Comments on: Social Origins of the American Corporate Predator State http://www.thomaspalley.com/?p=115 Economics for Democratic and Open Societies Tue, 07 Sep 2010 02:49:39 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 By: Social Origins of the American Corporate Predator State: A Uniquely American Phenomenon « Bear Market News http://www.thomaspalley.com/?p=115#comment-137530 Social Origins of the American Corporate Predator State: A Uniquely American Phenomenon « Bear Market News Tue, 27 Apr 2010 22:18:14 +0000 http://www.thomaspalley.com/?p=115#comment-137530 [...] Social Origins of the American Corporate Predator State [...] [...] Social Origins of the American Corporate Predator State [...]

]]> By: US Africa Command becomes fully operational October 1 « Crossed Crocodiles http://www.thomaspalley.com/?p=115#comment-126721 US Africa Command becomes fully operational October 1 « Crossed Crocodiles Wed, 01 Oct 2008 14:09:48 +0000 http://www.thomaspalley.com/?p=115#comment-126721 [...] on RGE Monitor from Nouriel Roubinin, The Origins of the American Corporate Predator State (also here). Jamie Galbraith’s recent book describes modern (Bush-Cheney) Republicanism as creating a [...] [...] on RGE Monitor from Nouriel Roubinin, The Origins of the American Corporate Predator State (also here). Jamie Galbraith’s recent book describes modern (Bush-Cheney) Republicanism as creating a [...]

]]> By: Social Origins of the American Corporate Predator State « Therearenosunglasses’s Weblog http://www.thomaspalley.com/?p=115#comment-125826 Social Origins of the American Corporate Predator State « Therearenosunglasses’s Weblog Tue, 19 Aug 2008 22:30:26 +0000 http://www.thomaspalley.com/?p=115#comment-125826 [...] Social Origins of the American Corporate Predator State 20 08 2008 Social Origins of the American Corporate Predator State [...] [...] Social Origins of the American Corporate Predator State 20 08 2008 Social Origins of the American Corporate Predator State [...]

]]> By: Chuck Emmons http://www.thomaspalley.com/?p=115#comment-125448 Chuck Emmons Sun, 17 Aug 2008 01:48:18 +0000 http://www.thomaspalley.com/?p=115#comment-125448 Dr. Palley, I find the same effects on social programming as you describe in the military-industrial relationship's effects on politics. First-order social programming is usually initiated by concerned citizens or social activists. As a basic order of funding is developed and a societal response to the new area of concern evolves, economic criteria begin to creep into the new field in the form of "outcomes", usually expressed in increasingly economic terms, even when effective solutions have not yet been found. Credentialling usually trumps dedication and empathy as the required inputs into the problem state. Eventually, cost-per-unit of service becomes a substitute for real outcomes, and the intent to find actual solutions diminishes. The remaiining "field" becomes the apologist for the system as the society moves its focus toward efforts with quicker payoffs. Any issue which is difficult or intransigent is put on a back burner in preference for work with quicker, more tangible payoffs. I have made the comment, with humor of course so that it could be heard, that if we took such an approach to our military or industrial endeavors, we would still be shooting muskets, flying biplanes and using water wheels to power our plants. I probably quote Eisenhower's admonishment on the military-industrial complex (and Washington's proscription against political parties) once a week. I enjoy your blog greatly; it gives me, and others of my friends I have suggested read it, a sense of hope. Keep up the great work. Dr. Palley,
I find the same effects on social programming as you describe in the military-industrial relationship’s effects on politics.
First-order social programming is usually initiated by concerned citizens or social activists. As a basic order of funding is developed and a societal response to the new area of concern evolves, economic criteria begin to creep into the new field in the form of “outcomes”, usually expressed in increasingly economic terms, even when effective solutions have not yet been found. Credentialling usually trumps dedication and empathy as the required inputs into the problem state. Eventually, cost-per-unit of service becomes a substitute for real outcomes, and the intent to find actual solutions diminishes. The remaiining “field” becomes the apologist for the system as the society moves its focus toward efforts with quicker payoffs. Any issue which is difficult or intransigent is put on a back burner in preference for work with quicker, more tangible payoffs.
I have made the comment, with humor of course so that it could be heard, that if we took such an approach to our military or industrial endeavors, we would still be shooting muskets, flying biplanes and using water wheels to power our plants.
I probably quote Eisenhower’s admonishment on the military-industrial complex (and Washington’s proscription against political parties) once a week.
I enjoy your blog greatly; it gives me, and others of my friends I have suggested read it, a sense of hope. Keep up the great work.

]]> By: George N. Wells, CPIM http://www.thomaspalley.com/?p=115#comment-124950 George N. Wells, CPIM Thu, 14 Aug 2008 10:35:05 +0000 http://www.thomaspalley.com/?p=115#comment-124950 Tom, et al., I think that there is an aspect of this problem that has not yet been fully explored -- the United States is a Democratic Republic whereas businesses are, at best, Feudal. Feudal systems, even when they attempt to put on sham democratic exercises like shareholder votes, concentrate power and wealth to the few and reject any form of outside intervention, considering that as tantamount to an act of war. As you noted corporations can mobilize resources sufficient to influence legislators in the Congress and even members of the Executive branch of our government. These corporations like the Feudal system and encourage things such as the idea that The POTUS is a "Unitary Executive" with unlimited powers. Corporations, while declared de-facto persons by the Supreme Court are really little more than Feudal mini-states resident within the USA. They should be treated as such and monies flowing from corporations to elected officials as well as appointed members of government should be treated as though they took money from a foriegn government. Tom, et al.,

I think that there is an aspect of this problem that has not yet been fully explored — the United States is a Democratic Republic whereas businesses are, at best, Feudal.

Feudal systems, even when they attempt to put on sham democratic exercises like shareholder votes, concentrate power and wealth to the few and reject any form of outside intervention, considering that as tantamount to an act of war.

As you noted corporations can mobilize resources sufficient to influence legislators in the Congress and even members of the Executive branch of our government. These corporations like the Feudal system and encourage things such as the idea that The POTUS is a “Unitary Executive” with unlimited powers.

Corporations, while declared de-facto persons by the Supreme Court are really little more than Feudal mini-states resident within the USA. They should be treated as such and monies flowing from corporations to elected officials as well as appointed members of government should be treated as though they took money from a foriegn government.

]]>