People send me stuff. This one, submitted to WUWT’s “submit a story” is quite something in that I’ve never seen someone take such a principled stand before getting a job. It usually comes afterwards. In this case, Bloomberg’s dabbling in “Tabloid Climatology” has led to a proactive resignation. – Anthony
A response to Bloomberg Business Week’s climate hysteria from someone who *was* considering working for them…
Below is a message I sent to Bloomberg today after cancelling my attendance at the ‘Bloomberg Assessment Test’ today. The test is aimed at graduates who want to break into the finance industry. I had been booked into this assessment for some time previously, however upon reading the ‘Bloomberg Business Week’ article ‘It’s Global Warming, Stupid‘ on November 1st, I decided I no longer wanted to have anything to do with Bloomberg. – Danny Weston
Dear Sir / Madam,
I write regarding my cancellation of attendance at the ‘Bloomberg Assessment Test’ that I was due to sit today (Weds 7th Nov 2012). I wanted to communicate my reasons for doing so.
As I am sure Bloomberg and its various holdings and affiliates hold potential candidates for employment to the highest standards, I also hold potential employers to similarly high standards, especially as – unlike many of the new graduates who will be applying via the BAT – I will be completing my PhD in the Philosophy of Computing having already had many years of gainful employment and a wide ranging skillset that would be attractive to a prospective employer such as Bloomberg. Indeed, I previously worked in the city as a qualified electronic trading systems consultant and have developed skills and experience since in both IT and research roles that would be valuable in city roles, should I choose to return to the finance and investment banking industry.
On November 1st, one of your holdings – ‘Bloomberg Business Week’ – published a highly misleading article, leading on the front page – ‘It’s Global Warming, Stupid’. Had this article been written by a guest contributor, or represented a rare deviation from the content typically provided by this publication, I would have ignored it. However in this case it was written by assistant managing editor and senior writer Paul Barrett and continues a running theme in the publication for promoting unsubstantiated nonsense on the issue of anthropogenic global warming that appears intended only to maximise hysterical fear, uncertainty and doubt. The author constructed a narrative using such wildly inappropriate and factually untrue terminology as “Now we have weather on steroids,” – the kind of language that one might read and could be forgiven for thinking one was reading a satirical piece from The Onion or The Daily Mash.
The straw – albeit a particularly dense one – that truly broke the camel’s back for me however, was Bloomberg editor Josh Tyrangiel tweeting that same day, presumably to ramp up sales of this particular issue that, “Our cover story this week may generate controversy, but only among the stupid.” This is not language becoming of the editor of a major mainstream news publication and solidifies my opinion that BBW is an outlet for propaganda, rhetoric and schoolboy level insults, not a publication to be taken seriously – especially for anyone who works in the business world needing facts on the ground on which to make decisions. And the facts on the ground are that not only are the claims of catastrophic anthropogenic global warming highly uncertain and also often wildly exaggerated, but that even many of the experts who stand behind alarming claims made regarding the latter disputed any feasible links to Hurricane Sandy.
During my time working in the city previously, my favourite aspect of the work was that I could always appeal to the bottom line. The ‘can do’ culture meant that rational changes and risks would be given the nod if they would result in a likely improvement. It was the complete opposite to the ossified bureaucratic culture I’d experienced working in the public sector. A core part of this however was an attendance to the truth – markets can be distorted and played of course – however ultimately they are a slave to truth, which is why market corrections and detection of bubbles is so important. Bubbles and fraud on the other hand are kept alive with the dead hand of careless propaganda and lies. And it appears to be the latter to which BBW wishes to be associated.
To that extent I cannot in good conscience work for an organisation such as Bloomberg, nor rely on its recommendation via the BAT for work elsewhere in the industry. I will – as I have usually done – make my own way and on my own merits. If Bloomberg is willing to tolerate publication of work that is nothing but insulting propaganda by one of its holdings then I believe its days are numbered as a reliable truth telling adjunct to the financial industry and I do not wish to be associated with it.
Yours sincerely,
Danny Weston
Phd Candidate, Philosophy of Computing
Department of Communications and Creative Arts
University of Greenwich
London
###
Related articles
- Helping Bloomberg understand ‘stupid’ (wattsupwiththat.com)
- IPCC – “Sandy Was Not Caused By Anthropogenic Global Warming” (toryaardvark.com)
- Bloomberg Business: ‘It’s Global Warming, Stupid.’ (papundits.wordpress.com)
- New paper cuts recent anthropogenic warming trend in half (wattsupwiththat.com)
- Bloomberg’s Magazine Calls Stupid People “Stupid” (theawl.com)
Wish I could write like that. If i had a company I would offer him a job straight away.
Mr Watts, sign him up!
I have worked in the British IT industry for 15 years and so far I’ve found only two warmists, and they weren’t British 🙂
Ha ha nice one Danny! Spot on as usual 🙂
I echo Richard’s comment (at 1:23 pm). I am in awe of the clarity and eloquence brought to bear by Mr. Weston. Where ever he ends up applying his education and life skills, he will have a huge positive impact on the bottom line of the establishment.
