my company...that's a positive. just because they apply their thinking to some engagements you morally object to doesn't mean they have an inherently morally objectionable approach to business.

and i'm not lauding mckinsey nor do i think they're beyond reproach, i'm stating what it is with them, they pull from the top schools and breed and elite alumni network. you can have zero care in the world for that system, but the reality is access to these institutions provides more opportunities, so those who value that access seek places like ivy league schools, elite employers or government positions, etc. pete clearly cares about this system (harvard, rhodes, mckinsey - he chose to be amongst the "elite") and seems to be benefitting from it, so why wouldn't he look fondly at the doors opened by working at mckinsey?

Yeah, and if I was advising someone on how to best climb the corporate ladder, I would definitely big up McKinsey and their methodology and their network. But we're not predicting who will be next in line for a corporate America promotion, we're talking about the Presidency. Many of the traits that enable a rise up the ranks in corporate America are horrible for good governance, in my opinion, because corporate America is in the business of making as much profit as possible, whereas the government is in the business of providing the best quality of life for the citizenry as possible. Morality and ethics are generally a hurdle to overcome in the former, but they're the guiding principles of the latter. This whole notion of the President as CEO of America is totally bankrupt and needs to be deaded. The corporate world and the government are two very different entities and the latter should hold a dominant position and skeptical disposition towards the former, especially in this era. The government should ride the corporate world like a broken horse.

It makes perfect sense for someone like Pete, who has had the doors opened by McKinsey, to look at them fondly. As you say, people like him who value access seek places like these. In my opinion, being an access-hound is a very big red flag for someone seeking to go into the government, which is fundamentally a task of public service. But I think we're talking past each other at this point.
 

dora_da_destroyer

Master Baker
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
65,570
Reputation
16,302
Daps
269,510
Reppin
Oakland
Yeah, and if I was advising someone on how to best climb the corporate ladder, I would definitely big up McKinsey and their methodology and their network. But we're not predicting who will be next in line for a corporate America promotion, we're talking about the Presidency. Many of the traits that enable a rise up the ranks in corporate America are horrible for good governance, in my opinion, because corporate America is in the business of making as much profit as possible, whereas the government is in the business of providing the best quality of life for the citizenry as possible. Morality and ethics are generally a hurdle to overcome in the former, but they're the guiding principles of the latter. This whole notion of the President as CEO of America is totally bankrupt and needs to be deaded. The corporate world and the government are two very different entities and the latter should hold a dominant position and skeptical disposition towards the former, especially in this era. The government should ride the corporate world like a broken horse.

It makes perfect sense for someone like Pete, who has had the doors opened by McKinsey, to look at them fondly. As you say, people like him who value access seek places like these. In my opinion, being an access-hound is a very big red flag for someone seeking to go into the government, which is fundamentally a task of public service. But I think we're talking past each other at this point.
again, you keep looking through a negative lens at what places like mckinsey do. they have all sorts of engagements, many in social impact, everything isn't about promoting the most negative aspects of capitalism. many of their engagements have made life better, especially when it leased to the creation of more jobs, but no one ever looks at shyt like that.

and there is tons that can be brought over from corp america to government - from budgeting, to branding, to knowing what questions to ask to find your way to a solution. furthermore bug law is part of corporate america and liz's work as a lawyer plays a big part in her approach to policy development. i don't see how you'd say the experiences aren't transferable...

lastly the majority of our government officials are access hounds, part of the reason they're in government :skip:
 

the next guy

Superstar
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
39,787
Reputation
1,579
Daps
37,950
Reppin
NULL
which is why we can’t let elite liberals establish what a pure leftist liberal is.

they can get donations from white people bc white ppl have more money.

Black liberals can’t compete with that, if/when we do get one on a national stage, they’ll get chastised for not having the processes Bernie and Warren have. That’s why I can’t ride with them trying to re-establish the liberal wing. They’re keeping out blacks candidates.
No offense, this is an excuse for corruption and changing nothing. These corporate people are trump supporters. No justification for taking money from them.
 

ADevilYouKhow

Rhyme Reason
Joined
May 11, 2012
Messages
34,476
Reputation
1,434
Daps
62,192
Reppin
got a call for three nines
finally an ungated article...wow, i keep forgetting how old, well young, he is. nikkas really losing their shyt over what a 24-27 yr old entry level consultant was doing :mjlol:

and the hyperbole (opening paragraphs make case interviews sound like he actually saved a F500 during his interview), fear mongering, and positioning in that article...oh no, they told a pharmaceutical company how to increase sales, surely they must suck. and heaven forbid this global company operating in 65 countries do business with the government of those countries :bryan:

I’m sure he did a lot of great work in Iraq and Afghanistan.

:leostare:

You’re clearly taking this personally. I hope you’re not internalizing what we’re discussing as some sort of referendum on your life choices or career. Your heart is clearly in this.

I won’t be voting for Pete.
 

Dusty Bake Activate

Fukk your corny debates
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
39,078
Reputation
6,012
Daps
132,755
Bernie maybe, but Trump would ragdoll the shyt out of Biden if Biden tries to go that route. This sounds wild, but Trump is actually sharper than Biden. He's mentally quicker and willing to go to more extremes than Biden. Look how he deals with the press. If Biden gets up there trying to play tough guy while sputtering "leave my son alone you big bully!", Trump is gonna have himself a night. Biden is a fake gangster, he's not really with the shyts. His best bet is to go the "This is not who we are" respectable statesman route, which I doubt will play that well either.
You’re probably right. Speaking as someone who used to be a real-life pre-internet troll as a youth I always knew the best person to target with jokes in the school cafeteria was the person who was gonna get big mad and try to snap back but jumble their words in response and act tough but not do shyt.
 

dora_da_destroyer

Master Baker
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
65,570
Reputation
16,302
Daps
269,510
Reppin
Oakland
I’m sure he did a lot of great work in Iraq and Afghanistan.

:leostare:

You’re clearly taking this personally. I hope you’re not internalizing what we’re discussing as some sort of referendum on your life choices or career. Your heart is clearly in this.

I won’t be voting for Pete.
you're clearly projecting, i have no stake in the world of mgmt consulting to be internalizing anything...i simply see things objectively, that article wasn't written objectively. i also think it's a flawed proposition to attribute every "morally" objectionable action/project of a company to every employee that has worked there - especially when citing issues that happened after said person you're scrutinizing left the firm.
 
Top