OWNERSHIP: Mark, Mark, Mark!

["William B. Ryan" <w_b_ryan@yahoo.com>]

[Reiners] but found it so rife with a.) mis-quotations
of Professor Ashford...
-------------------------------
--------------------------------

Except everything that I quoted was directly from his
email or paper.
---------------

[Reiners] b.) misrepresentations and utterly
fallacious conflations of "leveraged buyout"
schemes...
-------------------------------
--------------------------------

But Kelso bragged about it, as per the recollections
in this letter recently circulated on the Internet:

ESOP Fundamentals
By Stephen J. Butler

The United Airlines saga is especially troubling for
me because 55% of the company was owned by its
employees in an Employee Stock Ownership Program or
"ESOP." I know quite a bit about ESOPs because I used
to be a weekend ski instructor with Marti Kelso, the
daughter of Louis Kelso who claimed to have been the
inventor of the concept. Driving to and from Tahoe on
weekends thirty years ago, Marti, with her captive
audience, would proselytize unmercifully drawing from
her father's book which was entitled "The Capitalist
Manifesto." That title suggests the atmosphere in my
car. At the time, I just wanted to listen to "Wolfman
Jack" in peace and quiet, but what I was forced to
learn actually launched my career in the pension
business years several years later.

Louis Kelso claimed to have invented the "ESOP" which,
in the early days, was known as "The Kelso Plan." This
larger-than-life guy later claimed to have taught
Kolberg, Kravis and Roberts everything they knew about
leveraged buyouts. While Mr. Kelso was a great
promoter of both himself and the concept, Sears
Roebuck had actually "invented" one of the earliest
ESOP's back in the 1930's...
---------------

[Reiners] c.) logical inferences drawn from such
unfounded conflations so flawed that any student of
Logic 101 who happened to also be familiar with the
actual foundational propositions of Binary theory
would shake their heads and snicker, that I ultimately
could only feel pity for any participant in this forum
whose inferential abilities were so empoverished as to
find Mr. Ryan persuasive, and to conclude that the
effort would not be worth the frustration of giving
Mr. Ryan further opportunity to regurgitate more of
his inferential nonsense.
-------------------------------
--------------------------------

While it remains to be proven that I skipped Logic
101, it's obvious from this monstrosity of a sentence
that you skipped Syntactical Composition 101.

Sieg Heil. 



--- mark reiners <markreiners@hotmail.com> wrote:

Needless to say, however improbable it may be at this
late date, I would also heartily endorse a call not
only for Mr. Ryan's actual removal from the Ownership
forum, but his virtual disappearance from it as well. 
In fact, after reading his recent comments in response
to a new paper by Professor Ashford - which I only
paid attention to at all because the source was a
brief 'heads up' from Norm to Professor Ashford - I
contemplated the idea of dissecting the thing to
logical shreds in this forum (not a hard thing to do),
but found it so rife with a.) mis-quotations of
Professor Ashford, b.) misrepresentations and utterly
fallacious conflations of "leveraged buyout" schemes
as executed in a non-binary system with Binary
scenarios/predictions predicated on the assumption of
comprehensive implementation of Binary institutional
CHANGES to the system, and c.) logical inferences
drawn from such unfounded conflations so flawed that
any student of Logic 101 who happened to also be
familiar with the actual foundational propositions of
Binary theory would shake their heads and snicker,
that I ultimately could only feel pity for any
participant in this forum whose inferential abilities
were so empoverished as to find Mr. Ryan persuasive,
and to conclude that the effort would not be worth the
frustration of giving Mr. Ryan further opportunity to
regurgitate more of his inferential nonsense.  I may
share my dissection with Norm, Robert, Rodney, etc.,
in direct, personal correspondence, but unfortunately
I must share Dan Parker's recent observations -
conveyed by Norm from an email exchange with Dan -
that there comes a point - however noble and worthy
the objective and intent of COG may be - that to
further engage in a forum where someone like Mr. Ryan
is afoot, is simply a waste of valuable time better
spent elsewhere.  A resignation that I deeply regret,
because I continue to believe that the intent of the
COG forums is a potentially highly valuable thing.   

MARK REINERS   


>From: "Norman G. Kurland" <thirdway@cesj.org>
>Reply-To: ownership@cog.kent.edu
>To: ownership@cog.kent.edu
>Subject: Re: OWNERSHIP: Deletion of archives
>Date: Fri, 08 Jul 2005 20:45:44 -0400
>
>I heartedly endorse Rodney's demand on the ground
that Ryan has 
>abused COG's facility to level libelous statements
against me and 
>other participants.  For COG to aid and abet these
libels is to make 
>COG as responsible as Ryan for these libels.  To
remedy this abusive 
>situation I repeat my earlier demand that all Ryan's
postings over 
>the years in COG's Ownership discussion group (and
any others I'm 
>unaware of) should be removed from this facility and
future postings 
>by Ryan should be automatically rejected.
>
>Norm Kurland
>Rodney Shakespeare wrote:
>
>>Dear All,
>>All the emails in my Inbox have just disappeared but
before they 
>>did I saw
>>one from Bill Ryan saying Sieg Heil to Norm Kurland
on the grounds 
>>that Norm
>>is limiting free speech.
>>
>>Over time, Bill Ryan Ryan has deleted  probably
around twenty five 
>>of my
>>emails to the Social Credit elist -- without
explanation and 
>>without
>>informing me.  He will have done that to many other
people so it is
>>reasonable to assume that perhaps two hundred emails
-- even more 
>>-- have
>>been deleted by Bill Ryan from the Social Credit
archive without 
>>informing
>>anyone and with no explanation.  That in itself is
outrageous.
>>
>>And yet -- incredibly  and hyprocritically -- Bill
Ryan:--
>>a) accuses others of limiting free speech
>>b) demands that there be no deletion of his emails
from the 
>>Ownership
>>archive.
>>
>>Thus the Ownership elist is being massively abused. 
Ryan -- the 
>>upholder of
>>free speech -- is being abusive and demanding the
freedom to say 
>>what he
>>likes and have his abuse remain in the archives
while, at the same 
>>time,  he
>>denies freedom of (non-abusive) speech to others and
eliminates (by
>>blocking) hundreds of emails from the archive of his
own Social 
>>Credit
>>elist.
>>
>>I have had enough of this situation.  I demand that
Ryan be given 
>>the
>>treatment that he metes out to others -- i.e. his
emails be blocked 
>>and
>>removed from the archives.  What he does to others
should now be 
>>done to
>>him.
>>
>>Rodney Shakespeare.
>>
>> that says:unsubscribe ownership

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 
To subscribe to this or another of COG's discussion groups register at:
http://cog.kent.edu/register.html
To unsubscribe from this group send a message to majordomo@cog.kent.edu
with a single line in the body of the message that says:
unsubscribe ownership