Every four years several billion people spend an inordinate amount of time watching television. No, not Eurovision. World Cup fever strikes deep, a potent mix of nationalism, hooliganism, and referee-hatred. Life and death (and a great deal of property damage) are decided by each game. The worldwide excitement is high. The group stage is complete, and tomorrow marks the beginning of the knockout rounds where the fate of each team rides on a single game, and possibly a single foot. What a perfect moment for the first installation of Erratum Terrium's Spellbindingly Entertaining Statistics!! SES!!!
Money is, now more than ever, an integral part of the sports world. Even in the World Cup where player salaries don't figure, rich countries still have a significant advantage. They can recruit and train players from a young age, support them throughout their career, and provide a much higher levels of resources for their national team. And, unlike the poorer countries, they have mountains of extra support from corporate sponsors and therefore don't have to make budgetary sacrifices to provide those same resources.
Yet the World Cup retains fundamental equalizers that the overall international system lacks. The rules are the same for all teams; a goal struck by Cameroon or Paraguay is equal to one struck by France or the United States. But what is the relationship between a country's wealth and its 2010 World Cup success?
At first glance it appears that wealth is a fairly good predictor of success. Only 1 of the 7 poorest* teams (Ghana, the tournament's poorest side) made it past the group stage, while 5 of the 8 wealthiest* teams made it.
*Here we are measuring "wealth" by GDP per capita in PPP$ as measured by the IMF in 2009, with the sole exception being North Korea whose numbers are based on a 2009 CIA estimate. Let it be said loud and clear that Erratum Terrium's use in this situation of GDP per capita is a pure measurement of total country wealth. We do not, repeat, do not believe in GDP per capita as an accurate measure of the economic situation in any given country.
So the wealthiest teams tend to do better than the poorest teams. Fairly predictable, but not the whole story. Let's take a look at efficiency; that is, how well a given country used its wealth to achieve World Cup success. Here we will look at points scored in the group stage as a percentage of GDP per capita. Excluding the two teams who failed the score a point (North Korea and Cameroon, both very poor countries) there were twelve teams whose points scored made up less than 0.02% of their GDP per capita. Except for Algeria ($6,869) all of those teams have GDP per capita above $26,700 and only two of them (the United States and England in a fairly easy Group D) made it past the group stage. On the opposite side, there were 6 teams whose points made up at least 0.05% of their GDP per capita (with the most efficient being Ghana at 0.26%). 5 of those 6 teams qualified for the knockout round, with the only return-ticket team being Ivory Coast, who to their benefit managed 4 points in the Group of Death with powerhouses Portugal and Brazil despite the second-lowest GDP per capita among all 32 teams.
And for the wealthy countries, their successes were costly. Let's imagine that each country's citizens (the fictionally equal citizens implied by the GDP per capita calculations) had to pay for their points and goals with equal contributions based on GDP. The French would have to pony up $33,679 for each point, and the Swiss $43,007 for each goal. Meanwhile the Ghanaians only need to flip over $388 for each of their points, and the people of Ivory Coast only $419 for each goal scored.
Of course in all this analysis we are ignoring the 150+ countries that failed to qualify for the World Cup, most of which are poor. Although it is worth noting that none of the world's 5 richest countries qualified.
So basically we can say that while wealth is a fairly good predictor of World Cup success, it by no means assures any victories -- which France, Australia, Denmark, and Switzerland found out the hard way. And while poverty hinders World Cup success, it cannot contain quality play -- which Ghana, Ivory Coast, and Paraguay have proved this year.
We will have an opportunity to test the effects of the wealth disparity tomorrow when Ghana, the tournament's poorest team, takes on the United States, the tournament's wealthiest team with a GDP per capita nearly 30 times that of Ghana, on the first day of knockout play (Mighty Ducks, anyone?). For the sake of barefoot kids kicking plastic bottles down dirty streets around the world, let's hope the Black Stars comes out victorious.
ADDENDUM (4/7/10)
Victory was short-lived. In the first knockout round Ghana (#151 GDP per capita in the world) defeated the U.S. (#6) and Paraguay (#117) made sushi rolls out of Japan (#23). England (#19) and South Korea (#30) were sent packing. The quarter-finals, on the other hand, brought a harsh dose of reality to the economic underdogs. All four games saw the wealthier country take home victory. The lone, not-so-rich, non-Eurozone holdout is Uruguay (#62), who needed penalties to send the Black Stars home. Trivia Twist: Uruguay won the first ever World Cup in 1930.