Good on you Danny Weston! Well put.
Pretty powerful stuff to throw at the agenda peddlers.
Very commendable; but unfortunately I doubt if anyone with any influence at Bloomberg will ever see this.
Three cheers for a principled well qualified candidate who has “an attendance to the truth” and who supports a “‘can do’ culture”!
Ah, but you see Mr. Weston, Mr. Bloomberg does not care what you think.
Mr. Bloomberg knows that his words will earn him resounding praise and many dinner invitations from his coterie of friends in New York high society, among whom any words bemoaning “Global Warming” are sure to please.
Don’t you realize, Mr. Weston, that the whole “Global Warming” construct is merely a device to keep you and the rest of the peasant classes under the control of the members of NY high society and their peers throughout the world, who profit mightily from your toils?
Well done.
That was absolutely fabulous.
I wonder if their stomachs fell out their butts when they read that?
The pressure to conform:
http://www.businessinsider.com/sandys-climate-change-editor-banned-from-wikipedia-2012-11
It is well written, but I doubt anyone at Bloomberg will read past the 3rd paragraph before hitting the delete key. Nice try, though.
Danny,
With deepest sincerity and respect, I salute you!
MtK
“During my time working in the city previously, my favourite aspect of the work was that I could always appeal to the bottom line.”
And what about Bloomberg’s position doesn’t appeal to his own “bottom line?” Is he invested or intended to do so in cap and trade? Carbon derivatives? Green pie in the sky scams? Sure, the nuts are just useful idiots and propagandists, that doesn’t mean Bloomberg himself is one. Follow the Money.
BTW, this is a particularly New York phenomenon, foster by their self-importance and belief that the publication “The New Yorker” is a font of wisdom, rather than a venue of paid advocacy on climate scams.
Outstanding. Every potential employer should take heed at this principled reply.
And to think, with certainty, that CO2 in the atmosphere is beneficial….
Excellent. And very well written.
This caught my eye:
“During my time working in the city previously, my favourite aspect of the work was that I could always appeal to the bottom line. The ‘can do’ culture meant that rational changes and risks would be given the nod if they would result in a likely improvement. It was the complete opposite to the ossified bureaucratic culture I’d experienced working in the public sector. A core part of this however was an attendance to the truth – markets can be distorted and played of course – however ultimately they are a slave to truth, which is why market corrections and detection of bubbles is so important.”
In another blog, skeptics (or in the blogger’s insistence, “denialists”) are labeled as “do-nothings” and solidly entrenched in the status quo. Young Mr. Weston seems to possess an eye for bottom line results based on honest observations and questioning. It’s frustrating to know that such questioning is often perceived as obstructionist, especially when spending efficiency is so vital today.
I hope this will serve as an example to prospective and already-employed professionals, showing them how to stand up to those who enable the CAGW cult to survive, in the face of massive contrary evidence.
Does your academic department, research program, publication, office, or whatever keep promulgating “climate change” as anything more than rampant speculation? Then draft a letter like this one, and find a more rational place to work.
/Mr Lynn
I commend Danny’s stand on this issue. But I doubt it will make any difference to Bloomberg’s AGW stance.
Weston’s phrase “working in the city” refers to the financial district in London, known as “the city,” something US readers may not realize until the end. I initially took it to mean, working FOR the city (I.e., NYC).
That was an inspiring peice. Clear argumentation and clear, distinct English. Even me as a Swede can appreciate the language.
Such persons (principled, ethical) are no longer going to matter in our society.
To prepare for what’s coming, I suggest watching the movie Idiocracy
I suspect Mr Bloomberg’s publication is doing what is necessary for his political career, and the bottom line is that what Mr Bloomberg wants, he gets. The headline wiped the egg off his face, at least in non-thinking circles, after he had been as ineffectual as George W Bush in disaster risk management. The shame is that nobody in the MSM called them out on this cynical behaviour.
Danny , if you get any reply from them, I am sure everyone here would love to see it, if you care to share with us.
“But I doubt it will make any difference to Bloomberg’s AGW stance.”
As demonstrated yesterday, ideology trumps reality.
Danny has judged a book by its cover – and the book was found wanting. History will record this young man to be on the right side of the evidence.
Bloomberg – hang your head/s in shame.
Excellent article. Just the pick-me-up I needed today.
Well done Danny Weston.
Just took Bloomberg off my daily reading list for the same reason. Also because they attribute the big drop in stocks today to worries over European debt – not that maybe investors are not happy with the outcome of the election yesterday…
Interesting, eloquent, passionate, commendable and I’m sure it does not need me to point out, an utter waste of time & words. Nobody at Bloomberg will care.
bloomberg…… ah yes…… a reference resource for the greedy and stupid.
Wow. Great letter. A trimmed down version based upon para 3, 4 and latter half of 5 would be a good letter to the editor.
