RE: Corporate Responsibility Is Bunk
No later than two weeks ago, an article released by the Wall Street Journal dedicated to Milton Friedman and his take on corporate responsibility retained my attention. Friedman couldn't see any good in corporate altruism which he calls an oxymoron. This said, I never was a fan of his monetary solutions which were very fiat money friendly.
According to true liberals such as Friedrich A. Hayek, we as human being cannot see beyond the scoop of our own survival concerns, we simply are incapable to sense what others truly need and thus end up putting ourselves in a state of perpetual servitude when trying to intervene in the others' lives. Hence the so many wonderful altruistic theories on papers that never translate into the real life.
Nonetheless enforcing altruism is the centerpiece of today global socialism and the flaws quickly become apparent as soon as one realizes that socialism needs capitalistic market forces to feed and sustain itself. This is mainly why that ideology has spent decades to fight its own shadows and demons.
Among so many examples illustrating that corporate responsibility is bunk, we have the case of Starbucks exposed by the documentary "Black Gold" and which talks of rampant poverty among the Ethiopian coffee growers. In the same vein, I strongly recommend to watch "The Corporation". Only a few bad appels? I think not!
Then we've got that of the former Pfizer VP, Peter Rost, who has joined the rank of the whistleblowers by revealing how corporations - and the big pharma more precisely - avoided paying taxes for decades, using loopholes provided by transfer price techniques and financial heavens. In this sense it shouldn't be really astonishing to find out that 2/3 of the corporations didn't pay any taxes during the Clinton-boom years whatsoever.
Sure any of this is particularly new. Corporations go where they have profits to make even if this means trading with the enemy or implies just plain looting as explained in "Confessions Of An Economic Hit Man". To give you an idea, today the West sells more weapons to developing countries than ever, but it will never fail to adjust the rescue packages in term of humanitarian aid.
As a matter of fact, TV Commercial always portray our corporation as entities militating for the betterment. Look at our TV anchors, they will rather criticize China while avoiding the pollution mega disaster that our own relocated corporations have done there, the mainland's pollution scourge costs the country roughly $200 billion a year the report says! Right, they were able to do so because of the deeply flaws found in the leftist ideology. Our corporations have embraced blatantly the opportunity to pillage this part of the planet for the sake of their "cheap-item greedy consumers" who took advantage by going on an unprecedented multi-decade long spending binge. Cynically that are the same consumers who want corporations to be responsible. Allo Houston, we have a problem!
By now it should be cristal clear as why asking others to be in charge comes down to shifting the risk at the expenses of many and the environment as well.
The other day as I was exchaning a few emails with someone from the banking department and whose name will remain anonymous, I told my correspondent that it was about time to bring the naiveté of the mass people to an end. That it was essential for them to see life without pink tinted glasses. That our society as a whole would gain much more by knowing what the human nature and honest money are truly about, it is the only way to give free trade a meaning and eradicate up to 65-70 percent of the violence overnight and worldwide.
There are only two choices: raising our IQ or... the road to Babeldom.
Swimming With Piranhas
Here I go again for another economico-philosophical round. If you have made it so far I definitely take it as a compliment. As I already stated numerous times, my goal is to gather the evidence of world affairs affecting mankind and to share them with you.
Everybody has apprehensions and fears. So do I. What is nonetheless the most frightening statement ever in my view is when I hear someone argue about the benefits of the right to vote. At that very moment my heart starts pumping so fast that I feel the urge to incarnate the last inter-galactic Joan of Arc.
Deep political dialogue too often censors itself by the fact that it would eventually lead the speakers' to the acknowledgement of major deceptions - and a nervous breakdown is the least desirable. This why political correctness regulates or even outlaws the exchange of too diffierent political views and calls for the conversation to end. In such a case speakers will argue that nobody can change anyone’s mind. Speak and see no evil, depending on the side one sits on. It is always much easier to criticize the opponent than seeing one's own faulty reasoning. To give you an example, Democrats were outraged by Bush on spending but it didn't prevent them from unveiling their own massive $463.5bn bill.
