Corporate (with a sneer)
Dave is noticing that politicians this year are attempting to tap into the collective discontent left behind by the bubble’s burst. I saw the article he links on the front page of Sunday’s New York Times, running right beside an article about candidates trying to smear one another with insinuations of corporate ties. The NYT article reveals that the largest growth in the work force right now is from people of retirement age. The article tells the story of a sympathetic couple, who sank all of their retirement savings into stocks at the peak of the bubble and are now surprised to see it gone. No matter that people like Warren Buffet and Alan Greenspan (and even me) were warning everyone that the market was irrational — when thousands of baby boomers blow their retirements, personal responsibility is the last thing anyone wants to talk about. And to be honest, I think that the people typified by the NYT article are doing remarkably well at accepting their part of the blame, and it’s only the politicians who want to make it seem like somebody else’s fault. ABC today is reporting that teens can’t find jobs, no doubt a bit surprised to find themselves competing with their grandparents for entry-level jobs. Teens don’t vote, though, so that won’t be a political issue.
The real political issue is about reality being less appealing than illusion. The typical heart-jerking story is about someone who had a bunch of money, and now the money is gone. The part the stories alwaysleave out is that the money never existed. The person just had the promise of money. Even in the case of NYT’s sympathetic couple, who had a significant amount of cash at one point, and then invested it, were living on imaginary projected retirement. The only way to claim that the money was real would be to play a “what if” game and say “they would have had the money if thy hadn’t invested it…” ABC news continues to propagate this confusion in their article about how the government cooks the books. The article tries to draw a parallel between the corporate scandals and the Bush tax cut by portraying the tax cut as a “hidden debt” that Bush needs to use creative accounting to hide. Tax cuts are great fun, because the politicians always calculate their cost against completely imaginary things like “the surplus” and “social security fund”. The best part about “surplus” and “social security” is that the press never have to say “hypothetical” in front, since everyone knows that they are hypothetical, and only pretends that they don’t when it comes time to campaign.
When the Pringles took their retirement money and decided to invest in stocks, I am certain that they had this discussion. They undoubtedly knew that the stock market could be risky, and knew that there were safer alternatives. They couldn’t have forseen the magnitude of the impact oflying CFOs, uninterested SEC, and sleeping press. But at the end of the day, they made the decision to put their retirement at risk. They can share the blame with the other culpable parties, but so far it seems that most people are reject the blanket abdication of responsibility being offered by the politicians.
The pols will keep trying, though. Sunday’s NYT was gratifying, in a way, since it was such a strong evidence that I was right when I predicted six months ago:
“This year, the opressor is not “white anglo male protestants”, “white racism”, “bigotry”, “polluters”, or “big government”. This year, the opressor is “corporations” and, by association, “the rich”. As the newly conservative establishment focuses on fighting shadow wars with such “enemies” as militant homosexuals, moral-sapping communist professors and the like, they seem to be missing the real offensive being mounted by the underdogs. Two years ago, everyone was rich and powerful, living in a fantasy world called “the largest legal creation of wealth in the history of mankind.” Joe Day Trader wasn’t envious of “the rich”, because he was “the rich”. Now fast-forward to fall of 2001, when everyone is deep in the “down” period that comes after a wild high. Everyone is wanting “just one more fix to make the pain go away, bring back our bubble!” But instead of another fix of market bull, they get an in-your-face demonstration that America is not secure, and then they get laid off from their jobs. This is the shape of mass discontent and disillusionment, and these times are a bonanza for divisive politics. It’s no longer the minority who are disaffected; it’s a freekin’ majority!”
Wealth Bondage has plenty to say about corporate malfeasance. You’ve got to admire the use of rhetoric in this little snip:
“The Free Market? In 20 years it will be 8 guys playing poker for trillions outside the Bank of Bermuda. They will use Fortune 100 Companies for table stakes and Politicians as Waiters. The public, employed mostly as Mules, will watch on TV, identify with the Winners, and thank God that they are Free.”