Thursday, March 26, 2009

the inverse kingdom

Traditionally, creditors wielded more power than debtors. Creditors charged exorbitant interest, resorted to intimidation and violence, and seized land and possessions of their debtors.

Strangely enough, today in America, if you’re willing to take a loose definition of creditor and debtor, the debtors often wield more power than the creditors. This idea was suggested in Jacques Ellul’s Money and Power in application to the modern corporation: … the ancient reality of the superiority of the creditor. Obviously in our society, the debtor is often much more powerful than the creditor. The corporation cannot be compared with the hundreds of shareholders who compose it.

To further complicate matters, the corporation is not an individual and a corporation does not just consist of its shareholders or its board of directors or its employees. It takes on a life and a spirit of its own. And then we find ourselves faced with an unwieldly monster whose actions and decisions can have enormous impact on our lives.

The injustice of the debtors’ superiority is what angers us so much about the AIG bonuses as billions of taxpayer dollars trickle into the banking system.* I feel sympathy for Edward Liddy and those who received bonuses who were not directly responsible for credit default swap transactions that were the downfall of AIG.** Yet I am also outraged at the debtor’s entitlement—but it’s not Edward Liddy nor the bonus recipients who are the actual debtors to America, it’s AIG the corporation. And how do we understand how AIG’s employees are both part of and yet distinct from the corporation? And as a result, though they may have no personal wrongdoing related to the credit default swaps, they may have to uphold the moral responsibility of a powerful debtor before less powerful creditors.

So for better or for worse, the 90% tax may get passed and we may feel a little bit better.*** But the larger problems still remain unsolved…



* Compared to the total amount lent to AIG, the bonuses were a drop in a bucket. Dealing with large amounts of money can have two contrary psychological impacts—either you start penny pinching and counting every little cent or you figure since the debt is so large, little savings won’t make a big difference in the long run. Clearly in this case, the American public as the creditor feels the former. No creditor would like to see a debtor living the good life if there is no evidence of repayment.
** I’m sympathetic to the fact that many of them are the wrong target of the angry mob. That being said, I personally find large bonuses rather distasteful wherever, but that stems from a larger critique of American capitalism and compensation.
*** Has it been passed already? I don’t think I’ve been paying that close attention to the news in the last few days.

3 comments:

Unknown said...

The tax hasn't been passed, I think, because some AIG employees volunteered to give part of the bonus back.

Now, if you filled out your taxes yourself, and you knew a way to fill them out where you would be charged less, you would do that, right? (Assuming it was legal.) I'd say... 99% of people would do that. These AIG guys screwed us, yah, but these wonderful people who made this stimulus package didn't even read their own bill! The stimulus bill provided for these bonuses. The stimulus bill was written by the same front-running politicians out there now condemning the AIG people for taking the bonuses. The only question left is, "Did the politicians simply not know that the bonuses were allowed under the bill they themselves wrote, or did the politicians plan for this so they could get themselves on TV even more?"

l e i g h c i a said...

Hmmmm... my vote's for the latter! Though to be honest... I don't think the politicians read the full bill before voting on it...

M. Weed said...

Matt --- there was a bunch of confusion. The line about "they didn't even read the bill" is a GOP talking point and not accurate. The person at fault was Chris Dodd, who authorized a last-minute alteration which allowed the bonuses to get paid. He did it under pressure from "someone" (i.e. the Treasury or the Fed). He's the jackass who is responsible, and probably, from what we can tell, so is Geithner.

As much as I want to put Nancy Pelosi in a dunk tank and throw baseballs at her, this was pretty much Chris Dodd and a few others. Dodd will pay when he fails to get reelected, so I don't care about him. But also I'm wayyyy sick of GOP talking points that basically amount to slap-fighting to distract from the fact that they have nothing to say.