Coin Of The Realm
Thomas Dawson
November 14, 2005
Since World War II our political entanglements with the rest of the world have been increasingly, rightly or wrongly, intended to secure or engender the business interests of our corporations. Suddenly our international companies are enamored with the opportunities to move labor-intensive segments of their business to foreign lands. They now view the United States as only a temporary cash cow; a mature market to be used until faster growing markets can be developed elsewhere. At the same time, the interests of these corporations, who indirectly control our domestic economy, are often at odds with the welfare of our middle class. Corporate America has bought and paid for the influence of our politicians and since the end of the “cold war” they have been systematically reducing their liabilities and responsibilities with respect to the people that work for them in the quest for greater profits.
The primary and driving force of corporations is profit and this is as it should be. These corporations make up the engine of the American economy. However, the continued displacement of middle class jobs, which are flowing out of the country at alarming rates, and the eroding standard of living, are the result of this same kind of thinking, and is encouraged by our present political structure. But, lest we forget, these United States were not intended as a land “of the corporation, by the corporation and for the corporation”.
The national debt, trade deficits, middle class wage erosion, immigration problems, health care costs, and a plethora of other national problems are all related to the political reality of “American style free trade” expanding throughout the world in the last quarter century. We are told that these are normal, sequential economic changes taking place within our political system. Not so. The primary causation of most of these changes is the direct result of political pandering to corporate interests by our elected officials. Legislation should have some consideration of the “people” mentioned by our founding fathers.
The standard of living for the middle class in this country has not improved in the last quarter century. In fact, it has declined for the vast majority of Americans. Real wages have fallen more than 6%. Yet the GNP really is up! Because our (domestic?) companies are really making record profits! Our corporations are awash in money. At the same time the country is currently acquiring nearly THREE BILLION dollars of new debt through the trade deficit every day! Consider the National Debt. Disgraceful, and dangerous! A lot of other things are also going on here. This is a direct result of political pandering for corporate money. Politics is a very lucrative “profession”. (Hardly anyone is doing this as a public service)
The truth is that politicians cannot survive without hoards of money. Ask anyone who has ever run for office how much it costs. Certainly the man on the street cannot support them. So where do they get it? Who has it? Only large corporations can make large contributions regularly over long periods of time. Most of it is given to the party’s themselves so they can keep members in line through the use of the money spigot.
Not so long ago, this seemed like a reasonably good idea. Most of the large companies were entirely domestic and employed many people. The import/export companies were either bringing money into the country or buying products not available here. Many companies took on an international flavor while we were rebuilding Europe and Japan after WWII with their captive markets. Large amounts of money were acquired by American companies, along with a great deal of knowledge about other countries’ economies and politics. Great sums of money were spent on R&D and any new technology from around the world was developed quickly by the large US companies. All this employment was one of the major factors in building the American middle class. “What’s good for General Motors is good for the Country” seemed to be a pretty accurate phrase if not an accurate quote. A direct connection between domestic GNP and the domestic standard of living was just assumed to be the natural condition. Unfortunately, in a few short years, this assumption would be ruptured.
In the middle 50’s and 60’s we began to see some interesting changes. We began to increase the imports of foreign goods, and some of our companies began to build plants in foreign countries and even exported products back home. Volkswagen began to sell cars over here. We could now buy an English Ford. This was good business for everyone. Business around the world was heating up. Everyone seemed to understand the rules and we all did well. The Japanese suddenly burst on the scene. By the end of the 70’s and into the 80’s their quality cars were the best buy for the money. They had the best quality and Americans bought them. American car companies had manipulated the auto market for years for their own benefit and now the Japanese were encroaching on their very survival. Fortunately, Reagan was made to understand that we could not just watch such a large section of the middle class workforce go down the drain. He effectively limited the number of Japanese imports. When the Japanese asked to build automobiles over here and employ Americans, he invited them in. It was not the corporation he was protecting, it was the middle class American workforce. (This ridiculous, Pro-American concern for the citizen did not go unnoticed by our growing international corporations and was soon to be changed.) The American manufacturers quickly improved the quality of their products and regained much of their reputation. Again, business was good for everybody.
