Don't take it from me. Here's Carl Schramm from the Kauffman Foundation:
We should be asking President Obama, his economic team, and Congressional leaders a basic question: How do you propose to help ensure that the United States maintains a long-term annual growth rate of 4 percent (or higher)?
We at the Kauffman Foundation have our own proposals, all of them centered on the core fact - borne out by our research - that entrepreneurship and innovation are the key growth drivers in our economy. Highly entrepreneurial companies like Google, eBay, Amazon create more than half the nation's new jobs.
Action in several areas can make America's economic ecosystem more conducive to entrepreneurial growth and should therefore be central to the country's growth agenda.
• Building a skilled workforce. Finding and attracting highly skilled, entrepreneurial workers is one of the more important challenges facing the U.S. economy. Major, entrepreneurially driven improvements are necessary throughout our educational system to help prepare skilled workers, especially in math, science, technology, and engineering - the fields that will be most relevant to generating future innovative breakthroughs.
• Welcoming high-skilled legal immigrants. One quarter of the science and technology start-ups launched in the United States between 1995 and 2005 had a foreign-born founder. These companies employed 450,000 workers and generated $52 billion in revenue in 2006. Our economy needs more, not less, of such highly motivated entrepreneurs. One way to keep them is to grant a permanent work visa to any immigrant earns a degree in science, engineering or math.
• A lower-cost health care system that encourages entrepreneurship. Continued escalation of health care costs and uncertainties about future trends rank high on virtually every American's list of concerns. In addition, the fear of losing health care deters some employees from leaving their current jobs to launch new enterprises. Health care needs to be made both less expensive and more portable.
• Keeping U.S. capital markets competitive through appropriate regulation. Sarbanes-Oxley has turned out to be substantially more costly than was expected at the time. In addition, the SOX requirements may be discouraging successful entrepreneurial firms from going public and instead to sell to larger companies, an "exit" path that may reduce the entrepreneurial energy that drove the success of these firms in the first place. In its current form, SOX is a job killer in desperate need of reform. And, this current crisis, we should heed the lesson of SOX. Let's not ram a complex new regulatory scheme through Congress in a matter of days - only find out later that it has worsened the very problem it was intended to fix.
• Strengthening trade and global markets. Companies like Intel, Microsoft, eBay, and Google would not be the giants they are today without access to global markets in which to sell their products. In addition, firms of all sizes benefit from being able to purchase supplies and services from anywhere they can be competitively sourced. Free trade has a taken a political beating in recent years. It's time for our candidates to show some courage and stand up for this vital principle.
www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/02/whats_missing_from_the_economi.html
7 comments:
Growthology tries to trump Mises.org without acknowledging it: Is it Ethical for Dane Stangler to Backdate Research? While Carl Schramm ignores Hayek and Mises in his anti-intellectual books?
April 23, 2009 by entrepreneurshipeconomist
“Can Carl Schramm win a Nobel Prize for discovering the Mises Insititute via a search engine? Does discovering Hayek’s page on wikipedia constitute original “growthology” research for Dane Stangler?”
While the Mises Institute dwarfs growthology in popularity and traffic, Dane Stangler and the well-funded Schrammenomomics disciples refuse to acknowledge/link to it:
http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/mises.org+growthology.org
It is simply amazing what Schrammenomics will do–the vast and sheer power of Schrammenomics to influence the young mind. Because Schramm sits atop a $2.5 billion foundation, he has the power to deter a young lad from seeking the truth himself and googling the following without Schramm’s permission: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=mises+entrepreneurship&btnG=Search
Dane Stangler is definitely working for Schramm’s comedy team. He is now responding directly to this blog, trying to claim that Schrammenomics is actually all about Austrian economics (via backdating phantom research), even as Kauffman/Growthology refuse to link to or cite mises.org. Schramm mentioned neither Hayek nor Mises in his book GOOD CAPITALISM BAD CAPITALISM, while wiring hundreds of millions to univeristy Statists who oppose Austrian economists in all their actions, while also never teaching nor reading the Austrians, as Schrammenomics redefines entrepreneurship in S?chramm’s/the Statist’s image.