To his point – they (more than any) should be trying to get the inside story on the irrational exubrerance that surrounds CAGW.
While I agree with his sentiment, and give him a standing ovation for taking a principled stand, I cannot agree that this letter is well written. There are various words for this writing style: blotation, bloviation, or my favorite, “why say in 100 words what you can say in 1000.”
Danny should have made his point much more succinctly, easily enough done, then would have been much sharper and had a chance of being read.
how about that – a man who acts on his principles.
Mr Weston – bravo! You are one in a million.
Any others who have tested themselves and not come up wanting?
Keith Levet says:
November 7, 2012 at 2:37 pm
Excellent article. Just the pick-me-up I needed today.
Well done Danny Weston.
_______________________________
I will second that.
It is nice to know not all recent grads are brainwashed in green kool-aid.
Bloomberg LP is about making money from market information predominantly through its terminals, which is why it is so ironic that Mayor Bloomberg, after backing Obama, found the markets falling after seeing him reelected. The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 2.36% today.
http://www.bloomberg.com/quote/INDU:IND
Bloomberg is now more dominant in providing financial information than Reuters and it sees green products as a huge opportunity to make money through Bloomberg New Energy Finance which it claims, “delivers independent and comprehensive coverage across the clean energy industry and carbon markets”.
An article in the Financial Times in 2011 stated:
“The global market for solar and wind power rose from $6.5bn to $132bn between 2000 and 2010, says Clean Edge, a US research firm. The number of hybrid electric car models around the world has risen from two to 30 over the same time. Certified green building numbers grew from three to 8,138. But we will still see failures such as Solyndra.”
Even Lord Browne former head of BP is now “a partner at US private equity firm Riverstone Holdings, a large investor in fossil fuels whose $3.5bn renewable energy fund is one of the world’s biggest.”
“And one thing is clear: as long as people can make money from green businesses, investment will grow. As Lord Browne puts it, “The fundamental underpinning of sustainability is profitability. Without profitability, it’s going to disappear.”
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/2d12cf38-05b7-11e1-a429-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2Ba0ARW5b
The Bloomberg headline more truthfully refers to those gullible investors who put their money into green energy products which, as Lord Browne says, without profitability, which in reality is subsidies from taxpayers, “is going to disappear”.
You can throw away your tinfoil hat away now. The mainstream media last week came out of the closet and had a real live Pro-Agenda 21 commercial on a mainstream media TV show.
I thought that was just a conspiracy theory. I guess I was bamboozled by the people who didn’t want me to know about it. I wonder what else they have in store for us.
The Blaze – Pro-Agenda 21 Commercial
Danny Weston I complement you on your stand for straight forward information from our major media and ethical behavior in business.
I sincerely hope that someone who appreciates your skill set, stance and strength of character offers you a job that can make good use of your skills!
Larry
LearDog says:
November 7, 2012 at 2:45 pm
Wow. Great letter. A trimmed down version based upon para 3, 4 and latter half of 5 would be a good letter to the editor.
To his point – they (more than any) should be trying to get the inside story on the irrational exubrerance that surrounds CAGW.
_________________
Au contraire- “they” are the minions of profiteers driving the whole CAGCD meme.
Nice work, don’t forget sending a copy to Obama.
Well done sir. Stand on principle is always a win in my book.
I resigned from the IEEE in similar fashion several years ago…of course I never received any response from them to my grievance against their ridiculous energy policy recommendations.
Ignorance and the inability to conduct rational discourse is quickly destroying this country and it is unfortunate we cannot yet stop it.
Danny’s certificate of dignity. 10-20 years from now he can wave it around as proof he was a man among thieves.
Sadly, the best approach to deal with a propaganda outlet is to join and leak what is going on behind the scenes either through Wikileaks (I doubt they would publish) or one of the few remaining democratic media.
It’s always nice to see a well-written letter. Doubly so when it states a deeply-held conviction.
Well said. It would be a waste of time an talent to work there. Better opportunities await.
Unfortunately Danny is probably now being added to the PNAS blacklist. Hopefully the lack of any federal grants in the future won’t cause too much stress.
You write this kind of letter to preserve your dignity and you take this kind of stand to demonstrate your character. Mr. Weston will be successful in more important ways than Bloomberg ever will…or could even imagine.
LKMiller says:
November 7, 2012 at 2:57 pm
While I agree with his sentiment, and give him a standing ovation for taking a principled stand, I cannot agree that this letter is well written. There are various words for this writing style: blotation, bloviation, or my favorite, “why say in 100 words what you can say in 1000.”
Danny should have made his point much more succinctly, easily enough done, then would have been much sharper and had a chance of being read.
This was not a “letter to the editor” Mr. Bloviator.
“why say in 100 words what you can say in 1000.”
Sarcasm?
Fail.
Anyone who seriously believes AGW is a serious problem, and does NOT immediately revert to an Amish (or more primitive) lifestyle, is a hypocrite. Bloomberg is no exception.