Many corporations, especially those with international interests became extremely powerful as they did more business than many countries. It is only natural that they would want to extend their influence. For corporations this large, there is only one place of effective influence and that is the politician, domestic and foreign.
As large corporations are always looking for a profit advantage, they could hardly help noticing the disparity in wages between the developed countries and the under-developed ones. Japan has no natural resources and cannot compete with countries that do. They have to import, add value, and then export to make a profit. Business was so good that as their standard of living rose and they were over-employed, they “outsourced” the labor and for a few years had an enviable economy (read corporate profits). (Remember Japan bashing?) Other international companies soon began to follow when the “cold war” came to a close. This kind of business was obviously not within the range of Reagan’s pro-American thinking, but who cared? Corporations were making plenty of money and political contributions were rolling in! By the end of the 90’s the world economy had so heated up that politicians easily convinced us that outsourcing cheap labor would not hurt the developed countries and that it would be of great benefit to the under-developed ones if only work rules, environmental considerations, and other regulations would be removed. (How benevolent they had become!) Besides, their corporate benefactors could make a lot of money. We were having a domestic technology boom not unlike the automotive boom of the twenties. The slow-down (recession) of the early 90’s seemed like a blip in an ever-growing world economic boom. To really make the corporations happy, the government got into the act with a bill to open so-called “free trade zones”. And thus, NAFTA was born. This bill was sold as raising the Mexican standard of living and creating thousands of American jobs. A win, win bill! No one seriously believed American jobs would be created! In just a few short years this labor arbitrage has reduced the average wage in Mexico to about half of what it was before NAFTA. Our corporations were doing very well, because now they had something just as good or perhaps better than a free trade zone. They arranged another form of arbitrage, outsourcing their labor to Asian countries. Why pay 50 cents an hour to a Mexican when the Asians will work for 25 cents? The politicians even found ways to pay their corporate benefactors to outsource, by offering them tax breaks for doing it! No one can compete with Corporate America! Certainly the American citizen can’t!
Big farm Corporations have been trying to control congress since the 1930’s. They have learned well and now other large corporations emulate them. All kinds of moneys are spent by the farm lobbies on strong incumbent congressmen and their families to “educate them” on the reasons for, and the importance of farm subsidies and other corporate interests. Along with his family and personal ‘educational’ benefits, the incumbent congressman will often get considerable moneys as contributions to his election campaign. Even larger contributions are made to his party (both parties for control purposes); of which his share will trickle down to him from a number of sources as long as he does not depart from the party interests (read corporate interests). It’s not hard to get a Congressman from Iowa to support a farm subsidy bill. It’s a little harder to get a Delaware or Massachusetts Congressman to support it. One might think that this would take a bit of doing, as many times the congressman must support those things that are a direct detriment to his voting constituents. Most of the time however, his opponent will not even challenge him on these highly financed issues because his own funds from the party are controlled at a higher level. This system works so well that even pharmaceutical companies now spend rafts of money to “educate” doctors and their families at various resorts around the country. Currently, the pharmaceuticals are even “donating” to the FDA (for our benefit, of course). Understand that politicians can and do pass laws to benefit themselves, this is all perfectly legal
At this point in time, the voter has been effectively disenfranchised. It is not that he does not have a choice; it is only that there is no choice. Whoever runs for office is beholden to the corporations for the money that is a necessary prerequisite to attain and retain the office. This, in effect, is the new democratic “one party” or “corporate party” system. The politician and his family live in a world filled with both perks and promise. If he cooperates and is in office for any considerable length of time, he is practically guaranteed a plum lifetime job consulting or lobbying for these same companies and thus greasing the wheels of other politicians. (Responsible companies always reward their good soldiers.)
