Saturday, 23 April 2011

'Once you remove the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth'

I'm beginning to feel like Basil Rathbone trying to bring the dim-witted Nigel Bruce up to speed in a typical Sherlock Holmes movie. Indeed, I almost entitled this post, 'Elementary my dear Watson' (a mythical line which Holmes never actually utters in the original stories). 
I detect that a narrow shaft of light has suddenly begun to penetrate the swirling London fog our resident Dr. Watson's mind. Although he hasn't gone so far as to apologize to you, and to your fellow-citizens of the world's largest democracy, Kasey Chang has now requested a polite discussion, but what exactly he imagines he is going to bring to this discussion, I shudder to think. For a devastatingly-crass opening shot, he says: 
'I absolute agree that the laws and "Amway rules" for MLM are confusing, and a lot of scams pretend to be legal by adopting the Amway rules in name.' 
How is it possible that Mr. Chang still fails to comprehend that, not just lots of scams, but every single so-called 'MLM company' has been a scam whose instigators are all exceedingly greedy, but otherwise mediocre, little racketeers, who have simply copied the original exceedingly greedy, but otherwise mediocre, little 'Amway' racketeers - reciting the identical, reality-inverting script and steadfastly pretending to be honest businessmen by adopting the same 'Amway rules' in name only? 
Surely, no one can be that gullible and obtuse as to imagine that a bunch of wealthy, narcissistic parasites would voluntarily enforce rules which would immediately put an end to an almost fool-proof racket which continues to generate billions of dollars for them and for their parasitic, criminal associates (including their attorneys). 
Once you realize that the entire so-called 'MLM Industry' (including its codes of ethics and books of rules) has always been an absurd comic-book controlling-fiction which, exactly like Bernie Madoff's non-existent '$50 billions Hedge Fund', has only been built out of its victims' money, and has succeeded in becoming accepted as fact by a bunch of deaf, dumb and blind Inspector Lestrades (i.e. senior US regulators), Mr. Chang's questions - 
Would you agree that MLM is somewhere between a traditional business and a pyramid scheme? (or a hybridization of both?)
Can such a thing as "ethical MLM" actually exist? (Throw aside the "legal" aspect for the moment)
How much of the fault is the system itself, and how much of it is the way it's done? (i.e. is it the system's fault, or is it the "leaders / recruiters" fault?), 
makes as much sense as some financially-illiterate commentator asking Harry Markopolis in 2008: 
Would you agree that Madoff's fund is somewhere between a traditional hedge fund and a Ponzi scheme (or a hybrydization of both)?
Can such a thing as an ethical ponzi scheme exist (Throw aside the legal aspect for the moment)?
How much of the fault is Madoff's system itself, and how much is it the way it's done (i.e. is it Madoff's system's fault or is it Madoff and his associates' fault?). 
Our resident Dr. Watson has previously lectured us all at length about 'normal MLM companies,' so presumably he believes that 'normal MLM companies' exist. Although he draws this term like a sword, Mr. Chang now apparently says that, he has never directly said that 'normal MLM companies' actually exist which convenietly allows him to pretend that he can't understand where I have extrapolated such a fanciful idea from.  
We quoted an example of Mr. Chang's nonsensical drivel where he affirmed he has No position on 'Amway,'  but in the very same breath he then afffirmed his position that 'Amway has been operating legally in the USA (and elsewhere) for DECADES.' 
Although it doesn't seem possible, in response to that world-class oxymoron, Mr. Chang offered us an even more-nonsensical oxymoron with a rare tautological flourish for an added degree of difficulty:
'You are assuming that I had somehow stated or implied that Amway is a legal and ethical business when I did NO SUCH THING. I've stated several times I don't know enough about Amway to form such an opinion, only that it is legal under present US law. You even quoted me.' 
I'm not imagining this am I Shyam, our resident Dr. Watson really did say that he never said that Amway is legal, only that it is legal.  
Just when I thought that he couldn't possibly top that absurd line, Mr. Chang then claimed not to be able to follow my logic 
What will this funny fellow come up with next ? 
David Brear (copyright 2011)

No comments: