Tuesday, February 17, 2009
What's In Your Wallet?
In Veblen's wonderfully enjoyable essay on the rise and fall of the
viking empire and its parallels to Capitalism (An
Early Experiment in Trusts), I found myself unable to resist
making the connection with the Capital One Viking commercials:
I'm not sure if Capital One did, in fact, take the inspiration for these commercials in part from Veblen's essay, but if they did it would add an additional undertone of irony considering the all too ominous warning Veblen gives as to the results of excesses of greed. Like Vikings, Capitalism began as small, independent farmers (or small business owners) banning together to form expeditions in search of greater profits. Capitalism, like the Viking enterprises, eventually led to most of the smaller companies being gobbled up and a difficulty of new small companies to compete in the face of large corporate trusts; however, Capitalist governments (unlike Vikings) made regulations intended (in theory) to keep the large corporation from becoming too big and putting in systems of protections (to a degree) for the small upstarts. Viking corporations ended in the way that free, unrestricted Capitalism would have in the emergence of a single Viking company controlling all assets and then under poor leadership and an over extension of its power collapsing under its own weight. Capitalism managed to delay this collapse by putting in systems of regulation and protections, but (like the Vikings) greed has shown itself to be excessive (I am not one to argue against taking gains and becoming wealthy, but I do see issues with becoming wealthy while driving an organization into the ground or taking excessive amounts of wealth--is it better for one person who will not reinvest or spend $1 billion to have that money or for that person to have $150 million, still very wealthy, while the remaining money is distributed to start up new companies, pay employees extra--almost surely to be spent on luxuries by the middle class and thus helping to reproduce the means by which the modern economy functions). Thus, we now find ourselves in an economy crippled by the excessive greed of the banking industry, not to mention the Enrons and several other companies over the past decade or so that have shown that the underpinning of Capitalism (money begetting more money) has reached the ceiling inherit in the fact that we live in a closed system with limited resources and the only way to reach further gains at this point is to merge and risk a monopoly or play the imaginary numbers game. There are no more markets that can be opened, the world market has been fairly well saturated. Until colonization of space begins (NASA promised it in promotional videos I saw in elementary school--we should have had it about a half decade ago), no new trade markets will open up nor will we see any new (huge) infusions of raw materials. Clearly instead of continuing a system focused on ever increasing greed, we need to rethink the system and build one focused on sustaining economic conditions and conservation of resources (and colonization of space). That or we let Capitalism have a few more 'good years' and set it free to the open market while we sit back with a bucket of popcorn and watch the Viking horde of Capitalism consolidate, rape and pillage the land and workers, and then collapse in a gluttoness heap.
*I should note that I realize companies continue to expand their markets in other countries the economies of India and China are growing every day, but it seems reasonable that their growth will lead (if it is not already) to the slow down or death of other economies or (if nothing else) at some point in the future those economies will reach a relative plateau state, when perhaps the economies of Africa can be further tapped (or South America) but when all of these economies are tapped, where will the bourgesie obtain its proletariat? To me, in my admitted economic naivety, it seems incomprehensible that under conditions of full (or near full) saturation we should expect, nay DEMAND, a never ending increase in capital. Especially when capital has the tendency to be hoarded, reducing the consuming power necessary to sustain and reproduce the elements of the system.
I'm not sure if Capital One did, in fact, take the inspiration for these commercials in part from Veblen's essay, but if they did it would add an additional undertone of irony considering the all too ominous warning Veblen gives as to the results of excesses of greed. Like Vikings, Capitalism began as small, independent farmers (or small business owners) banning together to form expeditions in search of greater profits. Capitalism, like the Viking enterprises, eventually led to most of the smaller companies being gobbled up and a difficulty of new small companies to compete in the face of large corporate trusts; however, Capitalist governments (unlike Vikings) made regulations intended (in theory) to keep the large corporation from becoming too big and putting in systems of protections (to a degree) for the small upstarts. Viking corporations ended in the way that free, unrestricted Capitalism would have in the emergence of a single Viking company controlling all assets and then under poor leadership and an over extension of its power collapsing under its own weight. Capitalism managed to delay this collapse by putting in systems of regulation and protections, but (like the Vikings) greed has shown itself to be excessive (I am not one to argue against taking gains and becoming wealthy, but I do see issues with becoming wealthy while driving an organization into the ground or taking excessive amounts of wealth--is it better for one person who will not reinvest or spend $1 billion to have that money or for that person to have $150 million, still very wealthy, while the remaining money is distributed to start up new companies, pay employees extra--almost surely to be spent on luxuries by the middle class and thus helping to reproduce the means by which the modern economy functions). Thus, we now find ourselves in an economy crippled by the excessive greed of the banking industry, not to mention the Enrons and several other companies over the past decade or so that have shown that the underpinning of Capitalism (money begetting more money) has reached the ceiling inherit in the fact that we live in a closed system with limited resources and the only way to reach further gains at this point is to merge and risk a monopoly or play the imaginary numbers game. There are no more markets that can be opened, the world market has been fairly well saturated. Until colonization of space begins (NASA promised it in promotional videos I saw in elementary school--we should have had it about a half decade ago), no new trade markets will open up nor will we see any new (huge) infusions of raw materials. Clearly instead of continuing a system focused on ever increasing greed, we need to rethink the system and build one focused on sustaining economic conditions and conservation of resources (and colonization of space). That or we let Capitalism have a few more 'good years' and set it free to the open market while we sit back with a bucket of popcorn and watch the Viking horde of Capitalism consolidate, rape and pillage the land and workers, and then collapse in a gluttoness heap.
*I should note that I realize companies continue to expand their markets in other countries the economies of India and China are growing every day, but it seems reasonable that their growth will lead (if it is not already) to the slow down or death of other economies or (if nothing else) at some point in the future those economies will reach a relative plateau state, when perhaps the economies of Africa can be further tapped (or South America) but when all of these economies are tapped, where will the bourgesie obtain its proletariat? To me, in my admitted economic naivety, it seems incomprehensible that under conditions of full (or near full) saturation we should expect, nay DEMAND, a never ending increase in capital. Especially when capital has the tendency to be hoarded, reducing the consuming power necessary to sustain and reproduce the elements of the system.
posted by Mike Oren # 12:04
AM 
Post a Comment