Although I've grown highly suspicious towards psychiatry (and for a very good reason explained in depth here) the psyche cannot escape the fundamental Aristotelian axiom of existence: life is .Train of thoughts also must survive and tend to reject anything that could hurt their own projections, this regardless of their accuracy.
This rejoices our power lust addicts (monetary scientists, lawmakers and the cohorts supporting them) even more. As stated in a previous column of mine, that is where “they” get us: by being the instigators of at least 70% of the world problems then coming up with solutions concocted by themselves. Any remedy presented must be dissected. Although I may have a hard time imagining what would the world be like without “them”, there is no excuse for not acting upon it with the legal means at our disposal. This time again voters are in for a dirty rollercoaster.
Insanity consists in repeating the same errors and expecting different results. These days, you see, most people think that the market forces are subjected to some esoteric moral hazards theories. Hence most people would agree with a total take over by our financial institutions to protect or even rescue from the nasty side effect of globalization and in the worst case scenario, financial ruin. In particular when words like “seismic shifts and New World Order” were being pronounced by the Brit Chancellor Gordon Brown last 01/17/07. The latter went on referring to our mega financial houses as old-fashioned establishment in need of major reforms to meet the new demands of the international trade, more importantly winning the war on terror and also calling this proposal the “battle for the heart and minds” that will set in motion the platform of a New World Order. The very same week in The Financial Times, Bernanke warned US of ‘fiscal crisis’ fear' by the way: he urged immediate action to head off the looming Medicare and Social Security funding gap, saying the right time to start was "ten years ago".
But getting back to Brown it should be now crystal clear that our globalists never were prepared to face the so-called globalization and crises that would arise from it. Never. The Mexican bailout, the collapse of Argentina, the Russian crisis and the Asian meltdowns, all of which took place in the 1900’s, didn’t teach them a thing. Not a damn freakin' thing. Neither did the dotcom crash or the S&L crisis obviously. If you still do not see the emergency to stop swallowing blue pills... Or wait, can you conceive that we are governed by pundits who do not have a clue as how to run our lives. Now honestly, can you truly believe that? Yeah and you have the right to cast your votes! Ballots for what.. to give the elites the right to choose as how they will devour us? The truth is that people have been voting for their demises again and again since the last great depression of the 1930’s. Back to square one.
The dis/misinformed voters have certainly not realized – yet - what truly lies beneath such a peace and prosperity speech in the name of our sacred democracy. What is democracy worth by the way? Praising the endless virtues of peace and reforms is a part of the script. This time again their carrying attitudes predict a major wealth transfer and way beyond that a shift toward a “very great” depression, and its ensuing the threat of absolute fascism.
But some at the top are really freaking out. Scared that the masses may find out. And those are ready to do everything to keep the lethal world bubble afloat. Among them we find Michael Milken, the junk bond billionaire turned philanthropist who said developing countries could free up trillions of dollars by creating markets based on mortgages, credit cards and loans.
Considering the debt swap bubble (named the derivatives market ) which is about more than 400 trillion or 8 times the real wealth, 100 trillion would not postpone the day of reckoning by much. If we take this into account the banking interests running wild, this would give the planet another 2 years or so. But what after that? This would make the world crash would be even more terrible. Some highly illuminated Wall Street mavericks even argue that the opacity found in those 400+ TN derivatives is not a problem. Right now, in other words as the author of the article puts it, there is little sign of any end to the credit boom - nor, it would seem, to the mounting uncertainty about what might happen if or when this frenzied debt dance ends.
Let's take a deep breath in and travel back into time: when the frienzied debt dance ends... yes you read well. That's right... Now exhale as slow as possible.
This author surely has a good comprehension of what the stakes really are, although remaining neutral. Meanwhile at Davos, a luxury Swiss montain resort, la creme de la creme celebrates a year of booming returns and record bonuses. Though things are not what they appear to be. Clouds are gathering above the horizon.
One of the Davos players sees the future as "too good to be true" and urged to get prepared for a global blowout. In fact not him alone agreed with such views: Summers and Trichet joined the doomsayer bandwagon and warned Davos party Goers of underestimating risk and worse, compared complecency with self-denying prophecy. Prepare for a significant asset repricing he concluded!
