Goldman Sachs
Out of context: Reply #42
- Started
- Last post
- 77 Responses
- lukus_W0
As much as I hate the idea of corporations taking over the world, I think the Rolling Stone article was a little bit over-the-top. It's almost as if the editor asked the features writer to sprinkle in a little more hyperbole; cos finance is like, such a dull subject.
One of the things that I loved about the Wire, was the way that it illustrated how large organisations like governments can function; moving and morphing like a headless beast. It showed how while there are corrupt people with dubious motives -> it's almost impossible to have a central control figure who plots, schemes and ultimately decides the gov. corporations fate. The moves that various players are forced to choose between, snowball and create results and paybacks which no-one expected on the macro level.
I think the same is probably true of an organisation like GS. While I'd love to believe the conspiracy theories - I'm ssure the truth is far less enticing. That's not to say that GS - on balance - doesn't have an overly negative effect on society and the world at large.
The main problem with articles, like the one linked; is that they try to personify the corporation or company in question as if it's a single entity. Of course this is going to be problematic, because - like nations - we're actually looking at a system .. and systems are notoriously difficult to predict and describe.
Too bit to fail does sum the situation up. These mega-banks aren't going anywhere; probably ever.
And this for me, is the most depressing part of the story - the psychological effect. It definitely feels to me that we're powerless and that there's fuck all we can do. And this sense of powerlessness is likely to be pretty pervasive.