Breaking the Shackles of Short-termism

 December 18, 2012

Until recently, sociologists trained in the tradition of Wright Mills have assumed western economic elites to be rather monolithic in nature. Not anymore. According to The Economist (“Taking the long view”, November 24th, 2012), CEO’s like Paul Polman of Unilever or management experts like Roger Martin, Dean of the Rotman School of Management of the University of Toronto, are attacking the basic principle of neoliberalism: the pursuit of shareholder value.

For Polman, the idea that global companies should primarily be concerned with maximising return to shareholders is out of date. Martin calls it a “crummy principle that is undermining American capitalism”. And Georg Kapsch from the Federation of Austrian Industries has urged the business world to abandon it.

In truth, the ill effects of this theory are there for all to see. In order to increase their pay, managers have resorted to manipulating share prices. The time average investors hold on to shares has decreased from 8 years in the 1960’s to only 4 months in 2010. More alarmingly, however, is the fact that listed companies have invested only 4 percent of their total assets in research and development, which compares poorly with the 10 percent or more invested by privately-owned companies.

Not surprisingly, smooth operators like Warren Buffett or giants like IBM systematically refuse to provide investors with short-term earnings guidance. Big French companies prefer to bribe investors with bonuses if they hang on to their shares for longer than a few months, and up-and-coming entrepreneurial corporations like Google and Zynga have put in place defences such as dual-class voting structures so as to avoid investor pressure for short-term results and cuts to their R & D budgets.

According to The Economist, the solution to short termism is not to abandon the principle of maximising shareholder value, but to follow the advice of business guru…Bill Clinton, who in Delphian manner said “mend it, don’t end it”. Real experts, however, seem to favour the Chinese saying that if a principle doesn’t work anymore, it should be replaced with one that does.

The Idols of the New Left

1/12/2012

Author : Florian Pantazi

Regrettably, Western politics over the past 20 years have become less of a contest between competing politicali visions and more a question of which party is better qualified to implement the agenda of the global one percent( free markets, privatisation, salary reductions, tax minimisation,etc). Not surprisingly, in most Western nations theelectorate has lost confidence in their political leaders.

A few days before Barack Obama’s re-election, Larry Summers published a Reuters commentary reassuring readerst thatthe incumbent President deserved four more years in office, as during his first term he did not stray one bit fromB BillClinton’s political legacy. But were the Clinton years really as magical as all that ?

Together with Britain’s Tony Blair and Germany’s ex-chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, Bill Clinton acquired quite a reputation as the co-founder of the New Left. As I have explained in an article in 1998 (“The Need for Political Realignment” published in Curentul in Bucharest), however, this troika’s political agenda looked strikingly similar to the conservative one.

In the United States, for instance, the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act adopted in 1996 had put a 2-year cap on the federal aid destined for poor families. Peter Edelman, who resigned in protest, said that“Clinton’s objective was to be re-elected at any price”. Further along in 1999, the Clinton administration repealed the Glass-Steagall Act, henceforward allowing banks to undertake risky investments with depositors’ money. This effectively paved the way for the biggest financial crisis since the Great Depression.

In the same spirit, ex-premier Tony Blair signed British forces up for the Iraqi military intervention, which resulted int thousands of British casualties.

In Germany, the adoption by the Schroeder government of the Hartz Report in 2002 rendered employment precarious for millions of Germans, a principle which has since been touted as the “flexibility” of the workforce. Schroeder’s “competitiveness” drive has badly affected the incomes of some 40 percent of the German workforce. As a result, the latter is unable to act as consumer of last resort. Ultimately, Germany has become as dependent as China on the performance of its exports.

To better understand this trio’s political philosophy, let us imagine that a group of workers are trying to defend their rights in court. To this end, they hire the services of a bunch of high-profile lawyers who pretend to represent their cause . Only to lose the case… On the other hand, the lawyers suddenly come into big money and regularly feature on the guest-lists of the rich and powerful.

Our three lawyers – Clinton, Blair and Schroeder- were quick to take credit for the economic exuberance which followed the fall of the Berlin Wall or the introduction of the European common currency. In fact, as economists like James K. Galbraith pointed out, the economic booms that developed as a result, had very little to do with their economic stewardship skills. They happened to be in the right place at the right time.

These days, the global 1 percent promotes them in the media as idols of the 21st century and regularly provides them with fee-paying audiences in prestigious locations. The strategy works to fuel their megalomania, as well as to encourage other political leaders of the left to follow into their footsteps. 

Sadly, Schroeder and Clinton have ended up as true believers in their own talents and accomplishments. On French television, the former even feels compelled to impart his wisdom to the society at large, as his peers in this country have a much more normal attitude to political survival.

To date, followers of the principles of the New Left are to be found only among the leaders of much smaller countries, as Matthew Yglesias explains:

“If, when you leave power, the small Davos world keeps you in high esteem, a considerable array of jobs are open to you, be it at the European Commission, the IMF or what-have-you, even if you are absolutely reviled by your co-nationals. If anything, this vilification might even work in your favour”.(as quoted by Paul Krugman in “End This Depression Now!; translation from the French edition version by author).

As for this analyst, seeing Schroeder on TV, I could not help agreeing with George Orwell, who was fond of reminding us that “by 50, you get the face you deserve”…


The Wayback Machine - https://web.archive.org/web/20130628025308/http://www.europesworld.org/NewEnglish/Home_old/CommunityPosts/tabid/809/PostID/3328/language/en-US/Default.aspx

FROM ATLANTIC WAVE TO REVOLUTIONARY CONTAGION

  "   Palmer and Godechot presented the challenge of an Atlantic history at the Tenth International History Congress in 1955. It fell f...