Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Businesses The Almighty Buck Politics Technology

Ross Perot, Founder and Former CEO of Electronic Data Systems and Perot Systems, Dies At 89 (cnbc.com) 149

Ross Perot, a self-made billionaire, independent presidential candidate, and philanthropist, has died at the age of 89 after a five-month battle with leukemia. Perot rose to fame after founding his first company, Electronic Data Systems, in 1962 with just $1,000 in savings. More than two decades later, he launched information technology services provider Perot Systems, which was acquired in 2009 by Dell for $3.9 billion. CNBC reports on his political accomplishments: As a disruptive third-party candidate for president, Perot ran on a platform of fiscal responsibility and protectionism. He won nearly 19% of the vote in the 1992 race -- by far the biggest slice of the electorate for a third-party candidate since Theodore Roosevelt's Bull Moose Party in the 1912 election. Perot stood out from the political crowd for his quirks as much as his business credentials and lack of experience in establishment politics. "I don't have any experience in running up a $4 trillion debt. I don't have any experience in gridlock government, where nobody takes responsibility for anything and everybody blames everybody else," he said in a 1992 presidential debate. The shifting of U.S. jobs to Mexico created a "giant sucking sound," he famously said during the campaign. Perot was also a bit of a pack rat, collecting everything from whimsical toys to priceless artifacts. Perot owned the only Magna Carta ever allowed to leave Great Britain, which he loaned to the National Archives in Washington, D.C., and in 2007, sold it for $20 million.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Ross Perot, Founder and Former CEO of Electronic Data Systems and Perot Systems, Dies At 89

Comments Filter:
  • All the jobs went to China and India.
    • by Tablizer ( 95088 )

      It's pronounced "Jiiina".

    • All the jobs went to China and India.

      No, of manufacturing, a good number did go to Mexico before China joined the WTO. His focus was more manufacturing, and in that department, both Mexico and China gave us the sucking sound. India has gotten into manufacturing only more recently

  • It's really a shame Perot is gone, as a third party candidate this year I could almost see him winning this time.

    The elections he was a candidate for, were probably the last election you had a clearly decent choice to vote for.

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Awwwww. You don't like Trump and someone told you the Democratic Party is full of "libtards" and "Leftists" so you just don't know who to vote for.

      Do us all a favor junior, sit this one out and let the adults chose the president, okay?

    • by phantomfive ( 622387 ) on Tuesday July 09, 2019 @03:39PM (#58897830) Journal

      as a third party candidate this year I could almost see him winning this time.

      No. Fiscal responsibility is a good platform, but it's not a platform that wins elections (and if this were Reddit, there would be a bunch of replies assertively telling me "deficits don't matter").

      • Fiscal responsibility is a good platform, but it's not a platform that wins elections

        It's not even about that though, it's that Perot would be an obviously sane choice in a field of candidates that are quite mad.

        The closest thing I can think of to a modern equivalent is that guy who runs Starbucks. If he ran, I think he could win. But he was scared away by the media and liberal power-seekers.

        • Perot would be an obviously sane choice in a field of candidates that are quite mad.

          Not really, a lot of it is marketing. Any of us would look insane if we had enough exposure. (If you don't believe me, I'll look through your comment history and find your own personal insanity).

          • Re: (Score:2, Troll)

            by Rockoon ( 1252108 )

            Any of us would look insane if we had enough exposure.

            The media gives the Democrats all the time in the world to tell their side of it. You claim that this makes them look insane.
            The media chops out sounds bites of Republicans and then gives Democrats all the time in the world to talk about how bad the Republicans are. You are claiming this makes them look insane.

            You are right. The media makes the Democrats look insane by letting Democrats speak, and the media makes the Republicans look insane by letting Democrats speak.

            One side is much much worse, if yo

      • by Uberbah ( 647458 )

        No. Fiscal responsibility is a good platform

        Except "fiscal responsibility" often equates to "keep throwing piles of money at the military while giving massive tax cuts to the rich so let's slash social programs". When what it should mean is paying for high speed rail, free-to-use medical care and education, while repealing all tax cuts going back to the Eisenhower Administration.

    • by Tablizer ( 95088 )

      I voted for him primarily because I felt we needed more than 2 parties.

    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
      • Naw,

        Democrats have always been the party of bickering. They never have been unified. The amount of bickering varies by generation and topic, but there is always a fair degree of disagreement. Even on party planks and popular idealism they show that they may occasionally come together for a vote, but agree? No, and usually quite loudly.

        When Republicans try it they end up with the TEA Party and the Freedom Caucus and Donald Trump..
        Democrats just end up with a bunch of idealists shouting over each other.

