I just had a wonderful time talking with Kris Welch about the economic crisis for the second half of her hour long show on KPFA. She is such an enthusiastic host that she brings out the best in her guests.
http://aud1.kpfa.org/data/20081205-Fri1200.mp3
Michael, you mention only one response to 'declining profits' of US corporations in the 1960s.
ReplyDeleteFirst, I'm not sure that the profits of (all) US corporations were declining. I think it is likely that those that went global were simply making much more money overseas. Those US corporations that didn't expand beyond the national boundary were hit with the consequences of US Government policy that demanded an over-valued US dollar. (The latter, serving the purposes of expanding global reach for the US TNCs).
Secondly, I understand that the process of financialisation was one taken up by the global banking system and not of US domestic manufacturing and retail businesses, at least in the 1970s and 1980s. GM and GE did go into finance later but I believe that they were well and truly global by then and they may have done this din response to a failing global consumer base?
Finally, I doubt whether the driving force behind the changes that took place from the late 1960s onward was in response to 'declining profits' as you claim.
According to my research, the most notable 'vision' of US corporations in the 1960s was to expand globally and to create an integrated global economy managed purely to expand their market base and profits. They wanted to create a global shopping centre and production base free from national regulation and cultural impediments (A subsidiary or a segment of a corporate conglomerate within this global shopping centre could be making a loss in one country but the economic viability of that particular unit would ultimately be considered in the global commercial context of the wider world network, for instance.)
As for the natural environment or social impacts, we can see that they just didn't figure in their equations or 'visions'.