Corporate America and the Social Contract


From Mish:

Numerous programs are being put into place in an attempt by banks and mortgage holders to encourage home owners to stay debt slaves forever, while lawyers are advising banks to walk away from contracts and pay the penalty of loss of reputation.

Exactly how does this differ from homeowners choosing to walk away from their obligations with a price of "loss in reputation" otherwise known as a black mark on their credit score?

Here's the answer: There is no difference, and that is precisely why all these programs to keep homeowners in their homes when it is a bad economic decision for them to stay, will fail.

"It is the tipping point argument," said a senior partner at one of the biggest private equity firms, who asked not to be named said Mish, who was willing to be named. "The banks Consumers have so many issues with their balance sheets that they are considering a new policy."

If it's in your best interest to walk, and you are willing to pay the penalty price, then walk.

I advised a friend of mine a few months ago to walk away from a bunch of bad debt. He was totally underwater, horribly stressed and his life was pretty screwed. "So what," I said. "What can they do to do? They can't put you in jail. They can't garnish your wages. They've already taken everything they can. Besides, businesses do it all the time." He took my advice and actually has money in savings now.

Yeah, yeah, you say, "but what about the sanctity of contracts in America? What about a man's word?" Oh, really? Corporate America long ago broke the social contract with Americans. Screw corporate America. If you have cash to buy something with it will never be denied.


Sean Paul Kelley February 15, 2008 - 7:06pm
( categories: Business | Economics )

And now reports are emerging of homeowners skipping out on mortgages even though they can still afford to pay them.

Well, why not? After all corporate America has been getting out from under nasty lawsuits by declaring bankruptcy for years.

Petronius February 15, 2008 - 7:26pm

moving plants overseas aided by govt. tax laws, raiding pension funds then going bankrupt only to come out of bankruptcy with costs greatly lowered with no consequences other than big stock option rewards. There's gotta be thousands.

LJ February 15, 2008 - 7:32pm

I hope your current employer doesn't read your blog.

steelhead February 15, 2008 - 7:28pm

the problem is that you can't pay cash for some things. Tried to stay in a hotel or rent a car with cash? I broke down and got a credit card precisely (and only) so I could travel. Frankly I think it ought to be made illegal to either refuse cash, or charge more to people who use cash.

"legal tender for all debts"

Ian Welsh February 15, 2008 - 7:31pm

get a secured card with a credit limit defined by how much they have in escrow with the company?


"The best-informed man is not necessarily the wisest. Indeed there is a danger that precisely in the multiplicity of his knowledge he will lose sight of what is essential."

- Dietrich Bonhoeffer

Escher Sketch February 15, 2008 - 7:33pm

you *may* be able to get an unsecured card, with some arbitrarily high interest rate and yearly charge, but what I've seen more often has been the "secured card"
With the Secured card, you pay the card company in advance the limit of the card, and they'll allow transactions up to the limit paid in advance.

while I wasn't as bad off as SP's friend, I did have to sell my home and close out all my credit cards, running for a while with only the ATM/Debit card.....not fun.

-5.75,-4.05
"We're all fucked. It helps to remember that." --George Carlin

justadood February 15, 2008 - 8:02pm

was switching from American Express to a bank card. I plan to switch back, soon. I picked AX at first because I could afford plane tickets, hotels, etc. but wasn't about to carry a wad of cash. I got frustrated because none of the restaurants in a town I worked in took AX. Poor me! Wish I had never switched. Don't do it, kids; to establish credit, get the Sears card, and when your credit's good enough, get an AX card. Anything else, you're working for the banks.



Turn back to the Constitution - and
READ it.

Rick February 15, 2008 - 9:37pm

corporate bankruptcy can leave the actual miscreants still wealthy. A decision to close a division or ruin a bank, does not necessarily ruin the CEO...look at the bum who ran Home Depot into the ground. personal bankruptcy, thanks to legislation propelled through congress about two years ago by the credit card industry, will dog you longer and put more options out of your reach than it used to.

remember how we got to the sad place we now find our economic selves.

greensmile February 15, 2008 - 8:48pm

I guess well see what happens! The RIAA failed, as far as I can tell, to control the herd and I think that banks lost control of the herd too!

Personally, I expect congress to pass a "credit restoration act" which would patch up credit histories so the whole game can start over again since the banks lose twice if their profitable customers are out of the game.

mrmx February 15, 2008 - 10:29pm

Is legislation that links the actions of CEOs, CFOs, board members / chairpeople, and senior management (risk managers, legal counsel) who are responsible for decision making to the fiduciary and legal consequences of their actions. That is, overturn the recognition of corporations as having legal "personhood," and replace it with real persons--and their own money.

I wish I could find the reference showing how corporations have all the characteristics of sociopaths, but it's true. And people comprise corporations, not vague, nameless, unknowing entities. And those people make decisions about whether to uphold or break the law, to lie, cheat, or steal. To create rackets and syndicate them. To bribe members of congress and hire former regulators. They should be hanged from the lightposts from the Battery up Broadway and all the way up to Westchester.

The way things are going in the credit industry and larger economic state of the country, we may not have to bother though--they may do it themselves.

Jonathryn February 16, 2008 - 12:10am

score as "psychopaths" using the standard WHO mental health tests is called "The Corporation".


"The best-informed man is not necessarily the wisest. Indeed there is a danger that precisely in the multiplicity of his knowledge he will lose sight of what is essential."