The heavy hand of corporate influence on the members of congress is not a new problem. It has been a festering problem since the earliest days of our country. When the great majority of citizens were farmers, it didn’t seem that lobbyists could do much harm. As corporate America grew and farming became more efficient, the trend was for more Americans to leave the farms and become employees of these new corporations.
In the last part of the nineteenth century, thinking people were becoming concerned that the interests of Corporate America and the country as a whole were not of a like nature. There was much concern that corporate money was controlling the outcome of most of the laws in this country, and something should be done to curb this influence. In his annual message to the congress in 1907, President Theodore Roosevelt stated “The need for collecting large campaign funds would vanish if Congress provided an appropriation for the proper and legitimate expenses of each of the great national parties, an appropriation ample enough to meet the necessity for thorough organization and machinery, which requires a great expenditure of money. Then the stipulation should be made that no party receiving campaign funds from the Treasury should accept more than a fixed amount from any individual subscriber or donor, and the necessary publicity for receipts and expenditures could without difficulty be provided.” This is an idea that is still mentioned from time to time.
Many, if not most of the legislation that is enacted helps one group of people at the expense of another. Such is the nature of laws. Laws against cartels and monopolies in favor of fairness to the other corporations and indeed the citizens are necessary and good for the health of our country, but only if the government chooses to enforce them. Laws passed against the middle class Americans in favor of powerful corporations are not good for the health of our country. In theory, the elected officials are supposed to represent the voting public, not the corporate contributors. Passing legislation that will erode the middle class for the benefit of corporate profits is a crime against the citizenry.
You cannot blame a rat as a thief if you allow it to steal grain, nor blame a cat as a murderer if you allow it to kill rats. That is the very nature of these animals. You cannot blame corporations if you allow them to buy politicians. This is indeed the very nature of this animal. To paraphrase Milton Friedman, “Corporate executives, provided they stay within the law, have no responsibilities in their business activities other than to make as much money for their stockholders as possible.” That is why we need laws and regulations, to determine exactly what is to be allowed. You can and should blame politicians for selling out their trust of the people. No longer does anyone except perhaps some relatives and political associates hold politicians in high regard. That is why we need laws and regulations, to determine exactly what is to be allowed and what is not. You can and should blame corrupt politicians for selling out their trust of the people. They are committing overt crimes against the voters of these United States. Politics and Crime have become two faces of the same coin. Unfortunately, in the United States it has become coin of the realm.
The primary and driving force of corporations is profit and this is as it should be. These corporations make up the engine of the American economy. However, the continued displacement of middle class jobs, which are flowing out of the country at alarming rates, and the eroding standard of living, are the result of this same kind of thinking, and is encouraged by our present political structure. But, lest we forget, these United States were not intended as a land “of the corporation, by the corporation and for the corporation”.
The national debt, trade deficits, middle class wage erosion, immigration problems, health care costs, and a plethora of other national problems are all related to the political reality of “American style free trade” expanding throughout the world in the last quarter century. We are told that these are normal, sequential economic changes taking place within our political system. Not so. The primary causation of most of these changes is the direct result of political pandering to corporate interests by our elected officials. Legislation should have some consideration of the “people” mentioned by our founding fathers.
The standard of living for the middle class in this country has not improved in the last quarter century. In fact, it has declined for the vast majority of Americans. Real wages have fallen more than 6%. Yet the GNP really is up! Because our (domestic?) companies are really making record profits! Our corporations are awash in money. At the same time the country is currently acquiring nearly THREE BILLION dollars of new debt through the trade deficit every day! Consider the National Debt. Disgraceful, and dangerous! A lot of other things are also going on here. This is a direct result of political pandering for corporate money. Politics is a very lucrative “profession”. (Hardly anyone is doing this as a public service)
The truth is that politicians cannot survive without hoards of money. Ask anyone who has ever run for office how much it costs. Certainly the man on the street cannot support them. So where do they get it? Who has it? Only large corporations can make large contributions regularly over long periods of time. Most of it is given to the party’s themselves so they can keep members in line through the use of the money spigot.
