5 Comments

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D–Mass.) thinks she knows what ails capitalism: There aren't enough people telling the biggest businesses what to do.

Try to contain your surprise that Warren believes the profit motive is ruining capitalism. She wants the largest corporations in the United States to be legally answerable to people other than their shareholders, and she's introducing a bill to force it.  This Bill would be outright THEFT.

Warren's "Accountable Capitalism Act" would require that corporations that earn more than $1 billion in revenue a year (note "revenue," not "profits") would need a federal "charter" in order to operate. This charter would obligate these companies to consider all "stakeholders," not just shareholders, when making decisions. The bill would also require these corporations to permit employees to elect 40 percent of the company's board of directors; a super majority of 75 percent of directors and shareholders would have to approve political donations. (Gee, I wonder if somebody will propose something similar for unions?) Shareholders would be permitted to sue the company if they felt its actions were driven purely by profit and did not reflect the desires of its many "stakeholders."

The justification for all this is the common, economically sketchy claim of income inequality; that the rich are getting richer and that wages are stagnating. Warren complains in a Wall Street Journal commentary that shareholders have "extracted" $7 trillion in profits since 1985 that "might otherwise have been reinvested in the workers who helped produce them."

That number may look huge when presented this way, but it breaks down to $233 billion a year when calculated over 30 years. The United States' total Gross Domestic Product for 2016 was more than $18 trillion. (For extra fun homework, imagine taking this to its logical socialist conclusion, and calculate how much money each American would get from that $7 trillion profit figure if it were forcibly redistributed annually over that 30-year period.) Furthermore, Warren's argument assumes that because the money didn't get "reinvested" back into workers—in the form of, say, increased wages—those workers did not benefit from whatever it was that money did instead—like improvements to the machinery or software they use.

It's interesting that progressives (and many nominal conservatives) invoke "economic multipliers" when the government spends our tax dollars on subsidies and grants within the private sector. Entire communities, we are told, benefit when tax dollars are given to just a handful of politically connected firms. That money must acquire some special magic when it passes through a legislator's hands, because private sector profits apparently just get buried in a great big hole.

The truth is that our marketplace looks nothing like it did in 1985, and this is a good thing. Our options and our technologies have expanded dramatically and are increasingly accessible to more and more people. It's telling that none of that seems to be a consideration in Warren's proposal. Here's a reminder about the entire "growing income inequality" nonsense: Our middle class is shrinking because more people are moving up the economic ladder, not down.

Warren explains that she wants to essentially force these companies to use the "benefit corporation" model, which prizes a set of values above just profits. She notes that successful companies like Kickstarter and Patagonia have embraced such a model, and that it's legal in several states.

So, stay with me here: If these types of business models are so successful in the American market, then why wouldn't corporations adopt such a model voluntarily? We shouldn't need a federal bill at all! And what about companies that arereinvesting? Amazon brings in billions in revenue annually, but has operated for most of its lifetime barely making a profit. That it has recently started to increase its profit margin has inspired headlines over how dramatically their profits have increased. But here's what it actually looks like over time, courtesy of ReCode:

Amazon profitsCourtesy of ReCode

Amazon made the decision to invest in growth over profits for the long term, and the market has rewarded that decision. Now, it's getting the profits it passed up for years. Amazon is not legally operating under the public benefit corporation business model, but it certainly did operate for most of its lifespan with priorities other than profit. Yet Warren doesn't mention Amazon at all in her commentary. Why aren't they an example of a model corporation?

Warren even complains in her commentary that "companies are setting themselves up to fail" by funneling earnings to shareholders rather than reinvesting them. Assuming this is true, what does this have to do with her? Let them fail. This is why there is a marketplace. Why keep a poorly managed company alive if it's not creating value and drawing customers?

But Warren isn't really concerned about businesses failing. She's worried about the ones that succeed despite operating in ways that she doesn't like. What she really wants to is put the federal government in a position of evaluating and approving how companies grow. She wants to substitute the decisions of people who run businesses with the prejudices and preferences of people who think like she does. And she wants to use the courts to enforce her ideas of how corporations should be managed.

I brought up Amazon for a reason. Even though Amazon heavily reinvests in its own growth over profits it has constantly been getting crap over its low wages. Under Warren's bill, employees could essentially use the government to force Amazon to raise its wages. This would have benefited a certain number of employees, but it also would have done so at the expense of the company's growth. It would be creating fewer jobs. It would be smaller. There are some people who would see this as a good thing, but it could also result in a marketplace where people don't have the broad access to products and supplies that we have today. And that is not even getting into all the technology investments Amazon is responsible for that are making our lives better in any number of ways and will continue to do so in the future.

