Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: runnerpaul@*****.com runnerpaul@*****.com
Subject: Corp Citizens or National Citizens? [was:Megacorporate Power (or lack thereof)]
Date: Sun, 9 May 1999 13:06:54 -0400 (EDT)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

At 03:43 PM 5/9/1999 +0100, Paul J. Adam wrote:
>>believe it or not, it is entirely possible were someone to have
>>"extraterritorial existence on nationalized soil" to have citizens
>of that
>>nation working on your soil
<<snip>>
>Except that you then have to have hundreds of thousands of UCAS
>citizens
>flood into your extraterritorial enclaves every morning, and the same
>number flood out every evening. So much for security, when you have
>_that_ many people going in and out... it's a shadowrunner's dream.

In an earlier post, you stated that one of the reasons that you're
arguing the case for Megacorporate Power to be evenly balanced with
National Power is that because that situation creates an environment
conducive for hiring shadowrunners.

If nations held total power over corporations, there would be no need
for government to hire shadowrunners to help them investigate
corporations for possible wrongdoing, as national agencies would have
more power to enforce the nation's laws against the corporations.
Conversely, if the corporations were powers unto themselves,
answerable to no laws but their own, they would only need the
deniability shadowrunners provide for activities that would severely
hurt their public image.

I would then like to argue the case that Extraterritorial Corporations
employing a significant percentage of their workforce from National
Citizens instead of Corporate Citizens creates an environment where
shadowruns can be successfully completed. (to quote: "Otherwise, the
game is _boring_.")

I won't deny that there are benefits to the corporations to using
Corporate Citizens, such as a much lower security risk, and also being
able to pay salaries in corporate scrip, which may only be redeemed at
the "company store". However, there are costs involved too.

The corporation picks up the tab for the infrastructure to support
it's Corporate Citizens. Waste Disposal, Food Production &
Distribution, Energy Production, and everything else that the tiny
micro-nations called corporate enclaves would need to keep themselves
running all have to be provided by the Corp or contracted out to other
providers (with the expenses and risks that contracting out entails).

Just as an Army must march on its stomach, so must an extraterritorial
corp enclave. The corps can play at being nations up to a point, but
past a certain point, the expenses outweigh the benefits. The closed
financial system of corporate scrip does go a long way to offsetting
expenses, but sooner or later, the cost of adding more units of
housing and having yet more mouths to feed outweighs the security risk
of hiring employees from "outside the enclave fence".

Corps are in business to make profits. This was the point driven home
again and again as to why the megas would only have puny military
forces at best. The numbers of corporate citizens the megas have would
also have to be limited to be only part of their workforce. Just as
standing armies eat into a mega's profits, so would the infrastructure
to support a population of corp citizens.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP Personal Privacy 6.0.2

iQCVAwUBNzW/u6PbvUVI86rNAQFBiQP/X4rgoxVPkvh34BbGqnlajpINdMeQawHw
1mT8d+aggaTMVXEo48JbehjAu57P/wgybFIK546lSGhp4HWEdIS6GCoanndCH/fT
aiXG+ZlwvV4GUIYhwyxfN/OoK9THqdzdsGt4za0BkJOEIDC8g3SZTUdDAfaZNLfa
Rzfck7j61Qc=OTze
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
-- Paul Gettle, #186 of 1000 (RunnerPaul@*****.com)
PGP Fingerprint, Key ID:0x48F3AACD (RSA 1024, created 98/06/26)
C260 94B3 6722 6A25 63F8 0690 9EA2 3344

---------------------------------------------------
Get free personalized email at http://www.iname.com
Message no. 2
From: Steve Collins einan@*********.net
Subject: Corp Citizens or National Citizens? [was:Megacorporate Power (or lack thereof)]
Date: Sun, 9 May 99 15:04:59 -0400
On 5/9/99 1:06 pm, runnerpaul@*****.com said:

>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
>At 03:43 PM 5/9/1999 +0100, Paul J. Adam wrote:
>>>believe it or not, it is entirely possible were someone to have
>>>"extraterritorial existence on nationalized soil" to have citizens
>>of that
>>>nation working on your soil
><<snip>>
>>Except that you then have to have hundreds of thousands of UCAS
>>citizens
>>flood into your extraterritorial enclaves every morning, and the same
>>number flood out every evening. So much for security, when you have
>>_that_ many people going in and out... it's a shadowrunner's dream.
>
The thing is that it's a moot point whether they are Corp or national
citizens for the purposes of the discussion at hand (whether a corp could
fight a concerted government attempt to either revoke or seriously
restrict extraterrioriality). It is likely that a fairly small percentage
of Megacorp employees are Corp Citizens and not all of those who live in
the corp enclaves are. Some of them probably live there either as dual
citizens or on a kind of work visa. Many corp facilities aren't important
enough to require the kind of security that would create an enclave and
so those employees would live on UCAS soil although some of them may be
corp citizens.