Great letter.
Spoken like a real person.
The judgement must be that if Bloomberg can”t get it right on a now better researched area as the drivers of climate then it probably can’t get it right in its major core area.
I will add Bloomberg to the Sydney Morning Herald as a ‘to avoid’ source of reliable information.
oldseadog says:
November 7, 2012 at 1:44 pm
Very commendable; but unfortunately I doubt if anyone with any influence at Bloomberg will ever see this.
==========================================================================
I may not have made it up the food chain but now that it’s on WUWT they might. But whether they do or not, Danny Weston doesn’t have to hide from what he sees in the mirror.
LKMiller says:
November 7, 2012 at 2:57 pm
While I agree with his sentiment, and give him a standing ovation for taking a principled stand, I cannot agree that this letter is well written. There are various words for this writing style: blotation, bloviation, or my favorite, “why say in 100 words what you can say in 1000.”
Danny should have made his point much more succinctly, easily enough done, then would have been much sharper and had a chance of being read.
===============
I think “that” would have sharpened up your “then”, succinctly.
Well done that man. Not everyone has such principles. I’m going to share the story on facebook. If everyone does there is more chance of the ‘high heid yins’ (as we say in Scotland) becoming aware of it.
Yet another TYPO: “I may not have made it up the food chain”
Should be: “It may not have made it up the food chain”
(Sigh)
clipe says:
November 7, 2012 at 5:13 pm
“This was not a “letter to the editor” Mr. Bloviator.”
&
“why say in 100 words what you can say in 1000.”
Sarcasm?
Fail.”
Thin-skinned much? I gave him a standing O for his principles, and a C- for tripping over the message.
Lighten up, we have much bigger problems than this. Who is John Galt?
Please forgive me. Somebody had to do it! 🙂
Good man. BBW has really sunk down, as PopScience has done.
WTF are these journalists/propagandists thinking about their readers?
Hats off to a fellow man that can stand up to his principles. Bravo. 🙂
“why say in 100 words what you can say in 1000.”
Never articulate a multi-syllable declaration when a diminutive utterance would be sufficient.
Danny, that was some very polite venting. Your could have been more concise but then it would not have been as therapeutic. Good call.
We can argue forever with warmists about climate and not get very far. We need to think up new ways of confronting them. I will suggest, as I have done before, having a list of warmist individuals and organisations, ranked in descending order of the outrageousness of their views, and add Bloomberg to that list. Rerank the list and publish it every week.
Why shouldn’t this be done? DeSmog have a “Denier Database”. Let’s have a Warmist Database. The people in it can safely be ignored. If they ask nicely and start doing real science, they can be removed. Why don’t we do this?
The closest I ever came to this was taking an interview with a company that had jerked me around for months, only to tell the folks there that I took the interview just to find out who had been jerking me around.
“…while the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to meaning and for those who will listen, the enunciation of truth.”
Congratulations on your integrity Danny. I hope there are employers who will appreciate you.
This might take editing for length, and then appear in the Wall Street Journal.
they won’t read past “I write regarding my cancellation of attendance at the ‘Bloomberg Assessment Test’ “
the bloomberg article, “NY Mayor Bloomberg Endorses Obama in Presidential Race” was published on 1 Nov.
i go to bloomberg every single day to check on their latest CAGW propagands and they kept the story at the top of the homepage for the entire week up to the election. never seen a story held like that before. of course u could say well, it’s bloomberg’s publication, so it’s not too surprising.
however, on 1 Nov, reuters point carbon published “NY mayor cites climate stance in endorsing Obama ” at the top of their homepage, and it stayed right there for the entire week as well.
what a coincidence? not that i had a horse in your presidential race.
Nicely said, albeit a tad lengthy. Very ethical too, as it can be real hard to say no to the chance of a good job at a widely (though not universally) respected, high profile employer.
Perhaps this is hopelessly naive, but there is an alternative approach, and that is to join Bloomberg’s with the intention of trying to educate and challenge its views. People with fixed dumb views need to be challenged and, arguably, the best way is internally. Personally, I like media which offers a diversity of views, not those which merely affirm my pre-existing prejudices. How else can you learn and grow?
I cancelled my subscription to BBW because of their juvenile tabloid journalism.
Inspiring, even though your objection will probably be ignored by those dim propagandists. Illegitimum non carborundum.
Ingvar;
“Even
meI as a Swede can appreciate the language.” To get that right, eliminate the intervening phrases and clauses and directly match subject and verb. Would you say, “me can appreciate”?😉
I would probably do that, not necessarily regarding climate though.. 😉
We constantly had high profile companies giving talks/presentations coming to our uni who wanted to attract students’ applications.
There were 1-2 companies which are very tempting as employers in the public perception, and so I researched them; but more crucially, I already knew how they work through involvement with them through their paperwork I had to deal with in my part-time job at the time.