Warren says she wants American corporations to be looking out for "American interests." They are. They're just not always the same as Warren's political interests. She doesn't grasp the difference.

She has an apparently champion for her bill in Matt Yglesias over at Vox. Yglesias has also noted how frequently zoning regulations and NIMBY types keep much-needed urban housing development at bay. So he realizes when too many people have regulatory veto power over market decisions, stagnation is the outcome, and it ends up hurting any number of people. Why would this be any different?

 

 

 

 

Loading comment... The comment will be refreshed after 00:00.
  • Comment held for moderation.
    Captn. Jack · 01:14 10/02/2018
    She must be reading ATLAS Shrugged.
  • Comment held for moderation.
    HarleyRoseTX · 07:31 09/01/2018
    Nationalize big business? Sure Pocahontas! Start with taking Google and Amazon from it's globalist elite owners and give it to Trump's government to run!
    Great idea!
  • Comment held for moderation.
    Sammy jew dog · 10:35 08/19/2018
    Our News media needs to be Nationalized and taken away from the tribe.
  • Comment held for moderation.
    Alex · 20:30 08/18/2018
    Nationalize the "Socialists" like Soros' companies, facebook, apple, tweeter, ....... go through the campaign contributions and those that have been funding Socialism should be Nationalized.
    Then 'house" the homeless in THEIR houses . ... Sanders has THREE houses, he can give up TWO .... how many does Warren have????
  • Comment held for moderation.
    sammy the rat · 20:19 08/18/2018
    Never trust an Indian
    • Comment held for moderation.
      Amber · 07:16 08/19/2018
      That is no Indian .......
      White Woman speak with forked tongue ....
Say something here...
You are a guest ( Sign Up ? )
or post as a guest

 

 

 

Latest

11 Comments

New Rules of Engagement Announced in Syria; If Israel Hits Syria, They Get Hit Back -- IN ISRAEL

December 15, 2018
7 Comments

FEDERAL JUDGE RULES "OBAMACARE" UNCONSTITUTIONAL!

December 14, 2018
21 Comments

UKRAINE GOVERNMENT OPENS FIRE ON DONETSK AND GORLOVKA REGION

December 14, 2018
1 Comment

Obama State Dept. Provided Russia Dossier Nonsense to Senators HOURS Before Trump Sworn-in. ALL OF IT, FALSE!

December 14, 2018
2 Comments

US Embassy PROHIBITS Travel to Northern Israel ! ! !

December 14, 2018
55 Comments

I'm Wondering WHO is --ACTUALLY-- Running Our FedGov - It's not Trump

December 14, 2018
13 Comments

10 YEARS AGO TODAY – Al Gore Predicted North Pole Would Be COMPLETELY ICE FREE in Five Years

December 13, 2018
13 Comments

TURKISH ARMY BEGINS SHELLING U.S.-BACKED KURDS IN SYRIA

December 13, 2018
11 Comments

FREE Archive - Hal Turner December 12 - War within 48 Hours - Ukraine/Syria/Both

December 12, 2018
5 Comments

British Prime Minister SURVIVES "No-Confidence" Vote

December 12, 2018
4 Comments

END OF MACRON: French president faces NO CONFIDENCE vote TOMORROW - France in chaos

December 12, 2018
1 Comment

With Winter Upon Us, Seasonal Lubrication can improve performance . . .

December 12, 2018
2 Comments

Earthquake Hits Tennessee; Felt in Atlanta and farther South in GA

December 12, 2018
5 Comments

It's Official: British Prime Minster to Face No-Confidence Vote TODAY

December 12, 2018
4 Comments

British Prime Minister to be OUSTED in "No-Confidence" Vote

December 11, 2018
7 Comments

FIRST TIME IN 75 YEARS! U.S. ENDS RELIANCE ON FOREIGN OIL

December 11, 2018
7 Comments

ISRAEL PUTS TROOPS ON LEBANON BORDER; LEBANON NOW DEPLOYING TROOPS TO FACE THEM

December 11, 2018
6 Comments

UKRAINE ALERTS 90 HOSPITALS; PREPARE FOR INCOMING WOUNDED - "CLEANSING" OF "UNWANTED ELEMENTS"

December 11, 2018
2 Comments

VIDEO: Ukraine Moving more Armor for War

December 11, 2018
7 Comments

INTEL: Ukraine Government Planning FALSE FLAG ATTACK in Mariupol within 72 Hours

December 10, 2018