More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Robert Creamer

Robert Creamer

Posted: May 2, 2010 11:52 PM

Common Theme of Gulf Oil Spill, Wall Street Collapse: Unrestrained Corporate Recklessness

What's Your Reaction:

The BP oil spill disaster in the Gulf of Mexico and the 2008 collapse of Wall Street may not be identical twins, but they are siblings. Both are the children of unrestrained corporate recklessness -- recklessness that was made possible by a fifty-year corporate conservative campaign to prevent government from holding corporations accountable to the public interest.

The recklessness of Wall Street banks cost eight million Americans their jobs, and millions more their pensions. All of those unemployed Americans and under-utilized plants, stores and warehouses cost us trillions of dollars in lost economic output that we will never recover. It cost governments tax dollars that could have been used to educate children, build new roads, find cures for disease. It cost us hundreds of millions in interest to borrow the money we needed to jump-start the economy and provide basic services.

The Goldman Sachs emails published by Senator Levin's Committee on Investigations brought Wall Street recklessness into clear focus. There was nothing there about the consequences of their actions for the society or economy at large -- only how the trader who referred to himself as "Fabulous Fab" could make millions for himself at the expense of anyone who happened to be gullible enough to buy his worthless investments.

The oil company BP -- and the entire global oil industry -- have been no less reckless in their unquenchable thirst for profits. It doesn't take a genius to predict that when you start drilling thousands of wells in mile-deep water in the middle of the economically and ecologically critical Gulf Coast, something might go terribly wrong.

Of course we've seen what might go wrong up close and personal before. The Exxon Valdez disaster resulted in incalculable loss to the environment, billions in loss to fishermen and the Alaska economy, and billions more for a cleanup that lasted over three years.

The Santa Barbara oil spill despoiled miles of beaches, and for a time put the brakes on some forms of reckless oil exploration.

We don't yet know the full consequences of the BP Gulf of Mexico oil disaster for the economy or environment -- nor do we know the full range of preparations that BP made in the event of a catastrophe. But the proof of the pudding is in the eating. Whatever preparations they made were obviously far from adequate to stop what may become a cataclysmic event.

One thing we do know for sure: left to themselves, giant international corporations will always be reckless in their pursuit of more and more profit.

These international corporations have no loyalty whatsoever to our country or its welfare. They are huge, free-floating international organizations dedicated to only one goal: making as much money as possible for themselves. Remember that BP is British Petroleum. When it comes to Wall Street, its own advertisements remind us that "Citi Corp never sleeps" -- it does business in every corner of the globe. The trading group that sank AIG was based in London. And Goldman Sachs makes its billions from deals and trades in every corner of the world. These companies have no loyalty to the people or interests of the United States.

The cultures of these organizations reward short-term profit. They do nothing to punish employees or leaders for global economic or environmental catastrophe.

There is only one brake on this recklessness. That would be us -- in the form of our government.

For the last four decades the Conservative Movement and its corporate backers have promoted the notion that the private sector can and should be left alone to do whatever it wants, since only the private sector (meaning international banks and corporations) can create innovation and economic growth. To facilitate this, conservative leader Grover Norquist says that government should be shrunk so much that it could be "drowned in a bathtub."

After the Great Depression, we created the Security and Exchange Commission to oversee the stock market, the FDIC to guarantee ordinary depositors against bank failures, and passed the Glass-Steagall Act that prevented banks from engaging in reckless speculative activities that would endanger the economy. As a result there was no "credit crisis" in America for over half a century - and also the greatest period of long-term economic growth on record - the period that led to the birth of the American Middle Class. The first major American credit crisis following the Great Depression happened when the Reagan Administration deregulated the Savings and Loan industry.

And then the Big Wall Street Banks, and their conservative and Republican enablers -- convinced Congress to "deregulate" Wall Street and repeal the Glass-Steagall Act in the 1990's and the results are there for everyone to see. Now they are fighting tooth and nail to kill or weaken legislation that would begin, once again to hold Wall Street Banks accountable.