        Rememb
    • Perot was the Trump of 1992. Or Trump was the Perot of 2016. Very identical stances - about trade deals, protecting other countries at our expense, immigration and so on

      The things they differed on are really functions of how much society has shifted. Both Perot and Trump were pro-choice on abortion back in the day, but that was when conservatives argued that life begins at conception, and that exceptions can't be made for rape and incest. In 2019, the conservative position starts life at either heartb

  • by Seven Spirals ( 4924941 ) on Tuesday July 09, 2019 @03:13PM (#58897668)
    EDS was a stepwise solution until the weasels found offshoring. It's the whole idea that you shouldn't do IT yourself, but let "the experts" do it "over there". Well, we see where it landed HP who bought EDS. They are damn near bankrupt because while they were busy letting Carly shoot off both feet, the EDS model gave way to a newer model: offshore to India! So, while I appreciate what I believe Ross Perot tried to do in politics, I fear his example was the wrong one from the start. Don't rent IT, buy it. Mercenaries are never as productive or loyal as local soldiers fighting for their own.
    • Mercenaries are never as productive

      Yep basically EDS was the Golden Company of the day.

      I liked Perot but man EDS was strange. I had a friend who worked there a long time ago and it seemed like a really poorly run company.

  • "I don't have any experience in running up a $4 trillion debt."

    On the contrary, he made much of his fortune by winning fat government contracts funded by deficit spending.

    • by nnet ( 20306 )
      How did "making much of his fortune by winning fat government contracts" cause EDS to be $4trillion in debt?

      From where are you alleging he had experience being in that much debt?
    • "I don't have any experience in running up a $4 trillion debt."

      On the contrary, he made much of his fortune by winning fat government contracts funded by deficit spending.

      Yeah, but his responsibility was to EDS, not to the federal government or the nation's budget. Had he been elected, that would have been his priority.

      Like what Trump said, "I buy politicians, and then get them to do what I want".

  • Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Tuesday July 09, 2019 @03:21PM (#58897726)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • by NoNonAlphaCharsHere ( 2201864 ) on Tuesday July 09, 2019 @04:40PM (#58898172)
      If you'll recall, Clinton (the guy who won that election) left office with a budget surplus, which Bush and the Republican congress promptly gave away to their oil and arms-trader buddies.
      • Comment removed based on user account deletion
      • If you'll recall, Clinton (the guy who won that election) left office with a budget surplus, which Bush and the Republican congress promptly gave away to their oil and arms-trader buddies.

        Actually it was the Republican Congress that forced economic moderation upon Clinton and the Democrats. The Clintons' were so inept in their first two years the country put the Republicans back in charge of the House or Representatives, and the money, for the first time in several decades during his first midterm. This derailed his initiatives, it forced him to deal with the republicans. As a result Clinton moved politically towards the right.

        Things went to crap under Bush for two reasons. (1). The Clint

      • False. This is propaganda that is repeated often, but during no year of the Clinton presidency did the national debt decrease, nor did the deficit fall to zero.

        http://www.craigsteiner.us/art... [craigsteiner.us]

      • by hawk ( 1151 )

        That surplus wasn't from his policies, but because after campaigning against the "Contract With America" as "reckless," he and the house competed on the contract's terms.

        Roughly the sequence was a house budget proposal to balance the budget in seven years, Clinton countering with "I see your seven and raise you to six", and the house countering at 5. (I may be off by a year; it's been a while).

        As events turned, the economic boom related to the improved environment, both boosted tax revenue and sent

    • I remember he used charts and graphs to make his talking points on TV. I think he used to maintain a website with them for years after his candidacy. Although he made fun of Bill Clinton for being a Rhodes Scholar, he was quite the nerd himself.

      Don't forget the EDS cat herding commercial. [youtube.com]
    • He was a big proponent of the War on Drugs.

    • Actually, his position on 'Gays in the military' was similar to the GOP position: "Don't ask, don't tell". Bill Clinton added the "Don't investigate" to it.

      I agree w/ you on the rest of what you wrote. He was the Trump of 1992, but w/o the determination to stick to it, and w/o the strategy of hijacking one of the 2 parties, instead of running as an independent. Although to be fair to him on the latter point, there's no way he could have won a GOP primary. A Dem one, maybe

  • by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Tuesday July 09, 2019 @03:25PM (#58897746)
    Imagine my surprise when I found out he made his fortune cashing welfare checks (well, technically processing EBT, but close enough). Gave me a good lesson in media manipulation. Years later I learned what a "narrative" was in politics and how to watch out for them.
  • by PopeRatzo ( 965947 ) on Tuesday July 09, 2019 @03:27PM (#58897756) Journal

    Those were the days, when the worst thing a crazy candidate wanted to do was reduce the deficit.

    • Tuesday afternoon, a drunk and disheveled Rip Thorn was found sitting in the champagne fountain in heaven, holding a hammer.
      When asked what is he doing there he replied "Isn't this my house?" [wikipedia.org]

  • by bobbied ( 2522392 ) on Tuesday July 09, 2019 @03:29PM (#58897776)

    Where Ross had his charm, I still cannot forget that he is likely responsible for the election of WJ Clinton and all the history related to that. No Monica, no impeachment, no Hillary...No Newt Gingrich even..