In his most recent post at the “growthology” blog which was launched on Kauffman’s dime in a web 2.0 attempt to cloak Schramm’s incompetence and gloss over the seven-year erosion of the economy and spirit of entreprenuership by anti-intellectual/anti-entrepreneur/anti-Austrian, pro-Statist Schrammenomics, Stangler writes, “A generation of entrepreneurs becomes the next generation’s elite, the position of whom is then challenged by newer entrepreneurs. Henri Pirenne knew this; Joseph Schumpeter and his intellectual cousins, the Austrian economists and German historicists, knew this. We are apparently rediscovering it today. (AHAHH HA HA HA ! HAHAH HA!) Research we have been working on the Kauffman Foundation, soon to be released, will confirm this broad theme.”
http://www.growthology.org/growthology/2009/04/the-next-economic-wave.html
The blog post is so hilarious, I don’t know where to begin. Stangler ways “We are apparently rediscovering it today,” and by “We” he means the three anti-intellectual lawyers/anti-economists who just learned how to google “Austrian economics entrepreneurship” and think that that counts as a “discovery,” just because they are funded by Kauffman’s misappropriated millions to gloat about their “discovery.”
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=austrian+economics+entrepreneurship&aq=f&oq=
Look at how much traffic Mises.org gets compared to Growthology.org:
http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/mises.org+growthology.org
Stangler saying that he and his Kauffman/Schrammenomics cohorts are the first to “rediscover” Austrian economics is like Carl Schramm walking outside his lavish office/Schrammenomics/Kauffman compound and stating “I have discovered America!!”
I can see Stangler applying to the Nobel Committee as he and Schramm patent thier use of google to search “austrian economics entrepreneurship,” being the very first maverick pioneers to discover the over 65,000 results.
Stangler is a classic Statist in training. Truth and wisdom do not derive from the individual, but they must wait for Schrammenomics-funded Stangler to discover it on google, whereupon it then becomes offical State wisdom, just as long as he wears a tie while blogging about it. Without Kauffman’s/Schammenomic’s billions backing it, the research has not yet gained its apotheosis. It is not until the Austrian views on entrepreneurship are distilled, dumbed down, edited, deformed, destroyed, and repackaged by Stangler et al that they become worthy of the world’s Statists. It is not until the Austrian wisdom, born by free-thinking rugged individuals such as Mises and Hayek who never received posts nor salaries such as Schramm’s multi-million-dollar CEOship, it is not until the Austrian wisdom is quoted by one of Schramm’s employees that it becomes pertinent and real. It is not until Schramm and his Harvard MBA’s/JD’s coin a buzzword such as “growthology” and slap it on the Austrian’s work that the Austrians have any use or merit. It is not until Schramm announces to the group that Hayek and Mises are OK to talk about that the group is allowed to talk about Hayek and Mises without fear of their funding being cut. For Schrammenomics is a benevolent beast. Whereas Hayek and Mises were individuals who found it difficult to find univeristy posts and employment, Schramm is the superior man–the CEO and groupthink leader–the second hander and distiller who makes the individual glory, genius, and intellect of Mises and Hayek safe for the Statist, by eroding it, disparaging it, and destroying it–in the same way Schrammenomics has eroded the academy and economy. Hayek predicted what would happen to both Kauffman and the US Economy under Schrammenomics:
“Perhaps the most alarming fact is that contempt for intellectual liberty is not a thing which arises only once the totalitarian system is established but can be found everywhere among those who have embraced a collectivist faith (growthology’s faith that Schrammenomics is teh one, true way). The worst oppression is condoned if it is committed in the name of socialism (growthology/schrammenomics). Intolerance of opposing ideas is openly extolled (Stangler et al are 100% loyal to Schrammenomics–Schramm exiles indpenent thinkers); The tragedy of collectivist (growthology) thought is that, while it starts out to make reason supreme, it ends by destroying reason. There is one aspect of the change in moral values brought about by the advance of collectivism which provides special food for thought. It is that the virtues which are held less and less in esteem in Britain and America are precisely those on which Anglo-Saxons justly prided themselves and in which they were generally recognized to excel. These virtues were independence and self-reliance (not Stangler who backdates Kauffman’s research to make Schramm look good), individual initiative and local responsibility (it takes a village of Schrammenomic bloggers to run growthology) , the successful reliance on voluntary activity, noninterference with one’s neighbor and tolerance of the different, and a healthy suspicion of power and authority (as Stangler ever questioned Schramm’s power and authority, even as Schrammenomics collapses teh eocnomy/academy). Almost all the traditions and institutions which have molded the national character and the whole moral climate of England and America are those which the progress of collectivism and its centralistic tendencies are progressively destroying (look at how worshipping growthology and Schrammenomics leads to the unethical backdating of unreleased research–why doesn’t Styangler just hurry up and post some quotes form the Austrians–why must it all first be compressed, distilled, and de-souled.”