A few more statistical snacks...the average GDP per capita ranking for the 32 teams which qualified for the World Cup was 59 (out of 182), and the median ranking was 39. Much of that differential is due to Paraguay and Ghana, the only two teams from the bottom economic half to qualify. Below see the changes in the average GDP per capita rankings of qualifying teams:
World Cup = 59
Knockout round = 49
Quarterfinals = 64
Semifinals = 29
¡Uruguay all the guay!
Friday, June 25, 2010
Saturday, May 29, 2010
The Bitten Hand
Much attention is currently focused on the Gulf of Mexico oil spill. The environmental repercussions will be terrible, and it may be decades before the fragile region recovers. We learned that MMS government regulators were...shall we say, "relaxed" in their pursuit of oversight. And much attention has also been paid to the ping-pong game of responsibility played between the Obama Administration and the owners of the sunken oil platform which caused the spill, BP (No, not "British Petroleum" -- just "BP". Like when Prince changed his name to that symbol.) The administration has made a big show of being "tough" on BP, insisting that the company pay for the clean-up and announcing plans for new regulations and energy legislation. And where there's politics, there's money -- lots of oily BP money, much of which has gone to Obama and Louisiana Senator Mary Landrieu (D).
In recent times we have seen more conflicts between multi-national corporations and local governments in their countries of operation. Usually the battle-lines are far from the front pages. In back rooms it's much easier to solve these sort of problems "amicably". Once things go public the opportunities for bribery and corruption shrink. The BP oil spill is one example of a MNC/national government tiff. Let's take a look at some others.
GREECE
As if things could get any worse, 2 Danish pharmaceutical companies have decided to stop supplying vital drugs to the Greek medical system. The 2 companies, Novo Nordisk and Leo Pharma, previously supplied 17 insulin products, and a anti-blood-clotting agent and anti-psoriasis medication, respectively. Both companies state that their decision to withdraw the products is due to the Greek government's recent decision to cut all pharmaceutical prices by 25% -- a decision prompted by international pressure to reduce government spending. The companies, already owed hundreds of millions of euros by the Greek government, state that the new reduced prices would force them to run their businesses in Greece at a loss and could trigger similar price reductions in others countries. To their benefit, Novo Nordisk did agree to the price reduction on one less-advanced insulin product and will offer another basic insulin product for free. However, "Steve Gaudis" is not convinced of their goodwill. According to that same article, 40% of Novo Nordisk profits come from the modern insulin products. 50,000 people in Greece use(d) these products. The word "blackmail" comes up repeatedly in Greek statements.
SOMALIA/GERMANY
Abdinur Ahmed Darman, a Somali expatriate who maintains his baloney claims to be the President of Somalia*, has apparently signed an agreement with a German security company to send 100 mercenaries to Somalia. According to the contract, the former Bundeswehr soldiers will only arrive in the country when Darman returns as the legitimate president. Asgaard Security Group, the contracted party, has stated that it would wait for UN recognition of Darman before sending its troops. However other reports have the first contingent of mercenaries already on their way to Somalia. The internationally recognized President of Somalia* Sharif Sheikh Ahmed called the contract "laughable" and Darman a "con artist". Con artist or not, Darman is an interesting political character. He claims to have been elected president at a national reconstruction conference in 2003, and that all leaders since are illegitimate. He also claims credit for setting up the relatively stable Islamic Court system that ruled the country before the 2006 invasion by Ethiopia -- there is no evidence that this is true. There was a report made by several Somali journalists that his militia tried to kill them after finding their reporting objectionable. His government operates its own official government and PR websites (check the "Contact" page -- funny, but still a big step up from somalipresidency@yahoo.com). Perhaps coincidentally the PR website is run out of Germany as well. Check out the videos here and here.
Two ways of looking at this situation.
One: Darman and Asgaard are just looking for publicity. Asgaard wants to advertise its services in "unstable environments" (don't get any more unstable than Somalia these days) and Darman capitalizing on a weak Somalian government and a recent failed international conference in Turkey to make his name known to power brokers inside and outside of Somalia.
Two: This shit is for real. Darman wants to "re"-take power in Somalia, and he knows the international community is tired of the weak-kneed and fractional current government. He wants international backing for a new regime -- a.k.a. the Chalabi Gambit -- and he thinks that bringing in former western military types will buy him some Davos cred. Not sure if he realizes that the EU (Germany included) has already sent troops to Somalia to help train the army.
Oh and the * sign after "President of Somalia" is meant to remind readers that this title implies little if any actual control over said country, given that most of said country is run by one of two conglomerated Islamist groups.
SO WHAT?
