Clark Oil Case

A couple guys are sitting in the lunch room at the refinery where they work. They were killed in an explosion which originated outside of the lunch room when an untrained, unqualified company mechanic made a mistake in repairing a piece of equipment at the plant.

The guys got some money under the workers compensation act, which is great but limits the recovery you can get. So they sued Clark's parent company/shareholder. That company had allegedly made a determination to take a great deal of capital as profits and had limited company reinvestment in infrastructure and overhead including safety, maintenance and employee compensation. Apparently as a result Clark hired untrained and unqualified mechanics to work on an increasing number of failing equipment.

The parent company argued it had no control over the day to day operations of Clark, which is a critical factor in assessing liability.

Corporations are considered separate entities and generally one company is not charged with responsibility for the actions of another corporation. But the court looked closely at the parent company's actions to determine that it was not entitled to avoid trial via a motion for summary judgment.

I don't recall the ultimate disposition of the case, but it sure says a lot about how corporations can be run. Now don't get me wrong, I think the workers compensation act is a pretty good system and much of the time the money that corporations pay out when not protected by the act is obscene. And no doubt Clark was responsible itself for what happened. But in the most egregious situations to protect a parent company in this situation just rewards a company for setting up subsidiaries which it can divest when they kill people.

Maybe I just don't understand how we can be in favor of Gekko when he makes his speech about greed is good, and be opposed to the enterprising hitman who is hired to kill him after fradulently emptying his bank account and stealing all the worldly possessions from his home.

America the Beautiful

A little ramble today. What is better. To love this country right or wrong or to love it in spite of itself? Is there a difference?

I still talk to some conservatives from time to time. They think the United States is the best country in the world. Although I wonder from time to time, I'm willing to accept that argument for the most part. I guess you have to presume that it is something better than a choice between imperfect alternatives. Too many arguments are "love it or leave it" etc. etc. Too much chest-thumping for how great we are. And then some of the same people get bent out of shape why everyone wants to come here.

To me it seems like the expression has contorted to mean something more like "love this country because it (by virtue of it being it) is always right and never wrong." I would be a little disappointed in myself for supporting genocide against Native Americans, African slavery or the poll tax. Not to mention the fact that if you can't understand why other people hate us you are operating at a severe disadvantage in this day and age.

I believe Bono said the European view of wealth is different that the American view. The American looks up at the white mansion on the hill and says, "someday I'm going to have a house like that." The Irishman looks up and says, "someday I'm going to get that bastard." Kiss me I'm Irish.

I've just been thinking lately, isn't it better to love what this country has been able to achieve and could be without blinding yourself to the incredible damage and destruction we have also wrought.

I remember right around the time of the millennium a political radio station was taking calls on the most evil or murderous men of the 20th century, trolling for answers like Hitler, Pol Pot and Stalin but more happy to entertain discussions when callers said "Bill Clinton" or "Ronald Reagan." I called in and said Roosevelt and Truman. Of course a discussion about the bomb ensued. And I appreciate Roosevelt and Truman in spite of what they did. But to absolve them of responsibility for their actions is a mistake. It may make things easier, simpler, less troubling, but it is still a mistake.

I feel the same way about the country. Our decision to relate to other societies by destroying them is in error. But our response to that error can be great. I hope it is.

Pigs

BP is living the life right now. Choke supply, raise demand. Then increase supply and hold the price steady. Don't invest anything in infrastructure during those windfall profits years. Got to make those shareholders happy you know. And when your infrastructure crumbles, use it to raise prices again. Pass those costs on. Love means never having to say you're sorry.

Soon BP will be looking for welfare. Oh sorry, I mean reinvestment or something. Or maybe they'll do it the old fashioned way. The criminal who begs for money and when you shuffle past doing your best to look busy, next time asks again with the gun to your temple.

I know, I know corporations are made up of people like you and me. I believe that for the employees but not the shareholders. Shareholders are shadows of people. The way the system is set up its hard for a shareholder to be very concerned about anything other than pure profit. I don't think mixed fund managers exactly take an interest in the election of the latest board, or the newest changes in the by-laws. And being a shareholder you have a certain amount of anonymity. Even more so if you merely own a share of a fund.

Now maybe I'm a bad person but if I look at my 401K I'm hoping to make money. If I owned shares of a company, I'd be even more motivated to make money, I suspect. In the best case scenario I probably wouldn't read the mandatory disclosure from the corporation that they were about to undertake a lucrative business operation in human trafficking. In the worst case scenario, I'd vote for the operation and pray with the extra money I could buy a nicer security system to protect my wife and daughter.

Corporations run efficiently, but to what end? To me the flaw at the center of corporations is the flaw at the center of humanity. We might never do anything bad on our own, but when we're in a comfortable group we force ourselves not to pay attention, or worse - rationalize, when they are building the ovens at the work camps.