There are many people who manage to achieve really good degrees (and good jobs on that basis), but who literally don’t know what they are doing, they get things wrong you wouldn’t do in the first semester, even based on common sense alone. This is a clear failure of education/examination standards. (We are talking about the UK here.)
And after I had so much displeasure fixing nonsense coming out of highly paid people, I didn’t even apply there anymore – because I cannot fake agreement to idiocy every day, just to go along… I actually like doing what I have to do, or else work is hell. Overlooking incompetence as a leading principle in a high profile company is a bit like pretending the emperor has clothes on…
At the time, there were even 1-2 awkward decisions of that company’s particular department I was interested in that got their own media attention for being, well, slightly detached from reality… so it’s not just me being a wise-cracking know-it-all.
So there you have it, Homer Simpsons was right when he said: “Not being able to do something is not a reason to not do it anyway .” 😛
So in principle, I am living by my convictions…
“During my time working in the city previously, my favourite aspect of the work was that I could always appeal to the bottom line. The ‘can do’ culture meant that rational changes and risks would be given the nod if they would result in a likely improvement. It was the complete opposite to the ossified bureaucratic culture I’d experienced working in the public sector.”
Well said – leaves me wondering, has Danny experience with the loony public service of the Julia Gillard Green-Left government in Australia?
Well said Danny. It is strange that Bloomberg would have any comment on global warming. However, they are now in Total BS world now, so I can safely ignore anything published by Bloomberg on any subject matter.
Thanks,
John Edmondson
First, respect. Great! You’ll go far on principles. Second, LK Miller and his language pedantry; I’ve experienced this on other blogs, people who’ve got nothing better to do than question your use of language (usually on idiosyncratic and dubious pinciples). Sorry, get a life! Ideas first, manner of expression like about twentieth.
In a nutshell: It’s Global Bloomberg, STUPID
Another one into the denialists’ asylum 🙂
Aussie Luke Warm says:
November 7, 2012 at 11:03 pm
“During my time working in the city previously, my favourite aspect of the work was that I could always appeal to the bottom line. The ‘can do’ culture meant that rational changes and risks would be given the nod if they would result in a likely improvement. It was the complete opposite to the ossified bureaucratic culture I’d experienced working in the public sector.”
Well said – leaves me wondering, has Danny experience with the loony public service of the Julia Gillard Green-Left government in Australia?
It was the ‘can do’ culture of the Cities of the world with their ‘rational’ changes and risks that generated the GFC, bringing the world to its knees, destroying whole industries, whole national economies, and putting tens of millions out of work.
It is the governments of the world with their ‘ossified bureaucratic cultures’ that are trying desperately to put the pieces back together again.
Let’s wish them success.
“If Bloomberg is willing to tolerate publication of work that is nothing but insulting propaganda by one of its holdings then I believe its days are numbered as a reliable truth telling adjunct to the financial industry”
Wasn’t Bloomberg ALWAYS big in carbon trading, ETS schemes? I’ve never taken them very seriously.
I smell a rat. It can’t be written by someone in IT. It’s well written, in proper English, appropriately punctuated and without a single misplaced apostrophe. We just can’t do that 🙂
i’d have some respect for bloomberg is they were busily warning the public not to get caught in CAGW CO2 scams, such as this tragic one Bish has unearthed, and informing the public if selling “carbon credits” is as unregulated in other regions of the world besides the UK:
8 Nov: Bishop Hill: Uncreditworthy
There is an interesting article on the Financial Times Adviser website on the subject of carbon credits. These worthless bits of paper are apparently being touted as investments and their sale as such is not regulated…
http://www.bishop-hill.net/blog/2012/11/8/uncreditworthy.html
This is good for Bloomberg, not bad. Journalism is a purely ideological profession. It doesn’t WANT good writers or good thinkers; it wants hard-line Satanist-Stalinist zealots.
Bloomberg makes the ideology more blazingly obvious than most news agencies, which makes it easier to filter out heretics like this fellow.
It’s sort of like the blatant nature of most scams. Anyone with half a brain can spot a Nigerian Prince email as fraud. We wonder why they don’t make it more subtle, but the obviousness is intentional. Scams require a certain amount of work to manipulate the mark into long-term giving. By making the initial appeal unmistakably fraudulent, the scamster filters out people who can discern fraud, leaving only the marks who are worth cultivating.
I have only bought Bloomberg Businessweek once, because its lead story was a subject in which I was very interested and knowledgeable.
It was just like typical ‘climate science’, an emotional, fact distorting, version of something unremarkable.
The Bloomberg piece is the start of the push to justify Obama Administration’s carbon taxing and the attempt to restart a carbon market. This letter where it states:
“A core part of this however was an attendance to the truth – markets can be distorted and played of course – however ultimately they are a slave to truth, which is why market corrections and detection of bubbles is so important. Bubbles and fraud on the other hand are kept alive with the dead hand of careless propaganda and lies. And it appears to be the latter to which BBW wishes to be associated.”
