The Observer newspaper has an editorial opinion today entitled, 'The Observer view on out-of-control CEO pay.' As I have written before, the human being is a social being. As a result, it is also a regulatory being that regulates and controls its environment. Unless we start from an empirical and realistic view of human nature we will not conclude an empirical and realistic view of our world and our environment. The dominant myth that currently underpins political discourse in the UK is that each human being is a unique individual, located within a milieu that denies the existence of the entity we call society; as Thatcher said, there is no such thing as society. The important point to note is the observation that CEO pay is out of control and we must both ask the question, and provide an answer to, why should CEO pay be controlled? Does it matter?
One of the first things to notice about this conundrum is that, whilst the individualist free market philosophical perspective demands that pay for the top people in society be free from all restraints, it also demands that a rigid control is exercised over the wages of ordinary working people. To that end, since 1990, the pay scales at the top have escalated until they now average 183 times the working wage, whilst the working wage has decreased by 20% in the same period. Whilst we live in a country that has set a minimum wage of £6.70 per hour and has a recommended living wage at £8.25 per hour we have a company operating in this country that pays its Chief Executive £70 million per annum. This gives our CEO £33,653.85 per 40 hour week, whilst the worker on the minimum wage earns £268 per 40 hour week and on the living wage gets £330 per 40 hour week. The above noted CEO of course indignantly insists that he deserves every penny of his £70 million. As a result, the free market philosophy insists on complete deregulation of pay at one level, and rigid regulation of pay at other levels. That is one of the reasons that the free market is a fraud and a lie.
Now, regular readers will by now be fed up reading me telling you that there is no, nor can be, such a thing as a free market. Free marketeers insist on the deregulation of all economic activity (except workers wages of course), but, if you accept that the human being is essentially a regulatory being, then deregulation is anti-social and dangerous. All human activity must be regulated, either voluntarily or coercively. Of course we can have over-regulation, and much of our lives in a modern neoliberal society is over-regulated, but correcting over-regulation is a quite different matter than deregulation. You see, the paradox is that, in order to achieve their aims, free marketeers will not tolerate constraints on their activities and this leads them to impose serious regulatory restraints on those areas of social life that threaten their interests, such as employment rights, trades union activities, and human rights in general. Thus, a free market economic system leads inevitably to a totalitarian political system. That is why the most dangerous development in our world today is indeed a form of terrorism, but it is the terrorism of the free market and in particular the threat of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership.
The following is the first paragraph from an article on TTIP in the Independent newspaper
"The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership is a series of trade negotiations being carried out mostly in secret between the EU and US. As a bi-lateral trade agreement, TTIP is about reducing the regulatory barriers to trade for big business, things like food safety law, environmental legislation, banking regulations and the sovereign powers of individual nations. It is, as John Hilary, Executive Director of campaign group War on Want, said: “An assault on European and US societies by transnational corporations.”"
You see, the activities outlined here have little to do with free trade, but everything to do with removing as many constraints as possible on profiteering. Here we are presented with the specific assertion that food safety law, environmental law, banking regulations etc. are regulatory barriers to trade. That is one of the greatest corruptions of the English language and reason that I have come across for a long time. These matters are not regulatory barriers to trade, they are regulatory safeguards for health and safety, for the survival of the species and the planet, for the economic health and stability of sovereign nations. There is no earthly barrier to free trade within such regulations, but there are barriers to unregulated profiteering and exploitation. Barriers to trade are barriers erected to prevent trade or to suppress trade for one party in order to enhance trade for another. What the regulations mentioned here represent are regulatory controls within which free trade can operate reasonably and in a stable trade environment that does not impinge on or threaten human freedom to life, health and liberty.
Make no mistake should the TTIP become accepted and be enacted, food safety law, environmental law and all regulatory controls on the financial system will be abolished. That will be followed with a bonfire of all human rights. The free market has become a threat to the survival of the human race. You have been warned.
Your Servant
Doktor Kommirat
No comments:
Post a Comment