The big oil companies and Republicans have done exactly the same thing when it comes to weakening regulations, allowing oil companies to drill in riskier and riskier environments. Just as importantly, so far they have blocked passage of legislation to develop clean energy that would threaten the profits of Big Oil but would make it unnecessary for our society to risk the Gulf Coast to get our energy from dirty fuels like oil in the first place.

To prevent future economic and environmental disasters, Progressives have to stand up straight and demand strong, forceful action by government to hold big international corporations accountable. Government is not the problem -- in this case it is the solution.

And we have to assert once again that government is not some far off entity that orders us around and intrudes into our lives. As President Obama said last weekend in Ann Arbor -- in a democratic society, the government is us. Or as Congressman Barney Frank puts it: "Government is the name of the things we choose to do together."

We know how to use government to rein in the natural recklessness of huge corporations. Take commercial aviation. In spite of some periodic lapses in government oversight, the generally tough regulation of aviation by the FAA has turned commercial aviation into the safest mode of transportation in human history. It is safer to fly somewhere on an airplane than to take a train, drive, horseback ride, bike or even walk there.

In 2009, there were only three commercial aviation accidents classified as serious by the National Transportation Safety Board over the course of 18 million hours flow. The probability of a passenger being killed on a single flight is approximately eight million-to-one. In other words, if a passenger boarded a flight at random once a day, everyday, statistically it would take over 21,000 years before he or she would be killed.

That record of safety is not because people who go into the airline business are any less interested in making money than people who go into the oil business or Wall Street trading. It is because the public demanded strong government regulation of the safety of commercial aviation. That in turn has created a culture inside aviation companies that makes safety a primary value and actually ostracizes reckless behavior.

Left to its own devices the "invisible hand of the market" will not create that kind of culture. It never has, it never will. That is particularly true where the activities of companies are hidden from view of average citizens and consumers. Even the most sophisticated customers on Wall Street didn't have a clue how to evaluate the risks associated with the collateralized debt obligations being sold by Goldman Sachs. The electricity consumers whose power is made with coal haven't got an inkling about the working conditions of the miners that dig out that coal. And the everyday consumers of gasoline sure don't know what kind of risks BP is taking 5000 feet below the surface of the Gulf of Mexico as it drills for oil.

We can't just sit by and allow these huge private actors to threaten the well-being and future of our society just because they want to be free to make as much money as they can.

On last Sunday's "This Week" former Bush adviser Matthew Dowd kept repeating the new Republican mantra: "Washington doesn't work." Now there is the ultimate in Republican chutzpa. The modern Republican Party has done everything it can to prevent "Washington" from working. It diverted hundreds of billions of government revenue into tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans. It gutted regulations that held Wall Street and the oil companies accountable. It is blocking clean energy legislation that would free us from the stranglehold of Big Oil. It tried, unsuccessfully, to prevent passage of desperately-needed health care reform that would for the first time hold the private insurance companies accountable - companies that have driven American health care costs to the point where they are 50% higher than any other nation.

Ignoring the fact that Republicans have fought on behalf of big mine owners for years to weaken mine safety oversight, Dowd actually had the gall to say that the mine disaster in West Virginia was an example of how "Washington doesn't work."

He correctly pointed out that the draconian Arizona anti-immigrant "papers please" law was a response to the failure of Washington to take action to fix the broken immigration system. But he conveniently forgot that it is the Republicans who refuse to allow action to go forward to pass comprehensive immigration reform.

And, of course, he actually argued that the Gulf oil spill was yet another indication that "Washington doesn't work." This, from the party of the now-silent cries of "drill, baby, drill."

The Republicans and their corporate patrons will do everything in their power to get America to forget the iconic symbols of their failures. They will try to convince us that Barack Obama and the Democrats are somehow responsible for the collapse of Wall Street and the Great Recession - even though it all happened on the Republican watch and because of the failure of their policies and the bankruptcy of their economic philosophy.