Highlights that Bloomberg is promoting or perhaps inflating a carbon bubble one which will burst as the cold truth arrives; as it has already in Europe. But no doubt Bloomberg, with an overweening sense of their own importance, believe they can turn around the carbon markets for their ‘leader’. “However ultimately [these markets] are a slave to truth” so this letter points out that the markets should no longer follow Bloomberg’s false claims and instead follow the truth to protect their bottom line.
More succinctly, real business knows that global warming is a scam on which the carbon markets are built and is not an area to be associated with as the bubble is about to burst.
Unfortunately he’s likely to be disappointed if he turns down jobs on this basis.
I know of NO other job where telling the truth is supported. Even religion. We had a sermon last Sunday about the perils of Global Warming. I thought it was quite sweet, one religion supporting another…
How Green is Mayor Bloomberg owner of Bloomberg LP? He is said to own:
Audi R8
Chevrolet SUV (Suburban)
17 East 79th Street Townhouse
The Farmhouse, Titicus Road, North Salem, New York
The Mountain Haus, a 72-unit hotel-like condo in Vail, Colorado
Victorian townhouse worth upwards of $10 million in Cadogan Square, London.
Ballyshear a mansion in the Hamptons.
Stokes Bay a 6,000-square-foot home in Bermuda
Mooney Bravo private aircraft
Through his company a $4.5 million, six-seat Agusta SPA A109S helicopter
On the waiting list for an AgustaWestland AW609 Tiltrotor, a hybrid helicopter-plane
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/13/nyregion/in-mayor-bloombergs-jet-setting-heart-a-love-for-helicopters.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1
http://www.bornrich.com/michael-bloomberg.html
How much tax does Mayor Bloomberg pay?
“According to an extensive review of the mayor’s financial records by The Observer, even as Mr. Bloomberg was trying to counter the loss of taxes and other income from the richest New Yorkers, the foundation he controls was in the process of shuttling hundreds of millions of dollars out of the city and into controversial offshore tax havens that would produce nothing at all for the city in terms of tax revenue.
“By the end of 2008, the Bloomberg Family Foundation had transferred almost $300 million into various offshore destinations—some of them notorious tax-dodge hideouts. The Caymans and Cyprus. Bermuda and Brazil. Even Mauritius, a speck of an island in the Indian Ocean, off the coast of Madagascar. Other investments were spread around disparate locations, from Japan to Luxembourg to Romania.
‘I’ve never seen anything like it. It’s about as opaque set of investments as you can find,’ said Rich Cohen, who covers foundations and charities for Nonprofit Quarterly.”
http://observer.com/2010/04/bloombergs-offshore-millions/
Bloomberg in Bermuda:
“Mr. Bloomberg, who owns a waterfront estate here, has walled off his life in Bermuda from voters in New York, arguing it is none of their business. He steadfastly refuses to say when he is on the island, and to blindfold prying eyes, he has blocked aviation Web sites from making public the movements of his private planes.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/26/nyregion/26bermuda.html?_r=0
In case Bloomberg’s Paul Barrett or Josh Tyrangiel are reading this WUWT page may I point you to some data about Sandy and other hurricane strike in the USA. After reading it you will see that your headline ‘It’s Global Warming, Stupid‘ is in fact stupid and unsubstantiated by the evidence.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/11/01/helping-bloomberg-understand-stupid/
Mark, though it be “appropriately punctuated” for the most part, several slips are present in this excellent missive: “for me however” should be “for me, however”, and “played of course – however ultimately” should be “played, of course – however, ultimately”.
The failure to place a comma after however, thus making a simple contradictory adverb look like the relative adverb is a common error; however common it is, however, it is best avoided.
LK Miller
“Word not found: blotation”
LK Miller
“Word not found: blotation”
Sorry mods – too impatient!
Many readers are pointing out that Bloomberg is relied on for honest and accurate reporting in the financial industry. Is there really any such thing?
Consider the current financial crisis in the Western world- were there any warnings from Bloomberg,or other such sources before the crash?
Many of us know that big players like George Soros have financially raped entire nations before this current crisis. Soros looting of the UK treasury was just a trial run- he showed the rest of them the way and now they’ve done it to us all. This time around, not only did the big players extract such huge sums from the market that there was no longer an appearance of financial liquidity, but they also had such control of several nations’ purse strings that they were able to extract further trillions in payments from governments with which they promptly began paying themselves billions in bonuses.
Does anyone really think that Bloomberg (et al) is the least bit interested in the real truth of things, or what any of us have to say?
Good on you Danny, I would have done the same.
I wrote to them last week:
Guess what, I will NEVER buy Bloomberg Businessweek again. Your Stupid headline did it. You all are very stupid as you just lost lost a shit load of cash. Below is the correct headline. So get lost forever*.(Its just weather stupid)
The reply:
“Thank you for your comments. I have forwarded your email to the editors. In the meantime, thanks again and have a good day. Patti Straus”
Luther Wu says:
November 8, 2012 at 5:31 am
“Many readers are pointing out that Bloomberg is relied on for honest and accurate reporting in the financial industry. Is there really any such thing?