Case 1 the employees are Corp citizens:
Ok as I pointed out earlier in another post the corp could not possibly
hope to pull out of a country quickly or quietly. The government pulls
the passports for all corp citizens well before new facilities are
prepared for them, they also blockade all of those facilities as outposts
of a hostile foreigh nation. Any corp citizens living or caught off corp
territory are arrested on charges of espionage. The corp facilities now
can not feed themselves and it's not the governments problem because they
are not citizens. In the war of public opinion they can say is all "Corp
A obviously doesn't care about the welfare of their employees. We have
made reasonable requests that they abide by the laws of our country, why
would they refuse unless they regularly broke those laws? Corp A can end
this horrible suffering any time they choose by declairing the site no
longer extraterritorital and then we can send in relief supplies. As it
stands with the state of conflice they have forced us into we cannot aid
those poor souls trapped on the Corporations territory. If any of them
should wish to revoke their Corporate citizenship and apply for admission
to the UCAS as a refugee then we have agents of the INS stationed out
side of each facility." Each facility will become a besieged fortress and
will have to surrender quickly, nothing will get in and nothing will get
out until they do. No not even data as the government will cut the land
lines and jamm radio signals. How are you going to get your employees or
equiptment out? You havn't pulled anything out you have just abandoned
those employees and assets.


Case 2 the employees are National citizens :
How many of the key ones are going to be willing to leave? What makes you
think the new country will welcome all those new people? You think you'll
be glad to have you for the jobs? They aren't getting many jobs, most of
the ones worth having are goint to employees being brought from the old
location (otherwise you loose your knowledge and skills base). Tax
income? There won't be any the corp is extraterritorial. All you are
giving them is more pollution, working poor, and congestion. Assuming you
can get permission to bring them and enough agree to leave Have you got
any idea of the logistical problems with moving 75,000 employees? Do you
think the government will just let them up and leave? Then again if they
do you havn't left the nation with much of an unemployment problem have
you? Also before your new facilities are ready they still will raid you
and do just as Paul and I suggested earlier. Sieze the assets and sell
them to the highest bidder then use the profits from that sale to offset
the short term economic impact from loosing that Mega. At the same time
it will be declared illegal to work for the now defunct (in the UCAS at
least) Corp.

Steve
Message no. 3
From: Paul J. Adam Paul@********.demon.co.uk
Subject: Corp Citizens or National Citizens? [was:Megacorporate Power (or lack thereof)]
Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 00:02:54 +0100
In article <9905091306546Q.24040@*****.iname.net>,
runnerpaul@*****.com writes
>In an earlier post, you stated that one of the reasons that you're
>arguing the case for Megacorporate Power to be evenly balanced with
>National Power is that because that situation creates an environment
>conducive for hiring shadowrunners.
>
>If nations held total power over corporations,

Since when was that true? Corporations, collectively, wield enormous
economic and political power, but are riven by internal rivalry. Nations are
superior in military terms.

If a nation tries to muscle "the corporations", it'll be hammered. If a single
corporation tries to defy a nation, then up to a point it will lose.

>Conversely, if the corporations were powers unto themselves,
>answerable to no laws but their own, they would only need the
>deniability shadowrunners provide for activities that would severely
>hurt their public image.

If they were _that_ powerful, why would they give a damn about public
image?

>I would then like to argue the case that Extraterritorial Corporations
>employing a significant percentage of their workforce from National
>Citizens instead of Corporate Citizens creates an environment where
>shadowruns can be successfully completed. (to quote: "Otherwise, the
>game is _boring_.")

Doesn't fit the FASA universe. Quite possibly, many employees in any given
nation are working for a corporate subsidiary: corporations are often
widely spread.

But, then, did you know that when you pour fuel into your car from a
Gilbarco pump, you're actually using a product of the General Electric
Company, based in Great Britain? And yet, if a foreign company disrupted
forecourt service across America today and made many workers
redundant because of some esoteric dispute with Congress, would you
really lay all the blame on Capitol Hill and consider that the foreign
business was entitled to do what it damn well wanted within your country?

Again - UCAS citizens working for a megacorp and being paid in hard
currency don't suffer from any rulings on extraterritoriality. Play it right
and they see "the pampered pets finally getting a taste of reality". And
the extraterritorial corporate citizens don't get to vote.

>I won't deny that there are benefits to the corporations to using
>Corporate Citizens, such as a much lower security risk, and also being
>able to pay salaries in corporate scrip, which may only be redeemed at
>the "company store". However, there are costs involved too.