Not so long ago, this seemed like a reasonably good idea. Most of the large companies were entirely domestic and employed many people. The import/export companies were either bringing money into the country or buying products not available here. Many companies took on an international flavor while we were rebuilding Europe and Japan after WWII with their captive markets. Large amounts of money were acquired by American companies, along with a great deal of knowledge about other countries’ economies and politics. Great sums of money were spent on R&D and any new technology from around the world was developed quickly by the large US companies. All this employment was one of the major factors in building the American middle class. “What’s good for General Motors is good for the Country” seemed to be a pretty accurate phrase if not an accurate quote. A direct connection between domestic GNP and the domestic standard of living was just assumed to be the natural condition. Unfortunately, in a few short years, this assumption would be ruptured.
In the middle 50’s and 60’s we began to see some interesting changes. We began to increase the imports of foreign goods, and some of our companies began to build plants in foreign countries and even exported products back home. Volkswagen began to sell cars over here. We could now buy an English Ford. This was good business for everyone. Business around the world was heating up. Everyone seemed to understand the rules and we all did well. The Japanese suddenly burst on the scene. By the end of the 70’s and into the 80’s their quality cars were the best buy for the money. They had the best quality and Americans bought them. American car companies had manipulated the auto market for years for their own benefit and now the Japanese were encroaching on their very survival. Fortunately, Reagan was made to understand that we could not just watch such a large section of the middle class workforce go down the drain. He effectively limited the number of Japanese imports. When the Japanese asked to build automobiles over here and employ Americans, he invited them in. It was not the corporation he was protecting, it was the middle class American workforce. (This ridiculous, Pro-American concern for the citizen did not go unnoticed by our growing international corporations and was soon to be changed.) The American manufacturers quickly improved the quality of their products and regained much of their reputation. Again, business was good for everybody.
Many corporations, especially those with international interests became extremely powerful as they did more business than many countries. It is only natural that they would want to extend their influence. For corporations this large, there is only one place of effective influence and that is the politician, domestic and foreign.
As large corporations are always looking for a profit advantage, they could hardly help noticing the disparity in wages between the developed countries and the under-developed ones. Japan has no natural resources and cannot compete with countries that do. They have to import, add value, and then export to make a profit. Business was so good that as their standard of living rose and they were over-employed, they “outsourced” the labor and for a few years had an enviable economy (read corporate profits). (Remember Japan bashing?) Other international companies soon began to follow when the “cold war” came to a close. This kind of business was obviously not within the range of Reagan’s pro-American thinking, but who cared? Corporations were making plenty of money and political contributions were rolling in! By the end of the 90’s the world economy had so heated up that politicians easily convinced us that outsourcing cheap labor would not hurt the developed countries and that it would be of great benefit to the under-developed ones if only work rules, environmental considerations, and other regulations would be removed. (How benevolent they had become!) Besides, their corporate benefactors could make a lot of money. We were having a domestic technology boom not unlike the automotive boom of the twenties. The slow-down (recession) of the early 90’s seemed like a blip in an ever-growing world economic boom. To really make the corporations happy, the government got into the act with a bill to open so-called “free trade zones”. And thus, NAFTA was born. This bill was sold as raising the Mexican standard of living and creating thousands of American jobs. A win, win bill! No one seriously believed American jobs would be created! In just a few short years this labor arbitrage has reduced the average wage in Mexico to about half of what it was before NAFTA. Our corporations were doing very well, because now they had something just as good or perhaps better than a free trade zone. They arranged another form of arbitrage, outsourcing their labor to Asian countries. Why pay 50 cents an hour to a Mexican when the Asians will work for 25 cents? The politicians even found ways to pay their corporate benefactors to outsource, by offering them tax breaks for doing it! No one can compete with Corporate America! Certainly the American citizen can’t!