Consider the current financial crisis in the Western world- were there any warnings from Bloomberg,or other such sources before the crash?”
I remember the onset of the financial crisis very well because I had my money in NASDAQ 100 certificates and was nervous about switching all of it into cash while the market still jittered higher and higher. There were MANY, MANY articles in WSJ and financial times – some predicting a crash, warning of overconsumption via mortgage increases, house flipping, a property bubble… I don’t know about Bloomberg, don’t read them too often.
Without these warnings, I would have had no reason to get out. I did get out in time. Really; there were many warners in these publications.
(What happened next? I did get back in too early – but continued to buy all through the BFC…)
Thanks for that. Bloomberg reminds me of Al Gore. They talk about a lack of action to tackle global warming while doing their very best to ‘warm’ the planet with their well above average consumption, multiple homes and cars and private flying machines. I don’t whether Bloomberg is worse than James Cameron.
http://www.bornrich.com/michael-bloomberg.html
http://observer.com/2012/03/no-youre-selfish/
Danny. You might have a Ph.D but not knowing how to sign off a letter correctly detracts from it.. Dear Sir/Madam should be signed off as ‘ Yours faithfully ‘ not ‘Yours sincerely’.
Dear Sir/Madam takes ‘faithfully’, but Name i.e Dear Mr Smith takes ‘sincerely’.
University of where??
Oh, you mean the former Thames Polytechnic, “the greenest university in the UK”.
Nothing personal, Danny, but I doubt that Bloomberg really give a damn and if you are concerned about the extent to which people are being misled about global warming then try looking closer to home. Like your own “university” for example.
Great work, but I doubt it will make a diference, because –
I am convinced Bloomberg will follow the7 Council of the City of London in imposing a City-tax for vehicles in New York, sooner rather than later.
Global Warming seems to be the best excuse for imposing that citiy-tax far and wide.
Mr. Weston (shortly to be Dr. Weston) is to be congratulated for his stance, especially since his taking this stance may not be conducive to his employment by others. Unfortunately, taking a stance against the global warming politically-correct loons carries a risk that it will be used against him. There is a reason why so many of those who have spoken out against the loonery are retirees or have independent means. And it is not pretty…if you value quaint concepts such as freedom of speech.
I have canceled my subscription to Bloomberg.
Just cancelled my subscription … if they want to run crap like this in a business mag they can stuff their magazine. Before this I was often annoyed at the Economist’s GLO-BULL warming nonsense but lately Bloomberg has been off scale stupid with their shilling for AGW and this was the last straw or strike and they are out of my mailbox. To their credit they are refunding ~ $18 that was remaining on my subscription.
Whatever the “philosophy of computing” is (let’s hope it’s not a Kronecker-type dismissal of Cantor), Daniel Weston will no doubt find his doctoral niche. Meantime, though AGW catastrophists need rebutting on a PR basis, please understand that nothing anyone may do or say will penetrate their asininities.
Regardless of objective or even rational citations, Keith Farnish, Kentti Linkola, Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, will remain Luddite totalitarian enemies of humanity in every political-economic and pseudo-scientific sense. Bloomberg and its ilk, specifically the Green Gang of Briffa, Hansen, Jones, Mann, Trenberth et al., can no more talk climate sense than an Anabaptist of Munster could renounce Doomsday.
Good for Daniel Weston: Ability, character, integrity trump doofus propagandists every time.
“””””……spen says:
November 8, 2012 at 7:34 am
Danny. You might have a Ph.D but not knowing how to sign off a letter correctly detracts from it.. Dear Sir/Madam should be signed off as ‘ Yours faithfully ‘ not ‘Yours sincerely’.
Dear Sir/Madam takes ‘faithfully’, but Name i.e Dear Mr Smith takes ‘sincerely’…….””””””
Well golly , what a fox pass ! I didn’t even read that letter to discover that horrid gaffe. I simply couldn’t get past the complete lack of a formal heading containing name and address of the sender; and not even including the date in the header.
Come to think of it, it didn’t even include a formal recipient heading ahead of the dull “Dear Sir/Madam”
Obviously, WUWT should conduct a formal letter writing seminar, so that such boorish behavior is not indulged in by WUWT readers.
As for that “Dear Mr. Smith” , if anybody adressed me that way, the last thing that I would believe, is that they said that with sincerity; much more likely in jest.
But let me guess; I predict that Danny did not do his PhD thesis in “Formal English letter Composition.” That’s the trouble with PhDs you tend to learn more and more about less and less.
“I resigned from the IEEE in similar fashion several years ago…of course I never received any response from them to my grievance against their ridiculous energy policy recommendations.”
I simply gave up on the IEEE when it became obvious that their official answer to every question was “government”. Problems with education? Government. Not enough electrical engineering students? Government. Government, government, government.
I’m surprised they haven’t announced that the proper way to shield a circuit from interference is government.