"We are currently seeing elements in global financial markets which are not necessarily stable," he said, pointing to the "low level of rates, spreads and risk premiums" as factors that could trigger a repricing. "There is now such creativity of new and very sophisticated financial instruments . . . that we don't know fully where the risks are located," he added. "We are trying to understand what is going on - but it is a big, big challenge".
Under the guise of being concerned about the world's economic state, the Davos meeting is a mere call to get ready for the great game of liquidation which most of the people view as the dark side of capitalism. Many even call this vulture capitalism. Capitalism is indeed destructive when for instance the system in place values debt as wealth and currency debasment to propel the markets, two main tools without which socialism wouldn’t exist. It is vulture capitalism – legal pillagism - that has allowed 2% of the population to own 50% of the world. All was done by scientifically creating successive and massive banrkruptcies thoughout the planet over a more or less 300 year period. We may easily grasp the resentment of the people toward capitalism. But Lefitism is no solution either because there is, to put it bluntly, no freedom in the absence of the gold standard and no freedom goes along with the threat of insercurity. Even Greenspan put it very well a long while back. Let's quote what the Maestro said in 1966 in his essay titled "Gold And Econmic Freedom":
This is the shabby secret of the welfare statists' tirades against gold. Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the confiscation of wealth. Gold stands in the way of this insidious process. It stands as a protector of property rights. If one grasps this, one has no difficulty in understanding the statists' antagonism toward the gold standard.
It is particurlaly appalling to observe people's reaction when they are shown facts about the elites' predatory behaviors. Legal mass murders still find a blind support from those ignorant or worst preferring silence over action. The same crowd who instead of acknowledging that they have no answers, will not hesitate to become the most vocal defenders of individualism. It is for sure better to argue in favor of one's needs first when one feels powerless in the face of undeniable evidence of corruption. This voluntary servitude - already described more than 500 years ago by Etienne de la Boetie - allows the ruling elites to live happily ever after. Think Enron. While some heads may roll once every so often it is never really grave. The French revolution and the guillotine are far behind. Their bloated salaries subsidized by taxpayers, even with the new democratic-led Congress which just raised the minimum wage to win the hearts of the low middle-class, will not be an issue any time soon. Now let's brace for the economic consequences: firms will have to raise their prices or shut their doors if they cannot cope with the adjustment.Consumers will lose purchasing power. This will encourage illegal immigration. Taxpayers and consumers will have to come to the rescue by piling on debts to fix the imbalances or becoming poor-er. One of the ingredients for the next recession calling for another increase of the minimum wage. The complete spin.
In the meantime our high ranked CEOs get together with investment bankers and lawyers to regulate the plunder of Africa at the pace of $150bn yearly. Thinking of the people applauding the raise of the minimum wage to counter exploitation, I am sure they'd stay frozen if explained the unethical deeds of their mogul-icons abroad since it would unequivocally tarnish the idea they have about success and possibly lead to a civil war. The same applies to the sweatshop workers, I am not sure either whether they would like the prices of their favorite goods to go up by 50%. By now it should be clear that enforced altrusim is bunk.
It was Hoover who once said that people are handicaped when faced with a conspiracy so monstrous that they cannot believe it exists. Again it is our choice to believe in linearity or exponentality. If you are confused, just ask yourself how long you can play the ostrich while focusing on something terrible which happened to you in the past and whose effects were ravaging because you couldn't analyze its gravity.
Ironically the other day I came across an article by Science Daily stating that the detection of the presence of an active participant in a situation involves a brain region that's more active in altruistic people. 
As I put it ealier, the train of thoughts doesn't need to process accurate information, so what this article says is simply pure BS...
While most of the westerners believe in the power to vote, they have absolutely no idea they have in fact always been be swimming with piranhas.
All modern history, as learnt and taught and accepted, is purely conventional. For sufficient reasons, all persons in authority combined, by a happy union of deceit and concealment, to promote falsehood. - Lord Acton