How does Schramm expect to win the Nobel prize by funding a team of lawyers to “discover” all that he has been ignoring and rejecting throughout his entire life, as well as throughout the past seven years of Schrammenics whence a vast and great opportunity was lost to inspire entreprenuership across the land. Schram could have saved the economy by funding not arrogant Dane Stangler lawyer/conformists/Scrhammenomics research-backdating cleanup crew/PR specialists, but by funding entrepreneurs and innovators. Dane has the hardest job in the world–ignoring the beuaty and glory of the Austrians for the sveen years of Schrammenomics while backdating Kauffman research to make it look like Schrammenomics embraced the Austrian economists all along, while, in reality, you will find not one mention of Hayek nor Mises in his book GOOD CAPITALISM, BAD CAPITALISM. How the hell one could write a book on modern capitalism WITHOUT MENTIONING HAYEK AND MISES is beyond us, and it is certainly an accomplishment in itself.
A great thing about Schramm stepping down from Kauffman is that he will take Stangler et al with him, and rather than focusing on campaigning for the Nobel in economics while ignoring the intellectual giants who defined modern free markets, the new president will be able to invest in entrepreneurs and innovators instead of Stanglers. A thousand flowers will bloom when Schramm steps down, and no longer will Kauffman be defined in an opaque, undefined manner, as Schramm took great pride for in a recent WSJ article, but Kauffman’s definitive vision of supporting entrepreneurs and entreprneurship–of supporting wealth creation and education–as opposed to Schrammenomics–will be realized.
Just as ethics have corroded in our corporations, ethics have corroded in our Foundations. Hayek notes that when the truth ends, the worst rise to the top, and by suprressing Hayek’s and Mises’ beuatiful truth, genius, and wisdom, Schramm rose to the top in a characterless, Machiavellian, doublespeaking, anti-intellectual manner; refusing to hire/fund anyone smarter than him, while employing conforming PR lawyers/MBAs to laud Schrammenomics. He is campaigning for the Nobel in eocnomics via corproate methods, as he truly thinks that Scholariship does not derive from the individual and original thought, but that it best defined by funding Stangler lackeys to pen PR and backdate Kauffman research as they are the first to “discover” Austrian economics. Schramm lacks both the character and intellect to a) admit to his blown opportunity which resulted in the Schrammenomics devastating our academies and economy while placing students and the nation in unprecedented debt and b) truly embrace the Austiran economists on any profound level which will actually change the course of Kauffman. You can’t teach an old dog new tricks, and although you can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make in think. The fact that Schramm was allowed to run Kauffman for seven years while ignoring/rejecting the Austrians is related to the fact that under his leadership and the era of Schrammenomics, entrepreneurship and academia have been dumbed down, as rather than funding courses on Austrian economics, Schramm wired hundreds of millions to college adminsitrators/MBAs putting on the best dog and pony shows and coming up with new buzzwords such as “growthology” which means growing Schramm’s chances for the Nobel in economics by backdating Kauffman research which Schramm never performed in the first place, as Schrammenomics completely ignored Hayek and Mises in his lackluster one-star book which helped creater the economy by its very indecipherableness, which displaced the Austrians on the bookshelves due not to Schamm’s intellect and vision, but dude to the fact that he commandeered the a $2.5 billion foundation to poer his Austrian-free, Orwellian-entrepreneurship vanity press: Good Capitalism, Bad Capitalism. Good Capitalism is Schrammenomics–using words to obscure and deceive and never define (as Schramm takes great pride in in the WSJ), failing to match word and deed and hiring corporate laywers to backdate research while exiling Austrian economists for over seven years. Bad Capitalism Schramm defines as honest, rugged risk taking, independent, individualistic thought, innovation, and growing the economy via innovation, which is why Schramm refuses to fund innovation and innovators but only corporate lawyers/Harvard MBAs/policy wonks who make him look good and allow him to take credit for entrepreneurship’s true glory as the economy declines.