But Dowd's audacity needs to remind progressive Democrats that people across America want action. They want Washington to work. And to make Washington work, we need to demand that Congress reassert the power of government to hold mine owners, Wall Street banks, Big Oil -- and all of the most powerful international corporations - accountable to the interests of everyday Americans.

Robert Creamer is a long-time political organizer and strategist, and author of the recent book: Stand Up Straight: How Progressives Can Win, available on Amazon.com.

 
 
 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 286
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (5 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Dr Juan
Ron Paul -More Liberty, Less Government, No Fed
08:02 PM on 05/10/2010
I think it is worse. Today the purpose of a corporation is to pay those who run it a big salary and keep that salary as secure as possible and keep as much as possible away from tax. And they seak to monopolize a market so thet they really don't have to compete. Today that means "going global" and getting too big to fail.

When income taxes went up, corporate types started inventing ways to reward that were still untaxed. This brought on the fringe of vacations, pensions, sick days, personal days, medical and dental..... Unions saw what uppers were getting and fought to get their members in on some fringe too.

Anything that cost is examined to see if it is necessary. Now with the Obama health plan some companies are figuring out that is is cheaper to pay a 2000 a year fine than to pay for medical insurance and are gearing up in that directioin. To remain competitive, all others will have to follow... When one moves prodution to China, all the others have to follow... and so it goes.

Regulations do help but some important ones were dumped over the last 30 years.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
SpearTip
02:52 PM on 05/10/2010
Anyone who wonders at the behavior of corporations need look no further than the philosophy of Milton Friedman who theorized that the social responsibility of a corporation is to make profits. It is quite literally the justification of profits over people and many Wall Street CEOs and conservative politicians are fanatical believers. The problem is the legal protection corporations provide individuals. If I personally cheat and lie to you, I could (and should) be held liable for my fraudulent actions. However, if I create a company and cheat you through it, my liability is significantly limited or removed. Once you reduce or remove the risk of individuals being held responsible for their actions, every sort of unethical behavior commences.
photo
rbenjamin
Rule 5 rules
12:21 PM on 05/10/2010
Nailed it.
09:18 AM on 05/04/2010
To this list of corporate sector bad guys we need to add the telecom players who are holding back our advancement in connectivity. Limits, exclusion, control, and profits are the bywords of our telecom players at our own expense. We who invented the internet are steadily falling behind in our access to broadband and the internet.
photo
joebaggadonuts
Civilization: Evolutionary pathway of choice.
09:09 AM on 05/04/2010
I don't disagree with you exactly, but I think you need to recognize that some things corporations do are good. The only reason I say that is because you are staking out an absolutist position, something which is almost always a mistake. Here's what you said (in BOLD no less):

"One thing we do know for sure: left to themselves, giant international corporations will _always_ be reckless in their pursuit of more and more profit."

Let's take Google's response to the Chinese. Reckless, perhaps, but for profit? Henry Ford's raising wages for factory workers, for profit, perhaps, but long term only and it made it possible for workers to buy Ford products (cars). Well, frankly I am having a hard time coming up with more. Anyone out there who can help with that?
02:21 AM on 05/04/2010
the fact that all these business and corporations etc have to be regulated proves that Ethics courses must be taught in universities...before any a-hole MBA business student graduates he/she must complete a course in business ethics..also it proves that man is just a low untrustworthy soul it is disgraceful that these people cannot regulate themselves...and yet they march themselves in to church or synagogue or mosque and do their hail mary's and etc. and call themselves good christians, jews, muslims etc...as for the chinese they have no religion or morals at all...man is just a terrible greedy low life and all the religion in the world will never help..men are just evil (i'm finding out women are too, sad) just a few are really good.we need to bring back the concept of shame...
02:18 AM on 05/04/2010
the fact that all these business and corporations etc have to be regulated proves that thics courses must be taught in universities...before any a hole MBA business student graduates he/she must complete a course in business ethics..also it proves thatman is just a low untrustworthy soul it is disgraceful that these people can regulate themselves...and yet they march themselves in to church or synagogue or mosque and do their hail mary's and etc. and call themselves good christians, jews, moslems etc...as for the chinese they have no religion or morals at all...man is just a terrible greedy low life and all the religion in the world will never help..men are just evil (i'm finding out women are too, sad) just a few are really good.we need to bring back the concept of shame...
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
01:44 AM on 05/04/2010
The purpose of the Government(s) in the United States is: to act, solely and exclusively upon the behalf of the People, using the collected power of those People, and by their consent.