Here we have 3 situations in different parts of the world, linked by one aspect: the changing dynamic between national governments and multi-national corporations. It is clear to everyone that national governments (NAGs) have less carrot and stick tools in their belt to deal with the MNCs than they used to. It is simply too easy for MNCs to shift operations (or at least legitimately threaten to shift operations) or finances from one country to the next. And at a basic level, the culture of nationalist fealty that used to be status quo in major corporations has been diluted down to a What-Have-You-Done-For-Me-Lately attitude.
Once upon a time privatization was a tool of fiscally conservative NAGs trying to rid themselves of the moral responsibility for the general welfare of the population placed upon them after World War II. This viewpoint (Acronym Game: Reagan-Thatcher-IMF...go!) was founded in a world where corporations were, at the most, representations of the power of their respective countries. Not so far off from the days of the East India Trading Co. Those days are gone. And now we pay. Literally. The BP oil spill will drive up prices, which we have no choice but to pay, and then the increased profits will go to...well, you get the picture. The Danish taxpayers will help foot the bill to set Greece right again, and in paying those debts, their taxpayers dollars will go to Novo Nordisk and Leo Pharma...who will continue to withhold their products from the Greek market, fostering a black market in those drugs where prices for sick Greek consumers will most likely be significantly higher than they were before. And Asgaard will send its former Bundeswehr soldiers into Somalia, where some day they may be contractually obligated to fire on other Bundeswehr soldiers training Somalian security forces under EU auspices...all because a rich businessman with web access and a Napoleon-complex thought that calling a tail a leg makes it one.
OFF INTO THE SUNSET
But the argument here is not one which fulminates blindly against all increases in MNC power. The NAGs had a go at running the world, and the results have been severely mixed. There's no way of knowing whether the next century -- assuredly a century where the scales will tip towards MNCs -- will leave us better or worse off.
What is important to realize is that this new era will be different. In giving greater freedom to the MNCs we have removed some important democratic controls over how the world is run. We will continue to run into situations like the three demonstrated above -- and the NAGs will look (furtively) for ways to pull back on the reins on this runaway train. There simply isn't enough space for the primacy of profit AND nationalist fealty. Your money or your country.
In recent times we have seen more conflicts between multi-national corporations and local governments in their countries of operation. Usually the battle-lines are far from the front pages. In back rooms it's much easier to solve these sort of problems "amicably". Once things go public the opportunities for bribery and corruption shrink. The BP oil spill is one example of a MNC/national government tiff. Let's take a look at some others.
GREECE
As if things could get any worse, 2 Danish pharmaceutical companies have decided to stop supplying vital drugs to the Greek medical system. The 2 companies, Novo Nordisk and Leo Pharma, previously supplied 17 insulin products, and a anti-blood-clotting agent and anti-psoriasis medication, respectively. Both companies state that their decision to withdraw the products is due to the Greek government's recent decision to cut all pharmaceutical prices by 25% -- a decision prompted by international pressure to reduce government spending. The companies, already owed hundreds of millions of euros by the Greek government, state that the new reduced prices would force them to run their businesses in Greece at a loss and could trigger similar price reductions in others countries. To their benefit, Novo Nordisk did agree to the price reduction on one less-advanced insulin product and will offer another basic insulin product for free. However, "Steve Gaudis" is not convinced of their goodwill. According to that same article, 40% of Novo Nordisk profits come from the modern insulin products. 50,000 people in Greece use(d) these products. The word "blackmail" comes up repeatedly in Greek statements.
SOMALIA/GERMANY
Abdinur Ahmed Darman, a Somali expatriate who maintains his baloney claims to be the President of Somalia*, has apparently signed an agreement with a German security company to send 100 mercenaries to Somalia. According to the contract, the former Bundeswehr soldiers will only arrive in the country when Darman returns as the legitimate president. Asgaard Security Group, the contracted party, has stated that it would wait for UN recognition of Darman before sending its troops. However other reports have the first contingent of mercenaries already on their way to Somalia. The internationally recognized President of Somalia* Sharif Sheikh Ahmed called the contract "laughable" and Darman a "con artist". Con artist or not, Darman is an interesting political character. He claims to have been elected president at a national reconstruction conference in 2003, and that all leaders since are illegitimate. He also claims credit for setting up the relatively stable Islamic Court system that ruled the country before the 2006 invasion by Ethiopia -- there is no evidence that this is true. There was a report made by several Somali journalists that his militia tried to kill them after finding their reporting objectionable. His government operates its own official government and PR websites (check the "Contact" page -- funny, but still a big step up from somalipresidency@yahoo.com). Perhaps coincidentally the PR website is run out of Germany as well. Check out the videos here and here.