Schrammenomics = backdating Kauffman research to make him look good while ignoring the Austrians for decades and then suddenly “discovering” all those who did the research by googling “Austrian economics entrepnereurship.” Can Schramm win a Nobel Prize for discovering the Mises Insititute via a search engine? Does discovering Hayek’s page on wikipedia constitute original “growthology” research?
Schrammenomics = ignoring intellectual giants such as Hayek and Mises in penning a book about economics.
Schrammenomics = wiring hundreds of millions of dollars to univeristy adminsitrators who never read nor teach the classical economists, rewarding them for raising student tuitions and ugmenting student debt in an unprecedented manner, as they dumb down the campus by teaching Schrammenomics instead of Hayek and Mises
Schrammenomics = campaigning for the Nobel prize not by standing upon the shoulders of giants so as to see further, but by a) ignoring them and then b) trying to take creidt for everything that was already said far better.
Schrammenomics = campaigning for the Nobel prize utilizing cut-throat corpoate methods, hiring a team of Kauffman laywers/PR specialists to backdate research and say “really we were working on this all along, but Schramm is a humble man and did not want to share his genius, lest it seem prideful.”
Unless I miss my guess, Stangler’s “research” will be a dumbed-down survey of the Austrians, taking them out of context and using them not to inspire an entrepreneurial renaissance, but only to serve his boss’s campaign for the Nobel in economics.
It is hilarious that Kauffman’s “best and birghtest”, handpicked by Schramm who refuses to employ anyone smarter them himself who might outshine the master, are just now realizing that there is a School of Auistrian Economics, after Schramm spent seven years dumbing down univeristy campuses and funding programs excluding Austrian economists to please his Statist friends, wiring hundreds of millions to university administrators who throw him lavish parties for his speeches, hoping to get a cut of the $2.5 billion, while, like Schramm, never reading Hayek nor Mises.
Is it ethical for Stangler to backdate unreleased research with “Research we have been working on the Kauffman Foundation, soon to be released, will confirm this broad theme,” while Schramm has been consitsently and constantly ignoring and rejecting the Austrian economists in his books and works, while wiring hundreds of millions to the Statists who also oppose Austrian economics by their very nature–by their very actions? After seven years of Orwellian Schrammenomics, look at what has happened to the economy, to the DOW, to the national and personal debt, and to entrepreneurs and small businesses which are now reuglated more than ever, as Schramm wires hundreds of millions to univeristy administrators and legal scholars, as opposed to entrepreneurs and those who respect them, such as Hayek and Mises.
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/A-cult-finance-protecting-failed/story.aspx?guid={A581A991-DEB6-4DBE-ADC2-316FDD493450}&ref=patrick.net
While Schramm funds statists and anti-intellectual, innovation-free goryupthink growthology buzzword bloggers, Mises rewards entrepreneurs:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=InVKpxhsUus
I challenge Stangler to link to any of this, as although it might seem like a sure bet to a lawyer/Statist, I am not sure ho wmuch longer Schrammenomics will be allowed to erode the economy and spirit of entrepreneurship.
It is time for Schramm to step down and liberate Kauffman’s funds from his single-minded, anti-Austrian, anti-intellectual, anti-entreprenuerial campaign for the Nobel Prize/Statist approval, and let Kauffman’s vision be realized. A thousand flowers will bloom when Shramm steps down and entrepreneurs are given the chance to define entreprnuership, rather than Schramm’s handpicked “growthology” Schrammeconomists.