Absolutely. The concept of "megacorporations", zaibatsu, chaebol,
whatever, is mired in the 1980s. Look at the rapid trend towards
demerger, as enterprise after enterprise decides to "focus on its core
business".

For instance, Corporate Shadowfiles describes how businesses use
corporate scrip among their subsidiaries to minimise tax liability... but
one harsh lesson of the last few years has been that you _must_ compete
supply. Even General Motors spun off its component supplier, Delphi
Automotive, and it was one of the last major carmakers to do so. Buying
in-house just doesn't work well over the long run.

>The corporation picks up the tab for the infrastructure to support
>it's Corporate Citizens. Waste Disposal, Food Production &
>Distribution, Energy Production, and everything else that the tiny
>micro-nations called corporate enclaves would need to keep themselves
>running all have to be provided by the Corp or contracted out to other
>providers (with the expenses and risks that contracting out entails).

You begin to see my problem with the megacorporate concept as a whole,
particularly with their supposed inordinate power.

After all, if they can provide housing, transport, power, sanitation, and all
the other necessities of civilised life so efficiently, why do they need
governments at all?

And yet... even the most crushed government can demand a high price to
accept and dispose of corporate garbage. Don't want to pay? Fine. How
high can a trash mountain get on the border?

One problem in FASA's viewpoint might be that they're Americans :) As a
European I'm perhaps far more used to border checkpoints than most
residents of the US. _Nobody_ can force a national entity to allow
uncleared vehicles or people across a border: doing so is _casus belli_.

>Corps are in business to make profits. This was the point driven home
>again and again as to why the megas would only have puny military
>forces at best. The numbers of corporate citizens the megas have would
>also have to be limited to be only part of their workforce. Just as
>standing armies eat into a mega's profits, so would the infrastructure
>to support a population of corp citizens.

So, where's the profitability from openly confronting nations? That's what I
fail to see. Supposedly, any corporation can thumb its nose at any nation,
but I have never seen how that can be true. Certainly a complex balance
of power exists, but it by definition is _balanced_ - corporate economic
power balanced by national military might.


--
Paul J. Adam
Message no. 4
From: Robert Watkins robert.watkins@******.com
Subject: Corp Citizens or National Citizens? [was:Megacorporate Power (or lack thereof)]
Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 11:12:36 +1000
Wordman writes:
> My point has been and remains that corporations could cause significant
> damage to a country that tried this. It would cost the corporation, sure,
> but that wasn't the point. My original point is that corps would use much
> political pressure to prevent the situation from getting that far in the
> first place.

Unless it is the corporation's actions that have provoked the government
into doing so.

I mean, let's be honest: no major government is going to declare war on the
corps without a damn good reason. However, it is likely that the sheer
arrogance of the megacorps could provoke such a response. In that situation,
the "balance of power" would already have become unbalanced, and the
government reaction would restore that balance.

And it _is_ fairly likely that some or all of the corporations could act in
that fashion.

--
.sig deleted to conserve electrons. robert.watkins@******.com
Message no. 5
From: Paul J. Adam Paul@********.demon.co.uk
Subject: Corp Citizens or National Citizens? [was:Megacorporate Power (or lack thereof)]
Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 02:50:19 +0100
In article <S.0000168812@*******.com>, Wordman
<wordman@*******.com> writes
>> Absolutely. The concept of "megacorporations", zaibatsu, chaebol,
>> whatever, is mired in the 1980s. Look at the rapid trend towards
>> demerger, as enterprise after enterprise decides to "focus on its core
>> business".
>
>What?! Which financial papers are you reading? The news today is filled with
>huge merger news. Fleet Bank buying Bank Boston, AT&T buying MediaOne, ABB
>and Alstom, British Petroleum and Amoco... the list goes on and on.

Okay. Now, look at the notion in Corporate Shadowfiles that megacorps
own their entire supply chain and use that and corporate scrip to eliminate
all tax liabilities.

How many car manufacturers _own_ their parts suppliers? Most have busily
sold their off - GM just spun off Delphi Automotive, and they were among
the last to do do.

>My point has been and remains that corporations could cause significant
>damage to a country that tried this. It would cost the corporation, sure,
>but that wasn't the point. My original point is that corps would use much
>political pressure to prevent the situation from getting that far in the
>first place.

Fair enough. I keep getting people claiming "but... but... the megacorps
can do anything anytime anywhere!" and I just can't see it being so.
Neither side, in my opinion, has an interest in disturbing the status quo
too much.

--
Paul J. Adam

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Corp Citizens or National Citizens? [was:Megacorporate Power (or lack thereof)], you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!