Two ways of looking at this situation.
One: Darman and Asgaard are just looking for publicity. Asgaard wants to advertise its services in "unstable environments" (don't get any more unstable than Somalia these days) and Darman capitalizing on a weak Somalian government and a recent failed international conference in Turkey to make his name known to power brokers inside and outside of Somalia.
Two: This shit is for real. Darman wants to "re"-take power in Somalia, and he knows the international community is tired of the weak-kneed and fractional current government. He wants international backing for a new regime -- a.k.a. the Chalabi Gambit -- and he thinks that bringing in former western military types will buy him some Davos cred. Not sure if he realizes that the EU (Germany included) has already sent troops to Somalia to help train the army.
Oh and the * sign after "President of Somalia" is meant to remind readers that this title implies little if any actual control over said country, given that most of said country is run by one of two conglomerated Islamist groups.
SO WHAT?
Here we have 3 situations in different parts of the world, linked by one aspect: the changing dynamic between national governments and multi-national corporations. It is clear to everyone that national governments (NAGs) have less carrot and stick tools in their belt to deal with the MNCs than they used to. It is simply too easy for MNCs to shift operations (or at least legitimately threaten to shift operations) or finances from one country to the next. And at a basic level, the culture of nationalist fealty that used to be status quo in major corporations has been diluted down to a What-Have-You-Done-For-Me-Lately attitude.
Once upon a time privatization was a tool of fiscally conservative NAGs trying to rid themselves of the moral responsibility for the general welfare of the population placed upon them after World War II. This viewpoint (Acronym Game: Reagan-Thatcher-IMF...go!) was founded in a world where corporations were, at the most, representations of the power of their respective countries. Not so far off from the days of the East India Trading Co. Those days are gone. And now we pay. Literally. The BP oil spill will drive up prices, which we have no choice but to pay, and then the increased profits will go to...well, you get the picture. The Danish taxpayers will help foot the bill to set Greece right again, and in paying those debts, their taxpayers dollars will go to Novo Nordisk and Leo Pharma...who will continue to withhold their products from the Greek market, fostering a black market in those drugs where prices for sick Greek consumers will most likely be significantly higher than they were before. And Asgaard will send its former Bundeswehr soldiers into Somalia, where some day they may be contractually obligated to fire on other Bundeswehr soldiers training Somalian security forces under EU auspices...all because a rich businessman with web access and a Napoleon-complex thought that calling a tail a leg makes it one.
OFF INTO THE SUNSET
But the argument here is not one which fulminates blindly against all increases in MNC power. The NAGs had a go at running the world, and the results have been severely mixed. There's no way of knowing whether the next century -- assuredly a century where the scales will tip towards MNCs -- will leave us better or worse off.
What is important to realize is that this new era will be different. In giving greater freedom to the MNCs we have removed some important democratic controls over how the world is run. We will continue to run into situations like the three demonstrated above -- and the NAGs will look (furtively) for ways to pull back on the reins on this runaway train. There simply isn't enough space for the primacy of profit AND nationalist fealty. Your money or your country.
Saturday, May 22, 2010
Crash, Collapse, Spill: Whither Corporate Responsibility?
Dear Citizen,
In your blessed and tranquil day-to-day, you may have heard some whisperings about terrible accidents. Accidents, being a natural function of our ever more complicated world, happen all too often these days. We, the Corporations, feel terribly about these accidents and do whatever we can to aid the victims and prevent future accidents -- so long as those efforts do not affect our bottom line. "What's that?" say the faux-populist talkings heads, "So you DO only care about your profits. You are all terrible people and will go straight to hell upon your deaths -- which will all hopefully come about as a result of your own malfeasance!" Well, ratings lap-dogs, you do have one bit right: We do care about our profits. Our purpose is to make money for our stockholders, and we have few qualms about doing what is necessary to increase those profits and prolong our own corporate lives. It is through centuries of our profit-seeking actions that the economies of the developed world have grown so substantially and provided you all with the comforts and resources that you heedlessly enjoy today.
The personal computer and air-conditioning? Us.
AIDS treatment medications and witty greeting cards? Us.
Planes, trains, automobiles, and plastic tricycles? Take a wild guess.
And yet when something does go wrong, when an ACCIDENT does happens -- a commercial airplane with faulty, past-repair-date wiring crashes and incinerates a few hundred passengers, a coal mine originally dug by the light of oil lamps collapses and traps a few dozen underpaid, cancer-ridden miners, or an offshore oil rig pops a massive leak and wipes out a few hundred square miles of aquatic ecosystem -- the spotlight of blame always lands on us.
