The Supreme Court Corporation of America

[Aetius Romulous]

Banks: Corporate Bundles of Dismal Joy - and Mislaid Rage

"So you have a toxic mix of 1) Antiquated and dysfunctional state law, 2) Exponentially growing modern, sophisticated, technologically advanced international corporations and 3) a seething pile of humans on whom both depend in a weird, symbiotic mashup - humans that are fast losing a grip on the other two. Holding it altogether is nothing but a thin blind belief in a series of economic and political dogmas that began to rust years ago - and which give the wheel its creaky perpetual motion. Good times.


Flaying bankers alive accomplishes nothing, and punishes humans who are guilty of little more than playing by the rules exceptionally well. Regulating any commercial enterprise within a wobbly system is like having tea with a hungry lion; Band-Aids for a kid with razor blades. Banks are no different and as corporations, they simply cannot help themselves. Whatever it is they do in those towers of gold and ivory, banks are auto programmed by law and fiduciary duty to do what they were designed to do - and nothing more."

[Rajiv]

Re: The Supreme Court Corporation of America

Glad to have you on board Aetius

Is the above description of you correct?

Aetius Romulous; Historian, Economist, Accountant, Writer, and blood sucking CEO. Born at the wrong end of the Baby Boom Generation - too late to enjoy the ride, too early to have missed it, and stuck in the middle with the mess. Aetius writes and blogs from his frozen perch atop the earth in Canada, spending the useful capital of a life not finished making sandwiches and fomenting revolution. It's a living.

I hope you take part in some of our discussions

[Rajiv]

Re: The Supreme Court Corporation of America

Excellent article(s) by the way!

[audrey_girl]

Re: The Supreme Court Corporation of America

Second that!!!

[Aetius Romulous]

Re: The Supreme Court Corporation of America

Thanks Rajiv.

Pretty much me ... except for all the David Copperfield type crap which would embarrass family friends etc.

I found the site thanks to a tip from a friend when you posted another of my essays, "The Coming Fury of an Angry America"

Really enjoyed the feedback and comments. Really good group here. Glad I found it.

[Rajiv]

Re: The Supreme Court Corporation of America

You might also want to comment in this thread here - FUNDAMENTAL QUESTION Re: Why Scott Brown Won -- Erik Jansen

[Serge_Tomiko]

Re: The Supreme Court Corporation of America

Banks: Corporate Bundles of Dismal Joy - and Mislaid Rage

"So you have a toxic mix of 1) Antiquated and dysfunctional state law, 2) Exponentially growing modern, sophisticated, technologically advanced international corporations and 3) a seething pile of humans on whom both depend in a weird, symbiotic mashup - humans that are fast losing a grip on the other two. Holding it altogether is nothing but a thin blind belief in a series of economic and political dogmas that began to rust years ago - and which give the wheel its creaky perpetual motion. Good times.


Flaying bankers alive accomplishes nothing, and punishes humans who are guilty of little more than playing by the rules exceptionally well. Regulating any commercial enterprise within a wobbly system is like having tea with a hungry lion; Band-Aids for a kid with razor blades. Banks are no different and as corporations, they simply cannot help themselves. Whatever it is they do in those towers of gold and ivory, banks are auto programmed by law and fiduciary duty to do what they were designed to do - and nothing more."

An excellent, well-written article. Quality prose and brevity are often sorely missed in persuasive writings on the dismal science.

[c1ue]

Re: The Supreme Court Corporation of America

Our mislaid rage against these corporate bundles of dismal joy will prevent us from ever taming the mother of so many of our social problems.

As I've noted before, the banks are acting within their charter - i.e. making money any way they can. The real betrayal, as you correctly noted, is the in the political sector where corporate influence has clearly overridden fiduciary duty.

But it doesn't absolve the banks from a share of the anger.

Just because an attack dog bit me doesn't mean I only should be angry at the dog's owner/trainer.

The dog may not know better, but the banker could and should.

If bankers choose to hide behind semantics and hagiology rather than their heritage in the fellowship of human beings, so too then they should not be surprise when they are not treated as fellow human beings.

[sunskyfan]

Re: The Supreme Court Corporation of America

This isn't hard folks. This is a fight between corporations and the government over how money is CREATED.

[thriftyandboringinohio]

Re: The Supreme Court Corporation of America

This isn't hard folks. This is a fight between corporations and the government over how money is CREATED.

You are correct but incomplete.
Within the arena of finance, money creation is certainly one of the core issues.

