Friday, October 16, 2009

To AFL-CIO Regarding “Regulation” of the Financial Sector

Deregulation/Regulation is a false issue.

Regulation, is in some ways well intentioned, but in other ways a scheme of self-perpetuation of bureaucrats, some directly associated with the remaining strongholds of the AFL-CIO, AFSCME and SEIU.

That was not meant as an attack on those Unions, I invite their leaders and constituents to participate in the progress that I have in mind.

The issue of financial regulation is similar to the private (and quasi-public) sector health insurance practice of Utilization Management. It may serve a necessary "sentinel effect" on industries that are rife with greed, but at what bureaucratic costs?

Implementation of regulatory processes also qualify under the banner of futility, as do well meaning initiatives such as "truth in labeling", OSHA, and organic certification.

We don't need regulation, we need true fundamental economic/financial reform.

With regards to "nationalizing" Banks and other "investor owned" Institutions, we must be realistic concerning the inter-national composition of the investing institutions, corporations, and individuals.

Writing from a libertarian socialist point of view, I think it is necessary to clarify the objectives of any comprehensive program to re-dedicate private resources to a quasi-public mission and to consolidate equity and assets for the purposes of sharing the former and writing off the economically paralytic inflationary cost aspects of the latter.

In lieu of an economic system based on credit and equity trading, whose motivation is the underwriting of speculative ventures, and profit-taking, we need to transform our fundamentally inflationary financial/economic system to one that is based on equity sharing and meeting the needs of people in the form of community betterment.

Such a financial system would be the right hand, the resource allocation facilitating function and services of an ambidextrous ecological, democratic, economic "plan and implement" economy that would respect and favor the sovereignty of villages/neighborhoods, educate-foster-facilitate-inculcate inter-community and inter-regional equality, unity and cooperation based on the basic principles of inclusion, equity, humanity, mutualism, altruism, quality of life (in lieu of standard of living), environmental/public health and wellness, sustainability, and peace.

Such a system would seek to establish a more just balance between competitive advantage and comparative advantage with the concerns of those indigenous to all communities being paramount.

Such an economic system would recognize the necessity to embrace and implement conservation ethics for shorter term programs and projects of ecological economic redevelopment dedicated to survival pursuits and skills and its concomitant ubiquitous environmental improvement activities, and to the longer term programs and policies related to the legacy of the human race and its dominion (i.e. the recognition and respect of the resource limits imposed by a finite planet).

I call such a proposal an equity union and believe it to be a prudent and practical alternative to the extant economic/financial system. I believe such an economic rearrangement based on the fundamental mission of world unity and cooperation is the best hope for the purpose of entering an unprecedented era of peace and human progress and success.

Please respond.

Be not afraid of losing with respect to your personal private interest. There is more than a plethora of work to be done in fostering and facilitating the transition to a new financial/economic era and the avoiding the repercussions for letting the death of empire just run its course.

The first thing we must do is clarify our mission and principles. I hope that I have been clear at doing this here and among the other posts of which I have been trying to maximize circulation.

If the mission and principles are clear and desirable, then we need to form "union" with respect to their purposes, their education, their inculcation, their meaning to one and all, and the actions that we can all take to make such a purposeful, desirable world a reality.

We are in perilous times, and facing challenges that although having precedent, are unprecedented in the enormity of the fundamental change that is required. Fortunately, we have communications technology like we have never had before.

Let's not trivialize the fulcramatic shift needed in the financial/economic sector (i.e. resource allocation) by bickering about regulation, an ineffectual solution to the very real problems that we as people must address and act upon.

In Peace, Friendship, Community, Cooperation, and Solidarity,

Mike Morin
Eugene, OR, USA
(541) 343-3808


  1. To reach an "equity union", there must be enough people to demand such a thing. An equity union cannot be imposed from above - it has to come from below. Regarding regulation - there is something called "regulatory capture" - Baseline Scenario has a lot of information on that topic.

  2. Yes.

    My intentions for equity unions have always been that they be grass roots organizations, run as economic democracies.

    An equity union would be like a credit union, only it would deal with equity sharing rather than loans.

    See the September 30th post on this blog entitled "Reforming Economic/Financial Systems".