The people who run Corporations know, unfortunately, just how easily an elected official can be "turned," and made into a willing criminal himself, by "money."

The wise authors of our Constitution knew this, and that is why they penned Article 2, Section 4. It was intended to be a wholesale repudiation of criminal misconduct of any and all form, by "all civil officers, period." But our country has never (so far...) actually turned out that way, because of ... "money."

This has absolutely zippo to do with "Republican" or "Democrat." That's a false distinction because every single one of these people is doing their share to consume the nearly $4 BILLION a year (and that's just the tip of the iceberg) that is shoveled down their happy throats. They call the money by various names ... "campaign contribution," etc. But the Constitution itself uses only one: "word #25."
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
GordonSantaMonica
12:46 AM on 05/04/2010
Don’t worry citizens of the United States ... The Republicans will fight against the EPA, FDA, and any other regulatory agency that protects "We The People of the United States of America".

In fact if the Republicans and the Neo-Cons put their heads any further into the sand they will come up somewhere around China. :LOL LOL LOL.

By the way have you checked out Fox and the spinners. They are beginning to pull their heads out of the sand. They finally admit this is a “Disasterâ€. They do have some disclaimers however ... if the government regulates the oil industry the costs of gasoline and other oil related products will go “WAY†up.

Give me a break Fox. The Ocean environment is being destroyed. Ocean related industries are being destroyed. That is ok for Fox spinners. They are still working and making enough money to go hide from environmental destruction ... so they hope.

“ gaptidbits@yahoo.comâ€
11:31 PM on 05/03/2010
You also fail to point out the benefits of that de-regulation, over the past ~15-20 years Financial Services and the Energy sector grew from contributing approximately 6% of US GDP each, to nearly 15% each. Had these industries remained heavily regulated, it is likely that GDP per capita would only be 80-90% of what it is today. If that doesn't seem significant, look at what one year of moving from 2008 GDP back to 2004-5 levels did to the economy. Without the growth of those 2 sectors you would be looking at approximately 1995 levels, this would be an unmitigated disaster and make the billions lost on mortgage derivatives of the 100s of millions spent to clean up this spill look like pennies on the dollar.
photo
joebaggadonuts
Civilization: Evolutionary pathway of choice.
09:19 AM on 05/04/2010
Obtuse linear arguments should be relegated to the past, because they have no validity in the future. You feed a turkey for (as Taleb put it) a thousand days:
CHARLIE ROSE: And what is the story of the turkey?

NASSIM NICHOLAS TALEB: In the book, I have the story of a turkey that is fed for 1,000 days by a butcher, and every day confirms to the turkey and the turkey’s economics department and the turkey’s risk management department and the turkey’s analytical department that the butcher loves turkeys, and every day brings more confidence to the statement. So it’s fed for 1,000 days…

Then comes the day before Thanksgiving.

If the money which we paid for oil for the same period of time were used in a industrial policy shift toward sustainable locally sourced energy, how much better off would we be today.

Get your head around it, man. Don't be a bean-counter.
08:22 PM on 05/03/2010
International corporations have no loyalty? How about our own elected representatives?

