Corporations Too Big To Fail

Here in the U.S., we celebrate unrepentant capitalism. Conservatives constantly ward against punishing success with higher taxes. Friedman and Greenspan followers across the land espouse unfettered, free market ideals.

Now, an unprecedented lack of regulation has brought many of these bastions of unfettered success to the brink of failure. Despite greedy management and poor decision-making, our government has deemed AIG, Citibank, and probably the Big Three too big to fail.

Question: Why should we allow these corporations to grow so big they hold the U.S. (and, thus, global) economy hostage? Why should we promote free markets that allow these corporations to be rewarded with tax payer money for years of shitty operations?

I understand the government must do what it must and shore up these weak giants. Wouldn’t it be prudent (I hate that word), however, to exert regulatory measures that prevent these corporations from being able to hold our country by the balls? From continuing this Corporatocracy of America?


3 Responses to “Corporations Too Big To Fail”

  1. 1 Rob
    November 24, 2008 at 2:37 pm

    What about option 3, allowed to fail?

    There’s not just 2 sides to this story, it’s not freemarket to prop up corporations like they’re doing. It’s lobbying and all the rest of the crap like overlooking shady business practices and accounting that made these corporations crap, not just growing too large.

    Large isn’t the problem, greed and lack of ethics is the problem, and when that happens, let them fail. THAT’s the free market. You punish those who fail and build business on a base of lies and deceit.

    “Free market” as a concept is being bastardized into something that isn’t “free market”, the words are simply taking a beating and being a shield for what they really are, semi-fascistic free for all bullshit, not free market.

  2. 2 Providence Candlelight
    November 25, 2008 at 11:20 am

    I submit that taxation is not “punishing success”.

    What is “too large”?

    Stopping the growth of a corporation could be “punishment”.

    Failure is not always an option for the good of the nation. (Yes, like it or not, we are a social(ist) creature(s) – I rather like it).

    Shouldn’t we (our government) bargain for ownership (the right to vote for board members and thus management teams) in return for bailout money – the same as any prudent investor would?

    It could be that our (citizens and taxpayers) reasons for keeping a company afloat might be maintaining jobs (not the same as ordinary equity shareholders).

    Nevertheless, it is our money at risk. Shouldn’t we the say in the selection of the management team that manages it.


  3. October 26, 2009 at 1:13 pm

    How about relying not only on regulations, but also considering Paul Volcker’s advice from experience: being too big is itself a problem that can and should be remedied? I’ve just posted on it at http://euandus3.wordpress.com/2009/10/25/bigger-banks-too-big-to-fail/

    You might want to read the article I read: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33477077/ns/business-the_new_york_times/

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Scarlet Letter of Atheism


Bloggers' Rights at EFF

Blog Stats

  • 96,191 hits
WordPress Political Blogger

Top Clicks

  • None

%d bloggers like this: