Skip to main content
news

Re: Calumet files Chapter 7

PeterN
SubjectRe: Calumet files Chapter 7
FromPeterN
Date03/23/2014 03:11 (03/22/2014 22:11)
Message-ID<lglfpq0lib@news1.newsguy.com>
Client
Newsgroupsrec.photo.digital
FollowsRobert Coe

On 3/22/2014 10:38 AM, Robert Coe wrote:

<snip>

Robert Coe
- Governments are far too reluctant to pull the plug on corporations that no longer serve the public interest well enough to justify their existence. Sometimes a corporation behaves so egregiously that the government that issued its corporate charter should simply cancel it and revert the corporation to a proprietorship or an unlimited partnership. The company's stock price would probably fall to near (or even below) zero, but the owners would have had it coming. And the threat of such an action would be a powerful motivator to promote good corporate citizenship.

- Corporations, at least in the U.S., have routinely (and almost always successfully) promoted, almost as a constitutional right, the notion that governments have no business competing with the private sector, even in cases where the latter are behaving in a monopolistic manner and screwing the public. But in fact the U.S. Constitution favors no economic system over any other. Even socialism or communism would be constitutional, though I'm not advocating either system. What I am suggesting is that public-sector corporations should be created to compete with the private sector whenever the latter exhibits a self-interested indifference to the public good. And where is it written that even good corporations should be insulated from any form of public ownership? Corporations aren't reluctant to seek public "bailouts", willingly trading bonds or ownership stakes to get them. But when things turn good, they howl if the Government wants to keep its stake long enough to make a profit on the public's investment.

Enough ranting. It's not that I'm an actual economist or anything. :^)

What you say makes eminent sense in a perfect world, where there is no chance that the party in poser would use that power for political advantage.

-- PeterN