Carl Schramm’s “Schrammenomics” Creates Record Unemployment
By entrepreneurshipeconomist
Over the past seven years, Carl Schramm has presided over the least entrepreneurial and most corrupt era of American business. During these seven years he has done far more harm than good by redefining entrepreneurship in a Harvard MBA “growthology” buzzword manner that pleases his Statist friends. During the era of Schrammenomic “entrepreneurship/growthology” the government burgeoned (growthology) as tens of millions lost their pensions, savings, jobs, and homes while entrepreneurs lost their credit lines and the rising generation lost its future earnings, as the Kauffman Foundation’s endowment/hedge fund needed the TARP bailout funds to line Schramm et al.’s innovation-free pockets with millions upon millions, as the $2.5 billion endowment benefited from taxpayer bailouts for the Wall Street rich both directly and indirectly. MBA wealth-transfer, PR, hype, and the commandeering of a foundation to fund statist bloggers to further one’s personal career are the very opposite of both entrepreneurship and classical economics.
Instead of investing the Kauffman funds in entrepreneurs and innovators (as Mr. Kauffman intended), Schramm has pocketed millions for his corporate vanity press while leading and furthering double-speaking Statist philosophies, dumbing down and feminizing the university campus and replacing wealth-creating Ph.D.’s with wealth-transferring, buzzword-blogging MBAs/JDs, all the while saying one thing while doing another; as one cannot serve two masters. As Schramm’s campaign for the Nobel prize and fostering innovation and entrepreneuership are opposing endeavors, he had not the time to do both; and as he does not personally innovate nor invent nor create companies with actual names, he figured the former path would be the safer investment for the $2.5 billion endowment he inherited/commandeered.
Never has Schramm used his throne to speak out against massive student debt, but instead he has rewarded the administrations who augmented the student debt in an unprecedented manner and bought up more land and property with hundreds of millions of dollars–stolen capital that Kauffman had meant for entrepreneurs, rather than a private citizen’s campaign for the Nobel in economics.
When entrepreneurs innovate and create, according to Schramm, they do it for selfish motivations, and that is why Kauffman cannot fund them, but only take credit for their success, while leaving them with their failures as their lines of credit are cut off by Schramm’s satatist/banking friends. But when Schramm takes credit for the wealth created by entrepreneurs and entrepreneurship via his elite Kauffmun-funded PR team and Kauffman-funded vanity-press buzzword bloggers, he does it for the greater good of humanity, and thus he is the one, true pre-ordained beneficiary of Kauffman, as he is more virtuous than you, because he neither innovates nor invents, which is considered to be a crime against the Statists and the State. And over the past seven years, he and his team of elite Statists have crusaded against the true entreprneurial spirit, while seeking to take credit for entrepreneurship’s wondrous wealth creation while funneling millions to the bureuacracies/university administrations that oppose it. Name one–just one–Kauffman venture that has sprung fourth form the millions they have invested in Statist technology transfer and university dog and pony shows.
Schramm sees entreprnuers as oddball risk-takers, and that is why he will only fund his risk-free bloggers who all wear suits and ties whenever they blog. As if a man does not wear a suit and tie like Schramm, can he be trusted? Small business owners and entrepreneurs sometimes must roll up their sleeves to get the job done, and thus it would be unseemly to have them seen around/blogging for the Kauffman Foundation, which must be kept clean and pure. In addition, what if the entrepreneur fails? Surely this would be a blemish on Schramm’s sterling, pristine reputation. That is why Schramm only hangs out with Nobel Laureates and wealth socialists, winking at them each time he says “entreprnuership.” For they, and not the entrepreneur, can give him the Nobel in economics, and it is thus they who he must serve first and foremost.
“I sit on a man’s back, choking him, and making him carry me, and yet assure myself and others that I am very sorry for him and wish to ease his lot by any means possible, except getting off his back.” –Tolstoy Writings on Civil Disobedience and Nonviolence (1886)
Scrhamm and his socialist friends would have dominated in the Soviet Union, as the Statists redefine entrepreneurship as a puerile Web 2.0 riskless/centralized blogfest/PR machine/vanity press.
http://blogs.forbes.com/innovation/2009/03/america-still-loves-its-entrepreneurs.html
Yes–America still loves its entrepreneurs, but Schramm is the opposite of the entrepreneur, funding university administrations and creating vast technology transfer/entrepreneurship education bureaucracies in Schramm’s image–filled with lifelong, professional Statists who are jealous of wealth creators and entrepreneurs and pull out all the stops in opposing them.