Now, if you've read this far already then you are unfortunately not among the 95.3% of society that seeks happiness in ignorance [percentage based on the most recent Nielsen research], and it might be that you actually want to know how the world works. And therefore there is less than a 0.02% likelihood that you will ever willingly buy our stock. So we'll give it to you straight: Fuck you and your moral obfuscations about corporate responsibility. You can't have your cake, eat it too, and then complain that you wanted pie. The rich of the world -- and no equivocating; if you are reading this on your own computer, then that means you -- love to reap the benefits of the world we created. Non-Germans and Japanese: How do you think the Allies won World War II? Because despite all the difficulties, we redirected all of our factories to war material output and massively out-produced the Axis. And Germans and Japanese: How do you think you recovered from World War II? It certainly wasn't through socialism. And speaking of that, don't worry about the whole "defeating communism and saving the non-gulag-interred population of the world from being interred in gulags" thing -- that one's on us. By any chance are you living longer and healthier than your grandparents? For that you can thank pharmaceutical companies, corporate agriculture, supermarkets, pharmacies, and the transportation and oil companies that allow all of those goodies to travel across the globe -- not to mention the modern financial and communication networks that provide the foundation for it all.
Your left-wing talking- and typing-heads will tell you that corporations were created in the public domain, originally to serve the crown and later the democratic "common good". They yearn for that halcyon epoch where the economy utilized the country's resources to power growth and the democratic government made sure that every citizen's needs were provided for. Problem is, that epoch never existed and it never will. Every government, even the most "representative", is ruled by the power of money -- just as much so as any corporation. At least we are honest about our methods of operation; democratic politicians always spend an inordinate amount of time denying the truth of how greatly they are influenced by money. The world has always been ruled by the rich, and it always will be. Any attempt to deny this is at the very least foolish, if not outright dangerous.
It's a corporate world: a world you created for us to rule. You created it when you asked for MORE and decided not to care too much about how we got that pair of sneakers, that bunch of bananas, or that gallon of gasoline to you. And sorry bleeding-hearts, but it's far too late to start caring now. We've got the good shit, and you and all of your neighbors are just as hooked as any frothy-mouthed, skin-scratching addict. Did someone say regulation? We dare you -- double-doggy dare you -- to try and regulate us. And when we say "regulate", we don't mean "pass laws which contain regulations". We mean "actually use the legal system to change our behavior". The former is simple, and to be honest, we only put up cursory resistance to regulatory laws because passing these laws takes pressure off us and our political allies. Even the most stringent regulations can be easily outmaneuvered with a good team of lawyers, some offshore accounts, and a few well-placed bribes to government-salary regulators.
If all this talk is depressing your sappy liberal brain, by all means go and work for a charity or a non-profit. Help those people left behind in our free market economy, God knows there are plenty of them. We might even send you a donation every once and a while -- we want poor people to be happy too! Unhappy poor people can start riots and fuel anti-oligarchic movements, and those kind of things are bad for business.
So next time you read a story about some accident caused by the lack of corporate responsibility, don't get angry and certainly don't ask us to sacrifice our profit margins to run maintenance checks more often than necessary or provide counseling to widows. These accidents are part of an unpredictable world, collateral damages resulting from the economic growth. The reality is that billions more people will benefit from what this system of economic growth produces than will suffer from the occasional accident. Our focus-group-tested advice: Don't worry, be happy. Just let us take care of things. Remember, it's our world. You just live in it.
Sincerely,
The Corporations
In your blessed and tranquil day-to-day, you may have heard some whisperings about terrible accidents. Accidents, being a natural function of our ever more complicated world, happen all too often these days. We, the Corporations, feel terribly about these accidents and do whatever we can to aid the victims and prevent future accidents -- so long as those efforts do not affect our bottom line. "What's that?" say the faux-populist talkings heads, "So you DO only care about your profits. You are all terrible people and will go straight to hell upon your deaths -- which will all hopefully come about as a result of your own malfeasance!" Well, ratings lap-dogs, you do have one bit right: We do care about our profits. Our purpose is to make money for our stockholders, and we have few qualms about doing what is necessary to increase those profits and prolong our own corporate lives. It is through centuries of our profit-seeking actions that the economies of the developed world have grown so substantially and provided you all with the comforts and resources that you heedlessly enjoy today.
The personal computer and air-conditioning? Us.
AIDS treatment medications and witty greeting cards? Us.
Planes, trains, automobiles, and plastic tricycles? Take a wild guess.