However, all of US finance exists wholly within the larger arena of the basic rule of law and civil society, and is greatly affected by these. Some of the previous comments address that larger, non-financial topic. Limits on corporate influence are one of the core issues for both society and finance. If bank corps get whatever they want, we'll never change the way they benefit from money creation.

[oddlots]

Re: The Supreme Court Corporation of America

Errrr, anyone know whether those barricades were needed at Goldman Sach's headquarters yesterday?

I would doubt it.

In other words, I think calling the anger against Bankers mislaid is itself kind of boxing shadows.

You say, "Corporations have earned for themselves a rather tainted reputation in most cultures, cultures that embrace them and their "progress" while railing at the people who do so well inside them."

There's much here that I agree with. I get frustrated with people who are outraged by the apparent "greed" involved in the boom and bust, as if that word imparted some insight into the question of "what went wrong" (or could explain why the person responsible for ensuring the outraged critic's pension get's paid out is somehow "greedy," but in a good way.) I get similarly frustrated with unfocussed or incoherent critics of "corporations" that, again, can unthinkingly accept the positive effects of the modern corporation without feeling a need to explain the apparent contradiction. (Errr... is that a Wal Mart bag under your sink and an ipod in your kid's ear?)

I even have a good deal of sympathy when "bankers" occasionally blurt out the truth of their predicament: when, say, John Mack says "we can't control ourselves"; or another - can't recall who - says "while the music plays, we have to keep dancing." They are, ultimately, lashed to the mast of finance capitalism much as we are trapped in steerage: the logic of the corporation's pursuit of profit is unrelenting and pitiless to all as you point out.

But I lose that sympathy pretty quickly when these "bankers" trot out lame or insulting analysis in front of their democratic over-seers (cough). These people, their organisations, and their former colleagues in senior government posts lobbied hard for de-regulated finance. I am more than willing to give credit where credit is due: it was their boom... and now it's their bust. Who-coulda-node doesn't cut it.

In other words, I think the flaw in your argument is that banks are corporations but special ones. You cannot have a "run" on an industrial enterprise, but you can on a bank. Thus we have central banks (that was why, wasn't it? ) because there's a public utility function to credit which makes banks a very special case.

In this context confusing the anger at bankers, their lobbyists, defenders and apologists with a vague and confused anti-corporation argument is not helpful to the debate IMO. Especially if it is mislabeled as jealousy, i.e. "railing at the people who do so well inside them."

Welcome to the site.

[Aetius Romulous]

Re: The Supreme Court Corporation of America

Thanks so much for the welcome and the comments.

There is no denying it, it does appear a human trait to hate bankers. Probably some kind of inbred jealousy we won't admit too LOL.

Regardless, it is curious to me that there has never been any discussion about the corporate form itself. When the TV don't work, check if it's plugged in first. Just find that odd.

I sent this essay to Alan Grayson - the current Dem attack dog. I have never done that before. He is a rare economist in congress so maybe he may consider the basic law of the thing.

The other is accounting. How on earth can you get popular support for dull accounting? But that's where the real fix lies I believe.

[thriftyandboringinohio]

Re: The Supreme Court Corporation of America

In other words, I think the flaw in your argument is that banks are corporations but special ones. You cannot have a "run" on an industrial enterprise, but you can on a bank. Thus we have central banks (that was why, wasn't it? ) because there's a public utility function to credit which makes banks a very special case.

Your point is spot-on and argues for regulation. Banks can be dangerous, spreading wreck and ruin to uninvolved bystanders far and wide.

That's really not a new or unusual thing. Some industries are naturally dangerous to society in a physical way, like explosives plants. Society puts strong regulations on them to avoid widespread death and destruction. Class 1 Division 1 explosion-proof electrical systems; blow-out panels in buildings; clear limits on the total amount of explosive allowed on site.....These things are onerous and expensive to the business owners, but tough luck. If you want to put your factory in my community, you must comply.

Perhaps financial institutions should be looked at this way (again).

[Rajiv]

Re: The Supreme Court Corporation of America

Regardless, it is curious to me that there has never been any discussion about the corporate form itself. When the TV don't work, check if it's plugged in first. Just find that odd.

You might find some useful items in the links below

Poclad articles

Ending Corporate Governance

and also this thread I posted a couple of years ago

CorpOrNation

[Aetius Romulous]

Re: The Supreme Court Corporation of America

Very Kool..thank you!