And if it isn’t some corner of the food industry, it’s
banking. And if it isn’t banking, it’s clothing. If not clothing, then I don’t
know, housing. It doesn’t seem to matter much. Whenever a business entity gets
beyond some size, the rules of behavior seem to change automatically, like some
evolutionary rule.
In days of yore, just after dinosaurs had ceased roaming
freely, banks used to be limited to a single state. And there used to be rules
which prevented those single-state banks from engaging in, say, on-line gambling.
Then something changed and banks were allowed to open in any state, gobble up
local banks at will, and engage in on-line gambling. And what happened? Well,
the banking industry collapsed, and we the people were forced by our government
to rescue them by borrowing money from China to prop up these indecent
entities.
Now was that implosion caused by size? In my mind, size was
the driving factor, because beyond some size, intelligence seems to fail. At
some stage, the Peter Principle (remember that ironclad principle??) seems to
engage firmly and the very large entities begin operating as if on autopilot
(you know . . . the way republicans want the world to operate). And, while
autopilot works in limited situations in things like airplanes, it rarely works
in complex situations. For example, you
really cannot fight a war successfully using the autopilot mode (see the Charge
of the Light Brigade, Vietnam, the unnecessary war in Iraq, and the war in
Afghanistan). And apparently, you cannot operate the world’s financial systems
while on autopilot (see Citibank, Morgan Stanley, Barclays, et al). Instead, you evidently require actual human
intelligence, which is capable of detecting particularly stupid forms of greed
and that other problem that seems to affect banking, LBS—the little boy
syndrome. The little boy syndrome is a state of being in which we decide to
give all of our money to greedy little boys, while telling them to go play nice
on the street. Then, when they inevitably lose all the money because they are
greedy and stupid, we pretend to be shocked at their behavior. So, we need actual human intelligence to
detect that the LBS has kicked in, requiring adults to intercede, assuming
always that some adults actually exist within the banking industry (I wonder
whether that is a scientifically testable hypothesis).
So, maybe we need protections against size, or against Big. Maybe, for a start, we need to go back to some
first principles. For example, maybe banks should be limited to single states
again. Breaking up banks might even be fun. I’ll bet we could devise some kind
of video game based on breaking up banks, and Apple could devise an App for the
I-Phone, letting us all play “Break the Banks”. Oh, and let’s not forget gambling. Yeah,
assuming we all still think that on-line gambling is generally a bad thing,
morality-wise, why would we let our banks engage in activities we know to be
amoral at best? So, no on-line gambling for banks.
And then we can return to those wonderful days of
yesteryear, when too big to fail meant too big to exist, and we can begin again
operating our anti-trust regulations, preventing all commercial entities from
getting “too big to fail”. And the
little companies that produce organic food stuffs can continue to produce
according to their organic quality standards, without fear of being swallowed.
Yeah, that would be nice.
No comments:
Post a Comment