    Was it worth it? I don't think so... But who knows what would have happened with a second term of George Bush Sr...

    Well, Ross has had a lasting impact on this country, even though he never won. For a clear talking guy in a crew cut from Texas, he had a massive impact. Like him or not, One thing is sure, there will only ever be one Ross Perot.

    • by phantomfive ( 622387 ) on Tuesday July 09, 2019 @03:42PM (#58897848) Journal
      It's worth mentioning that the people who won the election instead of him ended up following his campaign promises and balanced the budget.
      • It's worth mentioning that the people who won the election instead of him ended up following his campaign promises and balanced the budget.

        Well, Bill Clinton was dragged into it kicking and screaming by Newt Gingrich's congress, when Dick Morris advised him to do that, and guarantee himself a second term

        • I witnessed as well. Newt dragged the Democrats, as they were kicking and screaming, to a balanced budget.

          It was all part of the Republicans "Contract with America" -- which promised to bring many specific things to a vote -- it won them both the House and the Senate -- and then they did bring each and every one of those things to a vote

          All this, while the narrative machine was attacking them endlessly.

          The Democrats have all the advantages, but still get it handed to them regularly, because their word
    • Where Ross had his charm, I still cannot forget that he is likely responsible for the election of WJ Clinton and all the history related to that.

      That argument is pretty clearly baloney. HBush did not "own" the Perot voters, and that is that kind of arrogance that was driving many of those voters away from the polls. If Ross did not run, both Bill and George's numbers would have both gone up, and in this scenario the gap does not necessarily even shrink.

      Look at the 1988, 1992, 1996 results side by side. They are strongly suggestive that half the Perot voters were genuinely brought to the polls by the appeal of Perot himself. The was no way that t

      • Clearly, Ross aligned with the republican voters better than the democrat ones so it's pretty objective to say he hurt Bush more than Clinton. You can argue how the actual vote would have gone w/o Perot but it's pretty obvious how this would have turned out.

        Clinton got 43% of the popular vote, Bush got 37% and Ross got over 18%. If 70% of Perot votes where from republicans who would have voted for Bush, that would have put Bush at 50% and Clinton at 48% which is hard to imagine would be overturned by the

    • The problem here was Perot dropping out of the race. Once he did, his credibility was gone. Had he stayed in, he'd probably have won, and then all the other things you point out wouldn't have happened. Newt still would have, since the Dem congress was the root cause of tax and spend

    • Clinton would have won the '92 election with or without Perot in the race. The world would be a much better place if Perot had won - two party duopoly seriously damaged, no NAFTA...but he didn't "give" the election to Clinton.

      https://www.salon.com/2011/04/... [salon.com]

  • A unique character (Score:5, Interesting)

    by dsgrntlxmply ( 610492 ) on Tuesday July 09, 2019 @04:19PM (#58898078)

    My parents were 2-3 years older than Perot, and went to school with him in Texarkana. His stature and voice did not bring him "most likely to succeed" recognition at that age. If my parents were still alive to see the Dallas Morning News article, they would likely have nodded, wept, and laughed at the photo of him with the hand-me-down bicycle and Texarkana Gazette newspaper bags, because that was exactly how they described him to me.

    He and my dad had partially in common the formative experiences of Texarkana humble means, United States Navy service (my dad: enlisted in WW2, ship sunk in the Okinawa campaign), and IBM sales. Some of the peculiar rigidities (e.g. suit-and-tie dress code) reported for EDS in the 60s-70s, came from the IBM sales heritage.

    I am inclined to believe reports that the origin of EDS was in his salesman's eye for opportunity, seeing computer time going unused at one or another IBM customer installation, where that excess time could have been sold to some other organization. By extension, form an organization to lease 5 computers, and sell their capacity and supporting staff services to 8 customers (5 and 8 are made up numbers here).

    My parents could agree on little else, apart from breaking from lifelong Republican affiliation, to work for Perot's political campaign.

    I never met him, but the bicycle picture in the Dallas Morning News article, alongside my parents' stories, made me feel as if I had.

  • by seoras ( 147590 ) on Tuesday July 09, 2019 @04:44PM (#58898202)

    I'll never forget the bumper sticker I saw while he was running for President:
    "How are you voting? Republican, Democrat or Ferengi?"

  • Iran... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by sconeu ( 64226 ) on Tuesday July 09, 2019 @04:52PM (#58898250) Homepage Journal

    Don't forget the whole "Rescuing EDS employees trapped in Iran after the revolution" thing.

    Ken Follett later wrote "On Wings of Eagles" about it.

  • Ross Perot, founder of Perot Systems, dead. Wow! Farewell old boss, RIP.

The unfacts, did we have them, are too imprecisely few to warrant our certitude.

Working...