The Kauffman funds were meant to fund entrepreneurs all across the land–not to be concentrated in one central-planner’s hands so as to build his vanity press/buzzword blogfest and further his campaign for the Nobel in ecomics, as millions of entrepreneurs lost their homes, savings, pensions, and businesses over the seven years of the central-planners’ anti-entreprneuerial leadership. Under Schrammenomics government spending has burgeoned in an unprecedented manner while corporate corruption has soared. And all the while, Schramm has remained too big to fail as the eocnomy crumbled under his anti-leadership.
How many more years is the Kauffman Board going to sit idly by as Schrammenomics funds innovationless university administrators and Statists? How many more homes, jobs, pensions, businesses, and savings must be lost, before the Kauffman Board reallocates the hundreds of millions directed towards Schramm’s vanity press/soulless, dishonorable boomer blogfest filled to the brim with conflicts of interest?
http://dealbreaker.com/2007/05/the-unsurprising-failure-of-et.php#comments
“It is interesting that Dealbreaker references Carl Shram of the Kauffman Foundation as an authority on ethics. Those of us who live in the Kansas City region know that Carl Schram and been a controversial figure since he was appointed to his post a number of years ago. Board members have resigned in protest of his leadership style and strategic choices. His controversial leadership led to the Missouri Attorney General reviewing the Kauffman Foundation for not staying true to the intent of Ewing Kauffman. The purpose of this review was stated as:
“In light of the public allegations of a departure from Mr. Kauffman’s intent, lack of appropriate oversight by the Board of Directors, and certain instances of conflicts of interest. ” (http://www.ago.mo.gov/newsreleases/2004/kauffmanreport030404.htm#conclusion)
See also this editorial from the Kansas City Business Journal (http://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/stories/2003/09/15/editorial1.html)
Ewing Kauffman was famous as an ethical leader. Carl Schramm is not.
–http://dealbreaker.com/2007/05/the-unsurprising-failure-of-et.php#comments
http://uk.reuters.com/article/gc06/idUKTRE53H1B920090418
http://blogs.harvardbusiness.org/how-to-fix-business-schools/2009/04/can-ethics-classes-cure-cheati.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/18/business/economy/18grads.html?ref=business
Talk talk talk talk talk talk, PR release, soundbite, soundbite, blog, blog, talk, talk, talk, PR release, talk, fund blog to review schrammenomic books with kauffman funds, talk talk talk, blog, blog blog. And the DOW goes down, down, down, along with the economy, pensions, savings, and the American Dream. Hord. Hord. Hord Kauffman funds for personal profits/book promotions/book tours. Deny entrepreneurs funding while pocketing millions meant for entrepreneurs and funding friends and schrammenomic “team players.” Write another vanity-press book. Send to sycophantic buzzword Harvard MBA/JD bloggers.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aL0jFzKptwwg&refer=us
Nowhere in the Kauffman mission statement did Mr. Kauffman say that one risk-free, Machiavellian man/Statist should so dominate and transmorgify the fruits of Mr. Kauffman’s vison, service, leadership, and entrepreneurship.
Over the past seven years as the DOW plummeted, housing prices plummted, and tens of millions of American’s lost their jobs/homes/savings/penisons to Schrammenomics, Schramm has pocketed millions and doled out hundreds of millions more to university administrators and elite blogger/lawyers supporting his campaign for the Nobel in ecomomincs.
Schramm had a vast opportunity to directly fund entrepreneurs and innovation–to lead an army of entrepreneurs; but as his major goal was the Nobel in economics and not fostering wealth creation and growth, nor saving the US Constitution nor economy; he focused on PR and “being liked” and surrounding himslef with syocphantic socialists who could put on the best entrepreneuership dog and pony shows. And after seven long years of anti-entrepreneur Schrammenomics, the unemployment rate has hit an all-time high:
http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&q=unemployment&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wn
Under Schramm’s anti-leadership (As the WSJ article states that he is proud that nobody knows what it is that Kauffman does), Kauffman will not fund entrepreneurs nor innovators nor risk-takers, but Schramm’s purloined empire will instead merely seek to take credit for the entrepreneurs’ innovation, work, and wealth creation via PR releases.