- Dietrich Bonhoeffer

Escher Sketch February 16, 2008 - 12:38am

To Jonathryn:
Never will your good idea happen at this stage of History. There is not yet an effective strategy to hold upper management accountable in our Corporatocracy. Someday, maybe. Meantime, what would succeed with near-universal effectiveness would be to make a public spectacle beyond your lamp post suggestion. One or two very high profile bona fide bastards hung by their feet from a helicopter and ceremoniously dropped in Times Square & K Street in Washington, D.C. with a warning to any others they are fair game. One hundred years of revolution would occur after a couple of these covered by global media. Legal proceedings won't do it for other than a handful. Most top-level execs & their compensation committee cronies from the Board already have dozens of perks and other ways to goose their compensation, much less cover their tails. Even Ken Lay, as a result of his death, had his conviction vacated as the appeals process had not played out & therefore the guilty verdict was null and void.

vonbahr February 16, 2008 - 5:05am

...and all the words about socialism are just words.

Without accountability, not the kind forced on us from the top down, but the kind that starts with the individual, no system will work.

Prepare for a collapse of the economy. A breakdown in society. Anarchy, (probably followed by troops in the streets). Your cash won't be anything but a piece of paper once confidence in it erodes. That will happen once enough people follow your advice (and the example of the big boyz).

Everything starts with the individual.

I did inhale.

Don February 16, 2008 - 11:29am

why do you have to go and get my hopes up like that?

I agree with you on this needing an individual, grassroots movement to do anything against this cyclic economy, and the poisoned society we now dwell in.

I also believe that the only way Americans are ever going to come out of their consumerist lethargy en masse, is to endure the horrendous conditions you described. Otherwise we'll continue down the dem/rep coin flipping road, while aggressively pursuing our own self destruction. Fingers crossed for a Mad Max America.

BuddhaBubba February 16, 2008 - 1:19pm

"Without accountability, not the kind forced on us from the top down, but the kind that starts with the individual, no system will work."

I'd say that accountability is at least bilateral. And, as Rousseau points out, "a lop sided accountability" is the "breeding ground" for instability.

As I tell people: "I won't buy a house now because I'm not going to enable the seller to have a lifestyle that I can't live."

In this mortgage mess, I blame the home sellers for taking advantage of the buyer as much as the buyers forgetting to be more stingy. And, regardless of who's at fault, bad deals always fall apart! and someone's signature, on a piece of paper, doesn't make a bad situation better.

mrmx February 16, 2008 - 1:37pm

Fascism is a conspiracy among government, Big Business, the wealthy (rentiers), the media and the military to control the state. This is firmly in place in the US.

The answer is not necessarily "socialism," which is relatively inefficient and readily corrupted in to totalitarianism, but real capitalism, where there is a level playing field. This means outlawing corporations as legal persons and ending the legal fiction of the corporate veil, as well as creating legal restrictions and disincentives to prevent wealth and power accumulating at the top.

It also means putting an end to fiat money under the control of a fascistic state, as it now is. As long as their is a fiat currency, the government can impose a hidden tax on the populace in the form of monetary inflation and manipulate wealth in favor of the powers that be.

Finally, until the legalized bribery of campaign finance and lobbying are ended the US will be a democracy in name only.

tjfxh February 16, 2008 - 1:54pm

That is precisely why I will cast my one insignificant vote for Ron Paul.

I don't see a hell of a lot of difference between the remaining choices (aside from the equally unelectable Mike Gravel).

I did inhale.

Don February 16, 2008 - 4:59pm

Does the term "fiat money" imply a certain view of economics? In other words, is it pejorative or descriptive? My sense is that it is used by the Austrian school adherents. Correct?

LJ February 16, 2008 - 5:16pm

Fiat currency means money not convertible to specie, but rather it is backed by the "full faith and credit" of the issuer, generally a state. Wikipedia on "Fiat Currency" (Remember what W said not long ago about the Social Security IOU's backed by the full faith and credit of the US? He said that they are just "paper" is a folder somewhere, implying that in reality the Social Security system is broke.)

This is not an Austrian concept per se, although the Austrian school makes a big deal of it because of its potential consequences. Put simply, the position of the Austrian school is that inflation is always and everywhere monetary inflation. Monetary inflation results in declining purchasing power, hence price increases not attributable to real appreciation, i.e., increases based on increase in actual value, e.g., increases resulting from greater productivity or scarcity. Monetary inflation only can occur when the money supply is not tied to real value. When it is not, the temptation is too great to fuel "growth" (read "excessive expansion") with loose policy and to bail out "those too big to fail" when markets correct through "reflation." As result, the free market is prevented from working, and inefficiencies and dislocations are the result.

This generally results in a lot of pain for everyone but the powers that be and their cronies, since they are first in line for the bailout and the only ones with wealth and credit at the bottom.

When a government issues money without solid backing that ties it to reality, then it can create as much of it as it pleases. The problem with such money is that it can be manipulated for policy objectives favoring particular sectors of an economy, and all too often, political expediency, e.g., in the name of growth when things are going well, smoothing out the economy when they are not, and saving the economy when things that "can't go wrong," do -- like now. At least that's the way some people a lot smarter than me about these things see it. Why does fiat money seemingly work?

tjfxh February 16, 2008 - 11:42pm

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.