And yet when something does go wrong, when an ACCIDENT does happens -- a commercial airplane with faulty, past-repair-date wiring crashes and incinerates a few hundred passengers, a coal mine originally dug by the light of oil lamps collapses and traps a few dozen underpaid, cancer-ridden miners, or an offshore oil rig pops a massive leak and wipes out a few hundred square miles of aquatic ecosystem -- the spotlight of blame always lands on us.
Now, if you've read this far already then you are unfortunately not among the 95.3% of society that seeks happiness in ignorance [percentage based on the most recent Nielsen research], and it might be that you actually want to know how the world works. And therefore there is less than a 0.02% likelihood that you will ever willingly buy our stock. So we'll give it to you straight: Fuck you and your moral obfuscations about corporate responsibility. You can't have your cake, eat it too, and then complain that you wanted pie. The rich of the world -- and no equivocating; if you are reading this on your own computer, then that means you -- love to reap the benefits of the world we created. Non-Germans and Japanese: How do you think the Allies won World War II? Because despite all the difficulties, we redirected all of our factories to war material output and massively out-produced the Axis. And Germans and Japanese: How do you think you recovered from World War II? It certainly wasn't through socialism. And speaking of that, don't worry about the whole "defeating communism and saving the non-gulag-interred population of the world from being interred in gulags" thing -- that one's on us. By any chance are you living longer and healthier than your grandparents? For that you can thank pharmaceutical companies, corporate agriculture, supermarkets, pharmacies, and the transportation and oil companies that allow all of those goodies to travel across the globe -- not to mention the modern financial and communication networks that provide the foundation for it all.
Your left-wing talking- and typing-heads will tell you that corporations were created in the public domain, originally to serve the crown and later the democratic "common good". They yearn for that halcyon epoch where the economy utilized the country's resources to power growth and the democratic government made sure that every citizen's needs were provided for. Problem is, that epoch never existed and it never will. Every government, even the most "representative", is ruled by the power of money -- just as much so as any corporation. At least we are honest about our methods of operation; democratic politicians always spend an inordinate amount of time denying the truth of how greatly they are influenced by money. The world has always been ruled by the rich, and it always will be. Any attempt to deny this is at the very least foolish, if not outright dangerous.
It's a corporate world: a world you created for us to rule. You created it when you asked for MORE and decided not to care too much about how we got that pair of sneakers, that bunch of bananas, or that gallon of gasoline to you. And sorry bleeding-hearts, but it's far too late to start caring now. We've got the good shit, and you and all of your neighbors are just as hooked as any frothy-mouthed, skin-scratching addict. Did someone say regulation? We dare you -- double-doggy dare you -- to try and regulate us. And when we say "regulate", we don't mean "pass laws which contain regulations". We mean "actually use the legal system to change our behavior". The former is simple, and to be honest, we only put up cursory resistance to regulatory laws because passing these laws takes pressure off us and our political allies. Even the most stringent regulations can be easily outmaneuvered with a good team of lawyers, some offshore accounts, and a few well-placed bribes to government-salary regulators.
If all this talk is depressing your sappy liberal brain, by all means go and work for a charity or a non-profit. Help those people left behind in our free market economy, God knows there are plenty of them. We might even send you a donation every once and a while -- we want poor people to be happy too! Unhappy poor people can start riots and fuel anti-oligarchic movements, and those kind of things are bad for business.
So next time you read a story about some accident caused by the lack of corporate responsibility, don't get angry and certainly don't ask us to sacrifice our profit margins to run maintenance checks more often than necessary or provide counseling to widows. These accidents are part of an unpredictable world, collateral damages resulting from the economic growth. The reality is that billions more people will benefit from what this system of economic growth produces than will suffer from the occasional accident. Our focus-group-tested advice: Don't worry, be happy. Just let us take care of things. Remember, it's our world. You just live in it.
Sincerely,
The Corporations
Saturday, May 1, 2010
Outsourced!
by Alfred P. Loafward IX
President pro tempore, Erratum Terrium Board of Directors
Today is a sad day for me, and a happy day, I must imagine, for Hernando de Soto. When I inherited the post of President pro tempore of the Erratum Terrium Board of Directors from my late uncle-in-law, who also happened to be an oft-needed tax attorney, I never imagined a day like this might come. To lay this narrative more squarely in the vein of honesty, this inheritance fell to me several weeks before my emergence from the womb, and my imagination was limited to the sequencing of kicks I delivered to the inside of my mother's swollen midsection. One such kick disturbed her so that she spilled her cup of tea all over her conversation companion, her suitor-of-the-moment, A. Mitchell Palmer. I have been made to believe that this incident, and the ensuing cloth-napkin intervention debacle, led almost directly to the First Red Scare.
