Mostrando entradas con la etiqueta Business. Mostrar todas las entradas
Mostrando entradas con la etiqueta Business. Mostrar todas las entradas

domingo, 23 de enero de 2011

Gangs of America / Pandillas de America

Si estuviera traducido el libro al español, éste quizá sería su título. Gangs of America es un ameno recuento de la historia de la persona jurídica mejor conocida como corporación, el papel que ésta jugó en Europa, Inglaterra, y las colonias que se constituirían en los Estados Unidos de América.

No es una historia desdeñable; al contrario, es fundamental para entender cómo y por qué fue concebida la Unión Americana, tal como lo fue.
Más adelante en el libro vemos como Abraham Lincoln no sólo estaba preocupado por lo que sucedería al término de la Guerra Civil, sino del creciente poder que iban adquiriendo las corporaciones, especialmente las de ferrocarriles.

Inmediatamente, el fallo
Santa Clara de la Suprema Corte inaugura la era moderna del poder corporativo, que se estrena con los llamados "Robber Barons" y unos treinta años de darwinismo social en la jurisprudencia norteamericana. El New Deal mitigaría el avance del poder corporativo, ahora al frente y al centro de la vida económica de Estados Unidos y del mundo capitalista en general, pero el árbol había echado ya hondas raíces y las personas jurídicas, no contentas con su virtual inmortalidad, adquieren loco a poco todos los derechos de las personas naturales.

El escándalo de la deblacle de Enron y WorldCom muestra como las compañías multinacionales ya no necesitan ni siquiera respetar los principios de contabilidad generalmente aceptados y mucho menos a sus propios accionistas, pero también muestra como empieza a emerger poco a poco el contrapeso que empieza a contrarrestar el poder corporativo; la misma globalización ayuda a organizarse a los opositores.

Reducir el poder corporativo es tan fácil como permitir mediante un proceso legal relativamente sencillo la revocatoria de la carta de incorporación (charter of incorporation), cosa que en este momento es imposible; claro está, que antes de escribirse este libro, era impensable.

Para todos los que puedan leer este libro en inglés, su amigo el Prócer Progresista se los recomienda especialmente.



If the book were translated into Spanish, this may be its title. Gangs of America is a lively account of the history of the legal entity known as the corporation, the role it played in Europe, England and the colonies that would create the United States of America.

It is not an irrelevant story, on the contrary, it is essential to understand how and why the American Union was conceived as it was.
Later in the book we see how Abraham Lincoln was not only worried about what would happen at the end of the Civil War, but about the growing power that the corporations gained, especially the railroad companies.

The
Santa Clara decision of the Supreme Court immediatly inaugurated the modern era of corporate power, which opens with the so-called "Robber Barons" and about thirty years of social darwinism in american jurisprudence. The New Deal would mitigate the advance of corporate power, now at front and center of the U.S. economic life and the capitalist world in general, but the tree has already deep roots; so that the legal entities, not content with their virtual immortality, decide to acquire all the rights of individuals they can grab.
The Enron and WorldCom scandals show how multinational companies do not even need to pretend they respect the generally accepted accounting principles, much less their own shareholders, but also show how it begins to emerge gradually the corporate power counterrevolution; the same globalization helps the opposition to organize better.

Reducing corporate power might be as easy as using a relatively simple legal process to allow revocation of the charter of incorporation, which at the moment is impossible to propose as a law, of course, but before this book was written, it was unthinkable.



Your blogger, Progressive Hero highly recommends this book. Go and get it now!
Enhanced by Zemanta

jueves, 23 de diciembre de 2010

You don't get to 1300 million chinese people without compromising your principles

As a progressive hero, what I detest the most is when so-called "liberal" or "progressive" entrepreneurs are so prone to suck it up to certified dictators, opressors and world bullies just to make another fistful of dollars. Zuckerberg pulls a Google: you know you can't make your big entrance to China without licking the boots of a few chi-coms, getting a politically debilitating wedgie, and granting that you won't interfere in any way with their iron-fist rule and you will be sure your precious social network will keep it that way.

Thanks to Bussines Insider for the fabulous embedding tool.


Shame on you, Zuckerberg.
Enhanced by Zemanta

sábado, 18 de diciembre de 2010

Colombian mining policy: spread your legs, relax and enjoy

A rough and rude title, but anyone who has read Introduction to the Colombian Economy by Alvaro Tirado Mejía, could hardly disagree, or would at least be wanting to sugarcoat reality. Two examples: the history of the Colombian Mining Company and Francisco Antonio Zea (they are very tied toghether). The other, I have to quote it as friend told me years ago: Two companies, A (private entrepreneurship) and B (state ownership), decided to start a partnership to for a promising business. To determine if the projections provided were viable and profitable enough, the private company went all the way and so they decided to get to work. The "A" company has about 6,000 employees. and the "B" company has about 50. Revenues from each one of every sale were divided in half and half strictly. Costs were too. Although the projections of A were not met, investment in infrastructure was so massive that there were no choice but to move forward. After a few years of operation, B was on the verge of bankruptcy, with huge losses and had to be liquidated. A, were as good as ever. How could that be possible?

Any acute reader will have noticed that I was telling (secondhand) the story of Intercor (A) and Carbocol (B), which despite being equally in all, ended with the state company bearing all rthe losses of the of the Cerrejon business. Now it's just history, but over two hundred years, the story remains the same: a timid and weak government that only knows how to say yes to predatory companies with true pirate vocation. On the other hand, how is it possible that in two hundred years it has not changed the mining business way? Why it did not change in two hundred years what we like to name corporate culture?

Not having to be progressive to be interested in this, but anyone who feels this like a personal injury, I know that the interests of the nation have been damaged in a not mensurable way and it is still hurting! Cristina de la Torre puts the nail on the head, in his column in El Espectador as she denounced Ingeominas, and in general how the previous administration refused to exercise control over mining operators who exploit our mines, something truly unprecedented and that could be considered rightfully as treason. This is not to kick to the investing companies out, but to simply state that they are unfair to us. They have to comply to what they have promised before. None of pacta sunt servanda sic rentibus sic other technicalities. It seems they are not satisfied with such tremendous advantages (tax stability agreements that that the majority of entrepreneurs in the country do not have), must be also not accountable to her partner, the Colombian State. What a shame!

Colombia's mining policy has not changed in two hundred years: it is simply spread her legs, relax and enjoy (?).
Enhanced by Zemanta
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...