In this case, Bloomberg’s dabbling in “Tabloid Climatology” has led to a proactive resignation.
———_
I’d be more impressed if he actually had the job and resigned. Failing to turn up to a job asssessment/interview, for a job he likely would not get, is hardly worth writing about.
And the outrage about being insulted is a bit rich from someone keen to tell other people how it is.
Lazy says:
“I’d be more impressed…”
Nothing makes you happy, does it?
LazyTeenager says:
November 8, 2012 at 12:11 pm
In this case, Bloomberg’s dabbling in “Tabloid Climatology” has led to a proactive resignation.
———_
I’d be more impressed if he actually had the job and resigned….
________________________________
I did that after being asked to sign off as lab manager on falsified data (certificate of analysis) over a decade ago. I was blackballed and have not worked a day in industry since.
The cost of taking an honest stance is very high. Industry has a catch phrase for it – She/He is not a ‘team player’ – No other sentence is more deadly to your career. It means you put honesty and integrity above the come good (profit margin) of the corporation. That is why connecting corporations to capitalism is so laughable. They have a heck of a lot more in common philosophically with socialism. As Dwayne Andreas former CEO of ADM, the world’s largest corn processor said to Mother Jones
In relation to climate science, who cares what the Koch brothers are paying for, or what skin Bloomberg has in the carbon credits industry? Who cares whether an individual scientist is a creationist, is in the pay of King Coal or the UN, is an AGW tertiary careerist, or whether he falsely claims Noble status (one on each ‘side’ to date, apparently).
All this stuff adds exactly zip to our knowledge about climate science.
However, it could well inform judgements about AGW policies and AGW politics.
The problem, IMHO, is that many individuals (as can be seen upstring in several instances) conflate judgements about individuals, corporates, policies and politics, on the one hand, with judgements about climate science on the other. The unfortunate result tends to be personal abuse of scientists rather than robust discussion about the scientific issues.
The personal qualities of Einstein are absolutely irrelevant to the science of the theory of relativity.
Ultimately, climate science, whatever it ‘says’, must stand on its scientific merits.
Bravo!! Please give Dr. Weston a 32oz sugary beverage of his choice.
“The personal qualities of Einstein are absolutely irrelevant to the science of the theory of relativity.”
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
The personal qualities of Einstein are directly responsible for the theory of relativity which is why he said: “For the most part I do the thing which my own nature drives me to do. It is embarrassing to earn so much respect and love for it.”
mfo says
The personal qualities of Einstein are directly responsible for the theory of relativity which is why he said: “For the most part I do the thing which my own nature drives me to do. It is embarrassing to earn so much respect and love for it.”
Fair comment. I will amend the statement to: The personal qualities of Einstein have absolutely nothing to do with whether the theory of relativity is good science or bad science. It stands on it own.
Howskepticalment says:
November 8, 2012 at 2:03 pm
In relation to climate science, who cares what the Koch brothers are paying for….
_______________________________
If the data/tests can not be duplicated, verified and validated it is not science. When someone hides his methods/data so it can not be duplicated, verified and validated or if it is based on computer models it is not science.
For those of us who are not in the position of doing the validation studies ourselves and there are two conflicting sides each claiming their data is “good” then we are left with making value judgements based on what ever other information we can get our hands on including the ‘sniff test’ money, motive and integrity.
At this point ‘science’ has such a huge black eye in so many different disciplines no one should take any scientist’s word without verification.
The fact that so many peer-reviewed papers have been posted on WUWT and have been easily ripped to shreds is an indication of the sad state of science. Those papers should never have made it into a scientific journal in the first place. There is even a website called Retraction Watch the problem has become so bad.
Howskepticalment says:
November 8, 2012 at 2:03 pm
…The problem, IMHO, is that many individuals (as can be seen upstring in several instances) conflate judgements about individuals, corporates, policies and politics, on the one hand, with judgements about climate science on the other. The unfortunate result tends to be personal abuse of scientists rather than robust discussion about the scientific issues.
_________________________________
You are incredibly naive.
Unless you are independently wealthly or can mange to put together your own research institute as Dr. Robinson has done with the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, you are stuck with politics and money.
There has been a heck of a lot of very good ideas and data that has been buried because it was ‘inconvenient’ to those who control the paycheck/grant money. That is based on personal experience and the experience of several of my friends. In a word Honesty DOES NOT PAY being a ‘team player’ does.
If Einstein’s work had been a threat to someone rich and powerful it would have been buried.
Here is a recent example link It took a tabloid like The National Enquirer to get the information out.
Forwarded to Matt Drudge.
GC
I think we are on the same page. Everyone knows that vested interests seek to corrupt the science. For example, one only has to look at the well-documented efforts of the fossil fuel vested interests to stymie AGW science and effective AGW policies.
The point which I was trying to make is that, in the end, the science must stand or fall on its own merits. Trying to disprove the science by attacking personalities just muddies the water. (See upstring).