Current international affairs have been with me all my life, and so, as previously stated, today is a sad day for me. Just hours ago I dispatched a courier with a parcel of signed papers, with the result of my signature on said papers being the final sale of all Erratum Terrium assets and properties to an international consortium of nose-hair-trimmer salesmen (very popular in Turkey, I understand). This consortium, in turn, transferred everything to a shell company in the the Bahamas, who in turn collateralized our substantial debt into securities backed solely by the mortgage on my third cousin Debbie's St. Augustine, Florida BBQ restaurant -- which, to remain in the vein of honesty, was run out of business and burned down in 1964 after she attempted solve race relations by refusing to serve both whites and blacks equally. These collateralized debt obligations were passed like hepatitis C from one investment banker to the next. To the best of my information Lloyd Blankfein used them accidentally as toilet paper on a restroom break from sworn testimony in front of the U.S. Senate, and then, upon realizing his error, tweeted "...using crap to wipe up crap". This was 30 minutes ago.
The papers, now covered in Blankfein crap, were found in the unflushed toilet 3 minutes later by Justo Rufino Estrada Cabrera, a Guatemalan national employed under a false Social Security number to clean restrooms in the Capitol building. Not speaking more than a few choice words in English, Mr. Estrada Cabrera immediately understood the value of the papers he held in his wisely-gloved hands, wiped off the Blankfein crap, and faxed a copy to his third cousin, a lawyer in Guatemala.
And so, as of May 1st, 2010, Erratum Terrium has been outsourced to Guatemala. I can only hope they continue the same worthy journalistic tradition. After all, neighboring El Salvador was the first country in the world to elect a former CNN anchor as its head of state! And what higher tradition of journalism is there than that found at CNN!
Please excuse the sarcasm. I get cranky when I don't take my daily fish oil supplement. Last night, in the midst of my anxious decision-making process, I went to see my speech therapist (my late mother, spurned in her youth by a haughty Carl Jung, forbid anyone in my family from seeing psychiatrists, speech therapy is the closest I can get) for some advice. "Erratum Terrium is like my child," I told him, "I have put my whole life into it, and I don't want to see it changed." The good doctor took a few long pulls from his thick, dark cigar, removed his sunglasses to reveal his bloodshot blue eyes, and asked the topless masseuse to leave the room. Exhaling smoke dramatically, he said: "If there is anything that we wish to change in the child, we should first examine it and see whether it is not something that could better be changed in ourselves." He then leaned towards the glass table and, using a rolled-up $100 bill, snorted a line of cocaine from South America imported by Mexican cartels through Guatemala. The significance of which, lost at the time in the contemplance of the good doctor's wise words, is clear to me only now.
Dictated, not read
May 1st, 2010
Location undisclosed
Sunday, February 28, 2010
A Clearing in the Jungle
On the day in question, a wet heat had already settled on the jungle, portending the arrival of the rains after an especially difficult dry season. Not even the slightest of winds drifted through the yellow-frayed leaves. Bird calls and monkey shrieks echoed, growing closer. All the animals were gathered in the clearing, milling around, clustered in quietly whispering groups, eyes glancing ever so often towards the great ceiba tree.
The howler monkeys finally arrived, swinging into the great ceiba. Their piercing cries called all attention, whispers ceasing, and necks turned towards the tree. The great owl sat perched on a thick low branch. He ruffled his feathers calmly, and then began.
"It is time for us to choose once again. For four years now Snake has been our leader. His time has come to a close. We must choose a new leader. In this time of great crisis, we must choose wisely. First, we will hear from each of the candidates. Then the voting will commence. First to speak will be Wolf."
Wolf approached the great tree slowly. For those who were not close enough to see his wide slimy grin, it might have seemed that he was nervous.
"Thank you, Wise Owl. Animals of the jungle, under my rule you can look forward to four years of stability. We must come together to defeat Fear. Over the past four years, who among us has felt fear simply walking through the forest? Who among us has had terrible nightmares about our family members when they have not returned by nightfall? We would not feel this fear if I had been chosen four years ago. We can now correct that mistake. Feel safe again. Choose Wolf."
A thunderous applause erupted among a few animals. A few more booed, while most stayed silent. Wolf bowed slightly, slimy grin never leaving his face.
"Now we will hear from Vulture."
Vulture floated softly onto a high branch of the ceiba. She looked down at Snake, one of her biggest supporters, and smiled.
