Comment Elsewhere: Social Network Cynicism

Terry at I See Invisible People has been discovering that Facebook, for all its utility and entertainment value, also has blazingly insensitive aspects. My comment

Facebook is like a TV station, a cable channel, or a magazine, or a newspaper: they provide a service which attracts an audience. Then they sell access to that audience to advertisers: advertisers will pay more for an audience that is more likely to be interested in their product, so Facebook, which knows a lot about its users, should be able, in theory, to sell high-potential audiences to advertisers for good money.

Someone who uses this prescription gift app is giving Facebook a lot of information about themselves and/or the recipient.

So far, Facebook has been treading a fine line (i.e. a big gray area): trying to be useful to their advertisers without blatantly prostituting their users or violating their individual privacy. But I’m not sure they’re making all the money they think they should be making, yet. So they’re being more aggressive about extracting information, and they’re being more aggressive about finding ways to draw in advertisers, and they’re being more aggressive about attracting the high-value 18-35 demographic (though I still don’t know why that is; they’re not the ones with all the money) by being “edgy”….

Yeah, it’s a little cynical. OK, it’s a lot cynical, but I didn’t make up the business model.

An email to my Congressional Representative

Dear Rep. -----,

I am not shocked that the Bush administration has proposed a policy (I won't say "solution") to the financial services crisis which involves a huge amount of money, no clear plan and no oversight: that's exactly in line with Bush Administration policy in every other area.

What I am shocked and dismayed about is that anyone in Congress is taking this proposal seriously. It deserves no better than amused rejection -- "There you go again," in Reagan's words -- and a serious discussion with real economists, financial experts, lawyers, and people with some sense of history and decency. That might result in a Resolution Trust-style solution, or a Japanese-style attempt to bolster bank's capital lines, but it won't result in a blank check and a hope that Republican loyalists won't use that money against Democrats and the rest of America.

Please refuse to consider the administration's proposal, because it is unworthy of consideration. There are dozens of better ideas out there that don't involve imbalancing the Constitution, wasting a trillion dollars and bolstering a failed party.

Comment Elsewhere: Corporate Death Penalty

In response to Elle, phd's discussion of the use and abandonment of illegal immigrant workers I wrote:

I'm a believer in the death penalty -- for corporations. In a case like this, the operations and assets of the corporation should be seized and liquidated (except for brand names, which should be abandoned forever to the dustheap of history), and the operating officers of the company (at least three or four levels down the chain of command) barred from working in the same industry for a period of no less than five years (more, if it's warranted).

It's the only way to get their attention.

P.S. We had a lovely short seder, with chicken soup and matzoballs, old-fashioned charoseth and lots of nice energy. Tonight I make the traditional "Soup-Chicken Gumbo" with Passover Puffs. We blew through a dozen eggs yesterday, and if I do any dessert baking, we'll easily do the same today. Happy Pesach, y'all!

Capitalism and its Discontents

Change comes from action. History is not a natural process, but the result of decisions made. Etc., Etc.

Capitalism, especially U.S. capitalism, will not simply collapse because it causes harm to the majority of Americans. In fact stock valuations rise with massive lay-offs and salary and benefit reductions. Nor will it decline by academic fiat deduced from general theory; nor will it inevitably decline because knowledgeable historians point to previous empires. Capitalism or any other mode of production can survive numerous crises unless a new class is able to overthrow it and replace it with another, presumably socialist system. In the meantime, in the present period, neither the internal mechanisms of capitalism are in disrepair, nor are the supporting cast of workers, consumers, and taxpayers showing any signs of rebellion, let alone organization.

-- James Petras, "Crisis of Capitalism" [subscribers only until June], Z Magazine, January 2007, p. 54.