This is a Louisiana problem of living-off its geography and giving a rats *ss about their risks.
What has Gov. Jindall been doing? What if an earthquake caused this?
Here is their senior US senator berating an expert about risk of oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/30/sen-landrieu-minimized-po_n_558772.html
.
08:09 PM on 05/03/2010
Says Mr. Creamer: "...recklessness that was made possible by a fifty-year corporate conservative campaign..." Later he says, "For the last four decades the Conservative Movement and its corporate backers have promoted the notion that the private sector can and should be left alone to do whatever it wants..."

OK Bob, is it fifty years or forty years? How many of those fifty years have Democrats controlled the House and Senate? Could it be that Democrats have been, in Bob's words, "enablers" too?

"The big oil companies and Republicans have done exactly the same thing when it comes to weakening regulations, allowing oil companies to drill in riskier and riskier environments."

What exactly is Bob's expertise in risk assessment or risk management in the area of oil production?

"He correctly pointed out that the draconian Arizona anti-immigrant "papers please" law was a response to the failure of Washington to take action to fix the broken immigration system."

A "papers please" law? Great hype...

"But he conveniently forgot that it is the Republicans who refuse to allow action to go forward to pass comprehensive immigration reform."

Mr. Creamer conveniently forgets to state some reasons why illegal immigration is such a problem and why current federal laws are not being enforced.

When will Bob and others be satisfied that there are enough restrictions on the market?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Harry Featherstone
08:07 PM on 05/03/2010
After 14 years as a CEO (now retired), competition drives every decision. It your competition is making a change that will bring more to the bottom line you will copy or improve on what you see. A corporation headquarters in a small town takes care ot the needs of the town. I multinational does not care about the towns but it does care about the bottom line.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
08:39 PM on 05/03/2010
Hey Harry, agreed!
I'm still running my co, have a few more years to go, everything you said (imo) is correct, I would just adjust the last statement a bit...
"I multinational does not care about the towns but it does care about the bottom line. "
change to...
I multinational does not care about the towns but it does care about the bottom line, regardless of what it does to anyones town..
Enjoy that retirement, I hope I'll be able to have one as well.
Ciao!
photo
joebaggadonuts
Civilization: Evolutionary pathway of choice.
09:22 AM on 05/04/2010
If competition drives every decision, then you are losing your customers. Go out and talk to them. Customers should be driving your decisions, not your competition.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:25 AM on 05/04/2010
Actually customers are the ones driving the decision process. The "Competition" Harry is talking about is the competition for customers, not competition for competitions sake.
A prime example is Wal-Mart. Mom &Pops have been destroyed by WM simply because customers choose lower prices over every other concern. Personally, I never shop there and never will but I still have that option in that I make enough money to shop elsewhere. Many more people do not have that option or are ignorant of the cause and effect of their actions and the rest due to their ideology are supportive of WM, even at their own (and our) expense.
Left unrestrained, these multi-nationals will continue to drag us all down to third world status in a few short years from now.
07:39 PM on 05/03/2010
"international corporations have no loyalty whatsoever to our country or its welfare."

That's why weather-vane windbags like Mr. Creamer, who was FOR federal mandates to require every citizen to purchase the products of private corporations (a.k.a. the Health Insurance Reform Bill) BEFORE they were against it (oooh! it's those big, bad OIL companies and WallStreet Bankers!) are just "internet narcissists," seeking as many "Me Too!" and "I totally agree!" feed-back comments as they can by riding the wave of some populist anger response to topical news.

zzzzzzzzz... awaken me when this hypocritical windbag does something more illuminating than STATE THE OBVIOUS as if it was profound.
photo
ibsteve2u
Someone who cares - to his unending regret
07:16 PM on 05/03/2010
"These international corporations have no loyalty whatsoever to our country or its welfare."

Bingo.

Crushing labor in America - a.k.a. the American people - was only the tertiary goal of inequitable free trade. The first, of course, was profits. The second - and perhaps the most important, from one perspective - was to isolate "big money" from the well-being of the American people and thus the nation.

Achieving the second goal would enable the third goal.