"Thank you, Wise Owl. We must continue the great work of Snake. We must make sure that no animal goes hungry in the jungle. We must make sure that every animal in the jungle has a place to live and can go to school. We must have pride in our heritage. My opponent, although his words are so smooth, cannot make you forget the atrocities of the past. He does not want to get rid of fear, but merely replace the fear of the criminals with the fear of the government. We cannot allow his type to take control again. We must build a better government, and a better jungle. Unity is our shield, and love is our weapon. Choose Vulture. Thank you."
The large majority of animals applauded quietly. A few of Wolf's supporters booed loudly and one threw a small volcanic rock at Vulture, missing by several meters.
"Thank you, Vulture," said Owl, "now you have heard the candidates speak. It is is time for you to make your voices heard..."
"Wait!" cried a small voice from the back of the crowd, "There is one candidate who has not had a chance to speak yet!"
"There are only two real candidates, Worm," said Owl sternly, "it is time to vote."
"Ant must be allowed to speak," said Worm, summoning as much courage as a worm can summon.
"There is no time," said Vulture, "we still have much to do."
"Ant has no right to speak here," added Wolf, "his views are backwards and dangerous."
Owl paused a moment and appeared to be thinking deeply.
"We will give Ant a voice," said Owl finally, "as our custom has always been to allow free speech."
A narrow crease appeared in the crowd as Ant made his way to the front. Animals began to grumble in low voices. Shouts rang out from Wolf's supporters:
"Stomp him!"
"Crush him!"
"Get a magnifying glass!"
Laughter followed. Ant crawled up to the base of the great ceiba tree, took a deep breath, and began to speak.
"Thank you, brothers and sisters. I stand before you not because I want to be your leader, but because I want you all to be leaders. Our jungle has suffered for too long under the yoke of a government bent on dominating our minds, chipping away at our heritage and our dreams until we are no more than dry leaves felled by the autumn winds. We should be gathering here not to choose the next oppressor, but instead to take back what was once ours. But we cannot stand alone against the oppression and inequality rendered by the forces of history. Only through true unity -- not unity under a flag or political party, but unity as brother and sisters in the same struggle -- can we reclaim our history and take hold of our future. Do not choose Vulture or Wolf. Choose your neighbors, your brothers and sisters. Choose yourself. Thank you."
Ant stopped and looked out at the animals. There was no applause, no boos, no response at all. The animals had not been paying attention. Vulture and Snake and Wolf and their powerful supporters were talking quietly together, smiling comfortable smiles and laughing at re-told jokes. The majority of the animals, not powerful enough to be in this inner circle were standing in small groups, distracted, looking over often at the inner circle trying to understand why they were smiling and what the jokes were and why they were funny. Beyond them were even more animals, mostly the smaller ones, who had to stand on each other's shoulders or help each other climb trees just to see what was going on. No one who could hear Ant had listened, and no one who wanted to listen could hear. Ant let out a familiar deep sigh. He looked up at Owl, hoping at least one animal had heard him. Owl had been listening. He smiled curtly, perfunctorily, at Ant, and then turned his attention back to the crowd.
"Now it is time to choose. Those who would choose Vulture, move to the left side of the clearing. Those who would choose Wolf, to the right."
No one moved.
"Now," said Owl with finality.
About half of the animals moved immediately to one side or the other. The supporters of Wolf and Vulture began to move through the animals that had not already chosen. Wolf's supporters brandished weapons and formed threatening circles around a group of animals until they moved towards Wolf's side. Vulture's supporters moved through the crowd, reminding the animals of all the delicious food they had received from Snake and would continue to receive under Vulture. And they showed them black list -- the list of Wolf's supporters who would receive nothing if Vulture won.
Eventually all the animals either chose a side or left the clearing confused as to why they had come in the first place. Owl set out to count the sides and name the new leader. Ant and Worm stayed for a while, hiding under some leaves near the edge of the clearing. Worm became impatient as the sun started to set.
"Let's leave," she said.
"No," said Ant, "I want to see who wins. Owl is almost finished. It looks like Wolf will win. I think people are tired of Snake's corruption and they don't remember so well the atrocities under Wolf's cousins. They fear Fear more than they love Love, I guess," he finished with a wry chuckle.
"Don't you see?" whispered Worm, "don't you see that it doesn't matter who wins? Nothing will ever change here in the jungle."
They were both silent for a long minute. A slight drizzle began to fall, tap-tapping on the yellow-frayed leaves above them.
"You're right, but" said Ant with determination, "if we stop believing that change is possible, then it will certainly become impossible. I will die with my delusions before submitting to that despair."
There was another silence, cut short this time by a mass of whooping and shouting from the clearing. Someone had won, again.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)