The Invisible Hand of the Market....Again

[TaraJo]

Evil capitalist corporations polluting the water, air and food, killing millions??!! Oh my! There's no need to fear! Government regulation Underdog is here!!!

Lemme see if I understand your perspective on this.

Corporations kill millions in an industrial accident? Meh. That's not really a problem. What can we do to stop it?

Terrorists kill four people when attacking an embassy? We are going to dedicate every talking point we can to this and never, ever forget about how much we lost!

Sound about right?

For the record, I don't think caitalism is inherently evil, but I sure don't think it's inherently good. It's neutral and it does whatever gets it money. If capitalist systems can get more money doing good things, they'll do good things. But if they can get more money doing bad, they're going to do bad. When you don't hold them accountable for their actions and you don't regulate them to prevent bad behavior, yes, you're creating an environment where bad behavior makes them more money.

[Mister Agenda]

Corporations can't hire assissins to kill individuals. Instead, they can polute the water and air and our food, killing millions. Why are we so well protected from the former but not the latter?

Yes, the basic job of the government does need to be protecting the people, but one of the primary forces we need to be protected from are corporations. So far, the government hasn't been doing the best job there. I think the first thing we need to do is wake up and realize that the way they hurt us is far different from how, say, your neighbor or a car jacker or a rapist will hurt someone and that the way you protect from those hurts is going to be government regulations. I mean, let's be real: you aren't going to let a pedophile influence the law as it relates to child sex crimes; so why do we let corporations have so much influence on the regulations intended to curb their bad behavior?

Because corporations finance re-election campaigns. It's a pernicious effect of elections being popularity contests. Given the Citizens United decision, we have something of a dilemma when it comes to fixing that. How do we constrain the political power of corporations without un-Constitutionally constraining the political power of the people who form the coporation? A Constitutional amendment? Who is going to pass that finely-crafted legislation in a country where re-election campaigns are largely financed by corporations?

It might be easier to erode corporate power indirectly by increasing constraints on what our congress critters can do for their benefactors. Our government has to treat all religions the same, not favoring one nor oppressing another, and most people recognize that this is in the best interest of all concerned. Much of our economic policy is based on incentivizing this enterprise and hamstringing this other one. From the point of view of business-owners, influencing government is a self-defense measure: if they don't do it, the other guy will. MS was hardly involved in lobbying at all before its competitors influenced the government to break it up. Now they won't be outspent.

I'm just spitballing, I don't pretend to have a definitive answer. I just recognize that we have a complex problem without simple solutions that needs to be addressed...but it may only be possible to do it in small bites.

[TaraJo]

Because corporations finance re-election campaigns. It's a pernicious effect of elections being popularity contests. Given the Citizens United decision, we have something of a dilemma when it comes to fixing that. How do we constrain the political power of corporations without un-Constitutionally constraining the political power of the people who form the coporation? A Constitutional amendment? Who is going to pass that finely-crafted legislation in a country where re-election campaigns are largely financed by corporations?

It might be easier to erode corporate power indirectly by increasing constraints on what our congress critters can do for their benefactors. Our government has to treat all religions the same, not favoring one nor oppressing another, and most people recognize that this is in the best interest of all concerned. Much of our economic policy is based on incentivizing this enterprise and hamstringing this other one. From the point of view of business-owners, influencing government is a self-defense measure: if they don't do it, the other guy will. MS was hardly involved in lobbying at all before its competitors influenced the government to break it up. Now they won't be outspent.

I'm just spitballing, I don't pretend to have a definitive answer. I just recognize that we have a complex problem without simple solutions that needs to be addressed...but it may only be possible to do it in small bites.

Oh, I fully agree. And something is going to be done about it, one way or the other. I mean, a couple of years ago, Occupy Wall Street came along and tried to protest the alliance between government and big money, but big money used their control of the media to destroy Occupy and hide or distort their message. Unless things change, there are going to be more and more protests and they aren't going to stay non-violent.

I mean, as much as you hear the right talk about how much they hate communism and the USSR, you'd think they'd pay attention to the conditions that made the Russian revolution happen. The people with money and power were abusing said power so much that the people refused to tolerate it. How much more will they be able to abuse their power here in the US?

[Mister Agenda]

Good points. Maybe a more focused and organized version of Occupy is needed?

[A Theist]

Evil capitalist corporations polluting the water, air and food, killing millions??!! Oh my! There's no need to fear! Government regulation Underdog is here!!!

Terrorists kill four people when attacking an embassy? We are going to dedicate every talking point we can to this and never, ever forget about how much we lost!

ummm...I think terrorists have killed a tad more than just four people at our embassy in other terrorist targeted attacks over the years and across the globe...

911, 2001...over 2,000 people killed in the Twin Towers attack alone.

[TaraJo]

ummm...I think terrorists have killed a tad more than just four people at our embassy in other terrorist targeted attacks over the years and across the globe...

Agreed, terrorism has killed a lot of people and should be taken seriously. But terrorism in general hasn't been the talking point from Faux News. With them, it's all Ben Ghazi, all the time. I'm starting to think we should start a Faux News drinking game where you take a drink every time they say Ben Ghazi on the air; you'll be wasted in the first half hour.

---

Good points. Maybe a more focused and organized version of Occupy is needed?

Probably would have helped. Also would have helped if so many of the people at Occupy weren't hipsters who were specifically rejecting everything mainstream. If you want to stay an outsider, you don't get to complain when people don't listen to you.

[A Theist]

ummm...I think terrorists have killed a tad more than just four people at our embassy in other terrorist targeted attacks over the years and across the globe...

Agreed, terrorism has killed a lot of people and should be taken seriously. But terrorism in general hasn't been the talking point from Faux News. With them, it's all Ben Ghazi, all the time. I'm starting to think we should start a Faux News drinking game where you take a drink every time they say Ben Ghazi on the air; you'll be wasted in the first half hour.

---

Good points. Maybe a more focused and organized version of Occupy is needed?

Probably would have helped. Also would have helped if so many of the people at Occupy weren't hipsters who were specifically rejecting everything mainstream. If you want to stay an outsider, you don't get to complain when people don't listen to you.

Hey, maybe we can play that same drinking game every time MSLSD News mentions either Chris Christy or some other of their anti Republican rants.

[Tiberius]

Corporations can't hire assissins to kill individuals. Instead, they can polute the water and air and our food, killing millions. Why are we so well protected from the former but not the latter?

We're not well protected from the latter because the corporations are in bed with the government.

I've said it before, we agree on this point. If corporations kill people, they should pay the price, in both fines and jail time for the people in those corporations who were ultimately responsible.

A free market wouldn't prevent that. The current market does. If the government were required by law not to interfere with the market, and vice versa, then they have more reason to pursue lawsuits and criminal charges against companies that break laws.

[Ryantology]

A free market wouldn't prevent that. The current market does. If the government were required by law not to interfere with the market, and vice versa, then they have more reason to pursue lawsuits and criminal charges against companies that break laws.

Help me understand this: any attempt by the government to punish a business that misbehaves is just much, if not actually more, of an example of government interfering with business, according to this logic. You can bet your ass that the legal defense would raise this point, and would they be wrong?

A government without the power to regulate business activity has no grounds on which to punish them for breaking laws. What is a law but a regulatory instrument?