Recently the use of business propaganda in the main stream media (MSM) has brought us the oft repeated phrase "toxic asset".
The dictionary defines an asset as:
as⋅set –noun(Online Dictionary, emphasis added). The definition of "toxic" is:
1. a useful and desirable thing or quality ...
2. a single item of ownership having exchange value.
3. assets, ... items of ownership convertible into cash ...
Investopedia Commentary ... Assets are bought to increase the value of a firm or benefit the firm's operations ... something that can generate cash flow ...
tox⋅ic –adjective(Online Dictionary, emphasis added). The news media promulgate the dichotomy "toxic asset" so as to deceive the public into believing junk is not junk, and that a toxic product has value.
1. of, pertaining to, affected with, or caused by a toxin or poison: a toxic condition.
2. acting as or having the effect of a poison; poisonous: a toxic drug.
3. a toxic chemical or other substance.
They do this hoping we won't go ballistic when the government wants to use our taxpayer dollars to pay for junk.
One professor calls this doublespeak, and has written a book "Why No One Knows What Anyone Is Saying Anymore". He points out:
With doublespeak, banks don't have "bad loans" or "bad debts"; they have "nonperforming assets" or "nonperforming credits" which are "rolled over" or "rescheduled." Corporations never lose money; they just experience "negative cash flow," "deficit enhancement," "net profit revenue deficiencies," or "negative contributions to profits."(William Lutz, Rutgers University). What is forgotten is that this propaganda is toxic and those who use it are doomed to eventually become deceived by it.