Too bad Stalin can't come back to suggest we all sit n a circle and sing kumbayah.

(Feels a little goofy leaving the first comment, but it occurred to me and I have to get back to writing -- didn't want to forget to post it.)

"The pursuit of short-term profit at the exclusion of everything else isn't working for anyone."

That is a straw-man argument. Most investors value companies on their long-term prospects, with quarterly results as a check on whether the business plan is still sound.

Huffington is merely a socialist who made it big. First, work for free to benefit the collective.
Then, sell the collective which you happen to own.

Then, tell everyone else that they should be working for the collective, rather than being concerned about their own profit.

This worked for her, and every other socialist in a position to benefit from the idealism of others.

Yup, what choice do the serfs have at that point?
People like her,Gore,etc disgust me.

Plan A -- the pursuit of short-term profit at the exclusion of everything else -- isn't working for anyone. It's not working for businesses' long-term sustainability, and it's not working for employees' well-being. And at a time when so many governments are gridlocked and paralyzed and unable or unwilling to pursue big, bold, far-sighted goals, the private sector has a responsibility and a unique opportunity to become a catalyst for fundamental change.

About the only big, far-sighted, goal ever pursued by the United States government was to put a man on the moon. And that was really just a 10-15 year plan inspired by Sputnik and Yuri Gagarin to beat the Soviets.

Companies are forced into short-termitis by the overreach of government. Labs used to be a popular thing for any manufacturing company. (How can we do this better.) But when regulation can shift at the whim of GE buying of a few senators and reps and making the new MRI tech outrageous there is no longer an incentive to do long-term research. Or plan for the new tech down the road.

What needs to happen to get the pursuit of short-term profit out of companies is to get the government out of the free market. Slash regulations, slash laws, slash protectionism, slash the federal government to bone.

She's risen higher than any Greek since Icarus.

I could be wrong but isn't the way she actually got rich, was marrying and divorcing a conservative multi-millionare.
Going from well off middle class to multimillionare is quite a jump, much more in many ways than going from 10s of millions to 100s of millions.

Marrying and divorcing well is definately taking a long view at boosting your economics.

"Socialism for thee, but not for me."

[The pursuit of short term profit at the exclusion of everything else is] not working for businesses' long-term sustainability, and it's not working for employees' well-being.

What Andrew said, plus:

Oh Arianna, you ignorant slut. It is hard to know where to start, but this will work for a start: you must be right, since there are no long-term companies. Wait, what? There are?

(The company I work for, FedEx, focuses very much on the long term. Shame it is such a failure. Not.)

We can choose not to be used by her ilk, and I do, the government gives us no such choice.

"Socialism for thee, but not for me."

No, no. You misunderstand. Huffington is a variation on Kip's Law:

Every advocate of central planning always — always — envisions himself as the central planner.

It's just the old Soviet Union: if you were not in the party, life was hard. The higher up in the party chain you were, the easier your life became.

"Or plan for the new tech down the road."

Our plan for new tech down the road, as near as I can tell, is to import it from China and India. We are exporting natural resources and importing finished goods. That's the definition of a colony.

@Amy, If memory serves, I believe the line came from a British classmate when she, by vigorous politicking, became the first foreign president of the Cambridge Union against jealous local competition.