Ramona asks


    But seriously, how bad are the regulations here in the U.S?  Does anybody really know?  Is it a case of any regulation being a bad regulation?

     

    Well yes as far as Industry is concerned. 

    Unless they're universal.

    Corporations don't object to a law that everyone has to obey. At least not nearly as much. They object to any law that gives their competitors an edge. The trouble is: that's every law in a "flat world" where there are plenty of  -stans and -zanias which will permit their companies to do the things we have wisely limited here. Until now.

    We weren't uncivilized in the 19th century . We listened to Caruso , read  Walter Scott ,drank lemonade on the front porch.and listened to well meant sermons on Sunday. But barred the doors to the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory. And

    The golf course lies  so near the mill

    That almost every day

    The laboring children can look out

    and watch the men at play*

     

    Sarah Norcliffe Cleghorn

     

    None of which were ended by sermons or more humane sentiments. But by Teddy Roosevelt and Franklin, and Samuel Gompers and Walter Reuther            

    Neither did   "move to the back of the bus"  and separate water fountains and lunch counters yield to our better natures. But to LBJ and votes in Congress.

    Human nature itself is a weak reed.But a tower of strength compared to the benevolence of corporations.  Nice guys finish last , Leo Durocher used to growl. Ditto for nice companies. No corporation can be more generous than its competitors for long. And even if they could -by virtuie of patents or whatever, no CEO can, because the investors don't want as much money as is left over after treating the employees well. They want as much money as possible.

    Which leaves either regulations or what Galbraith called "Counterveiling Powers". In American Capitalism, the Concept of Counterveiling Powers he described the post WWII society in which Corporations' ability to gouge the public was limited by competition in the market and by unions on the shop floor. The first remains but the second was systematically destroyed by legislation going back to the 1940's Landrum/Griffin bill. Somehow the corporate objections to legislation doesn't extend to legislation which gives it the ability to cut wages.

    The Madison madness should be seen in this context. Scott Walker and other governors and mayors almost alone in our society still must bargain, dread word, with their workers. But absent collective bargaining, no regulation will protect the workers from the people who write the regulations who will behave as every other unregulated body - giving as little as possible and demanding as much as possible.

    Comments

    Great comment.  Thanks for trying to answer my question, Flavius.  I would like to see facts and figures about the damage regulations do to corporations vs. the good those regulations do both in the workplace and in the surrounding neighborhoods.  I doubt there is a source for that, but I also doubt corporations are so seriously hobbled by regulations it's nearly bankrupting them or causing them not to be able to do business.

    It's union-busting for the obvious reasons:  The Big Guys want to dictate every aspect of their operation.  An understandable notion, considering it's their money going into it, but without their employees they could never have grown to such proportions.  When profits go through the roof and they're still niggling about money and employee benefits, there's no question about their motives.  They're never going to be the Good Guys just looking out for the Little Guys.  We're always going to need unions. 


    Yes.It's really pretty simple.

    Scott Walker doesn't want workers to be able to bargain collectively. But also doesn't want to have regulations that would govern the things which would normally have been spelled out in a contract.

    What's left?  That he should have absolute power .Of course.

     


    Latest Comments