Big farm Corporations have been trying to control congress since the 1930’s. They have learned well and now other large corporations emulate them. All kinds of moneys are spent by the farm lobbies on strong incumbent congressmen and their families to “educate them” on the reasons for, and the importance of farm subsidies and other corporate interests. Along with his family and personal ‘educational’ benefits, the incumbent congressman will often get considerable moneys as contributions to his election campaign. Even larger contributions are made to his party (both parties for control purposes); of which his share will trickle down to him from a number of sources as long as he does not depart from the party interests (read corporate interests). It’s not hard to get a Congressman from Iowa to support a farm subsidy bill. It’s a little harder to get a Delaware or Massachusetts Congressman to support it. One might think that this would take a bit of doing, as many times the congressman must support those things that are a direct detriment to his voting constituents. Most of the time however, his opponent will not even challenge him on these highly financed issues because his own funds from the party are controlled at a higher level. This system works so well that even pharmaceutical companies now spend rafts of money to “educate” doctors and their families at various resorts around the country. Currently, the pharmaceuticals are even “donating” to the FDA (for our benefit, of course). Understand that politicians can and do pass laws to benefit themselves, this is all perfectly legal
At this point in time, the voter has been effectively disenfranchised. It is not that he does not have a choice; it is only that there is no choice. Whoever runs for office is beholden to the corporations for the money that is a necessary prerequisite to attain and retain the office. This, in effect, is the new democratic “one party” or “corporate party” system. The politician and his family live in a world filled with both perks and promise. If he cooperates and is in office for any considerable length of time, he is practically guaranteed a plum lifetime job consulting or lobbying for these same companies and thus greasing the wheels of other politicians. (Responsible companies always reward their good soldiers.)
The heavy hand of corporate influence on the members of congress is not a new problem. It has been a festering problem since the earliest days of our country. When the great majority of citizens were farmers, it didn’t seem that lobbyists could do much harm. As corporate America grew and farming became more efficient, the trend was for more Americans to leave the farms and become employees of these new corporations.
In the last part of the nineteenth century, thinking people were becoming concerned that the interests of Corporate America and the country as a whole were not of a like nature. There was much concern that corporate money was controlling the outcome of most of the laws in this country, and something should be done to curb this influence. In his annual message to the congress in 1907, President Theodore Roosevelt stated “The need for collecting large campaign funds would vanish if Congress provided an appropriation for the proper and legitimate expenses of each of the great national parties, an appropriation ample enough to meet the necessity for thorough organization and machinery, which requires a great expenditure of money. Then the stipulation should be made that no party receiving campaign funds from the Treasury should accept more than a fixed amount from any individual subscriber or donor, and the necessary publicity for receipts and expenditures could without difficulty be provided.” This is an idea that is still mentioned from time to time.
Many, if not most of the legislation that is enacted helps one group of people at the expense of another. Such is the nature of laws. Laws against cartels and monopolies in favor of fairness to the other corporations and indeed the citizens are necessary and good for the health of our country, but only if the government chooses to enforce them. Laws passed against the middle class Americans in favor of powerful corporations are not good for the health of our country. In theory, the elected officials are supposed to represent the voting public, not the corporate contributors. Passing legislation that will erode the middle class for the benefit of corporate profits is a crime against the citizenry.
You cannot blame a rat as a thief if you allow it to steal grain, nor blame a cat as a murderer if you allow it to kill rats. That is the very nature of these animals. You cannot blame corporations if you allow them to buy politicians. This is indeed the very nature of this animal. To paraphrase Milton Friedman, “Corporate executives, provided they stay within the law, have no responsibilities in their business activities other than to make as much money for their stockholders as possible.” That is why we need laws and regulations, to determine exactly what is to be allowed. You can and should blame politicians for selling out their trust of the people. No longer does anyone except perhaps some relatives and political associates hold politicians in high regard. That is why we need laws and regulations, to determine exactly what is to be allowed and what is not. You can and should blame corrupt politicians for selling out their trust of the people. They are committing overt crimes against the voters of these United States. Politics and Crime have become two faces of the same coin. Unfortunately, in the United States it has become coin of the realm.
Print
Email