Notice what has happened over the past seven years since Schramm took the helm of the Kauffman Foundation and redefined entrepreneurship in his own elite, “never worked a day in my life,” “never filed a patent nor launched a company with an actual name,” “too big to fail” image.
This is because Schramm sees entrepreneurs as greedy, selfish people. And that is why he receives the lion’s share of the Kauffman funds to promote his vanity press and hire an entire cabal of “growthology” bloggers and Harvard MBAs to coin new buzzwords so as to transfer more wealth into Schramm’s pocket as the economy declines. For when entrepreneurs seek money, they do it for selfish reasons. But when Schramm’s “schrammenomic” Harvard MBA/blogger/lawyer friends seek money, they do it for the greater good of society.
When entrepreneurs innovate and create, according to Schramm, they do it for selfish motivations, and thus the Statist will not fund them. But when Schramm takes credit for the wealth created by entrepreneurs and entrepreneurship via his elite Kauffmun-funded Harvard MBA/PR team and Kauffman-funded vanity-press buzzword bloggers, he does it for the greater good of humanity.
Schrammenomics is the problem–not the solution.
Hi !.
You may , probably very interested to know how one can manage to receive high yields .
There is no need to invest much at first. You may start to get income with as small sum of money as 20-100 dollars.
AimTrust is what you thought of all the time
The company incorporates an offshore structure with advanced asset management technologies in production and delivery of pipes for oil and gas.
Its head office is in Panama with offices around the world.
Do you want to become really rich in short time?
That`s your choice That`s what you desire!
I feel good, I started to take up income with the help of this company,
and I invite you to do the same. If it gets down to select a correct companion utilizes your money in a right way - that`s it!.
I make 2G daily, and my first deposit was 1 grand only!
It`s easy to get involved , just click this link http://jepahiqu.angelcities.com/irywywe.html
and go! Let`s take our chance together to get rid of nastiness of the life
Good day !.
You re, I guess , perhaps curious to know how one can collect a huge starting capital .
There is no initial capital needed You may commense earning with as small sum of money as 20-100 dollars.
AimTrust is what you haven`t ever dreamt of such a chance to become rich
The firm represents an offshore structure with advanced asset management technologies in production and delivery of pipes for oil and gas.
It is based in Panama with offices everywhere: In USA, Canada, Cyprus.
Do you want to become an affluent person?
That`s your choice That`s what you desire!
I feel good, I started to get real money with the help of this company,
and I invite you to do the same. If it gets down to select a proper partner who uses your money in a right way - that`s it!.
I make 2G daily, and what I started with was a funny sum of 500 bucks!
It`s easy to get involved , just click this link http://vecafokygi.angelcities.com/fegufim.html
and lucky you`re! Let`s take our chance together to get rid of nastiness of the life
Hello everyone!
I would like to burn a theme at here. There is such a nicey, called HYIP, or High Yield Investment Program. It reminds of ponzy-like structure, but in rare cases one may happen to meet a company that really pays up to 2% daily not on invested money, but from real profits.
For quite a long time, I earn money with the help of these programs.
I don't have problems with money now, but there are heights that must be conquered . I make 2G daily, and I started with funny 500 bucks.
Right now, I'm very close at catching at last a guaranteed variant to make a sharp rise . Visit my blog to get additional info.
http://theinvestblog.com [url=http://theinvestblog.com]Online Investment Blog[/url]
Glad to greet you, ladies and gentlemen!
Let me introduce myself,
my name is James F. Collins.
Generally I’m a venturesome analyst. for a long time I’m keen on online-casino and poker.
Not long time ago I started my own blog, where I describe my virtual adventures.
Probably, it will be interesting for you to find out about my progress.
Please visit my web page . http://allbestcasino.com I’ll be interested on your opinion..
I seldom leave comments on blog, but I have been to this post which was recommend by my friend, lots of valuable details, thanks again.
Post a Comment