Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Marc Renouf renouf@********.com
Subject: Megacorporate Power (or lack thereof)
Date: Wed, 5 May 1999 11:50:57 -0400 (EDT)
I've followed this thread for a while now, and watched both sides
debate the issue. So now, I'll throw my own pair of ducats into the pot.
The thing that people are forgetting when dealing with
corporations versus governments is the concept of "nationalization" of an
industry. It happens all the time, all over the world. Most frequently,
it happens with large entities that control goods or services vital to a
nation's economy, like oil companies. What is "nationalization"? It has
two colloquial usages, both of which are bad for the corp in question.
The first is usually applied to multinational corporations, and
results from the government declaring that the corporation's
holdings in that nation are bound by the nation's laws, and often must be
owned or controlled by citizens of that nation. It's like creating
another company, like Ford UK. Ford owns Ford UK, but Ford UK is still
bound by all of the laws and strictures that apply to companies operating
in the UK.
The second usage is far more drastic. It's where the government
says "this company/factory/refinery no longer belongs to private industry,
and will henceforth be controlled by the state."
Why does this happen? Because the people who run said
company/factory/refinery get cocky and start doing things the government
doesn't like, such as jacking prices or playing with production quotas in
order to get leverage or concessions.
And how do the shareholders view this? It depends on the laws of
the country pulling the nationalization. In some, the stock holders are
given a fair value for their stock ("fair" as defined by the government,
not the corp - think "eminent domain"). In some, the shareholders get an
equal "share" in new government-run entity, sort of like a government
bond. This bears no voting privileges, however (though it may provide
dividends). And in some cases, the shareholders are just shit out of
luck. They lose it all, and if they bitch, well, that's what the military
is for.
Will the company/factory/refinery run as well under government
control? Probably not. They'll probably have to bring in at least some
new personnel (unless the government nationalizes the employees as well -
something that happened to refinery workers in Lithuania's largest oil
refinery two years ago).
"But what about extraterritoriality," you say.
Extraterritoriality isn't worth the paper it's printed on. It can be
revoked at any time. It's easy, and doesn't even need the sanction of
congress. Can you say "War Powers Act"? Embassies are extraterritorial
too, but that didn't stop us from seizing (i.e. confiscating, occupying
and violating the "sovereign" territory of) the Yugoslavian Embassy three
weeks ago. And it didn't require an act of Congress. We're not even
formally at war with Yugoslavia. This could result in *no warning* when
and if the government decides to take action.
If extraterritoriality were so powerful, it would be the rule
everywhere. Yet there are nations that do not recognize it. In order to
do business in those nations, the corporations must have nationalized
subsidiaries, which are bound by the rules and laws that apply to
corporations of that country. If megacorporations had such power,
wouldn't extraterritoriality be the rule rather than the exception?
While megacorporations are powerful, they are not untouchable.
While they can have vast and far reaching economic effects, they are not
immune from oversight. They still have to follow some rules. Just
because your research facility is off-limits to the cops doesn't mean that
you can thumb your nose at the government with impunity. You still need
to pay taxes in order to operate within that nation's boundaries. Your
employees probably still pay income tax to the federal government,
especially if they still live on UCAS soil. Whatever concessions the
corps may have gotten, tax-exempt status for corporate employees and
entities is certainly *not* one of them. No government in its right mind
would kiss of so much tax revenue.
And with extraterritoriality comes a new dimension: international
espionage. Yes, that's right, your corp activities and facilities are no
longer domestic and now fall squarely within the province of the CIA.
Yes, you have given the government the legal loophole it needs to spy on
you, becuase you claim to be a "sovereign" entity. This is especially
true of megacorporations that control industries deemed vital to national
security (like defense contractors). And if the government determines
that your activities represent a "clear and present danger" to that
nation's strategic interests, you can bet your socks they'll take action.
Let's keep things in perspective. The government can seize assets
and properties, detain people, and reduce a corporation's holdings to
nothing without resorting to an act of Congress. Less democratic
governments have an even easier time of it. Megecorporations only retain
what rights they have at the sufferance of the government of the nation
they operate in. If they do not reasonably protect it, or if they begin
abusing it, the government can and will take it away. Yes, it would cause
economic hardship. Yes, the repercussions would be drastic. No, these
are not reason enough to keep the government from doing so if it gets its
ire up.
The reason that megacorporations hold as much power as they do in
Shadowrun is precisely because they *cooperate* with governments. The two
are totally in bed together. The thought of the megacorporation
threatening to nuke a nation is as ludicrous as the thought of the
government shutting down Ford for arming its security guards with MP5's.
The megacorporation would not exist without heavy concessions from the
government. Similarly, those heavy concessions wouldn't exist if the
megas weren't feeding a large portion of that money straight back into the
system. It's a two-way street, but when push comes to shove, it's the
government that makes the rules. They have the ability to make national
policy, and the military force to back that policy up. No corporation can
exist without a consumer base, but if a consumer base exists, it doesn't
take long to fill a megas empty shoes.
Because of this, megacorporations tread the thin line between
maximizing their profits and funneling money back into the system that
lets them maximize their profits. Without this balance, megecorporations
(and especially extraterritoriality) would not exist.

Marc Renouf (ShadowRN GridSec - "Bad Cop" Division)

Other ShadowRN-related addresses and links:
Mark Imbriaco <mark@*********.html.com> List Owner
Adam Jury <adamj@*********.html.com> Assistant List Administrator
DVixen <dvixen@****.com> Keeper of the FAQs
Gurth <gurth@******.nl> GridSec Enforcer Division
David Buehrer <dbuehrer@******.carl.org> GridSec "Nice Guy" Division
ShadowRN FAQ <http://shadowrun.html.com/hlair/faqindex.php3>;
Message no. 2
From: Danyel Woods 9604801@****.ac.nz
Subject: Megacorporate Power (or lack thereof)
Date: Thu, 6 May 1999 10:41:20 +1200
So says Marc Renouf (1150 05-5-99):

> I've followed this thread for a while now, and watched both sides
>debate the issue. So now, I'll throw my own pair of ducats into the pot.
<<SLICE>>
> Let's keep things in perspective. The government can seize assets
>and properties, detain people, and reduce a corporation's holdings to
>nothing without resorting to an act of Congress. Less democratic
>governments have an even easier time of it. Megecorporations only retain
>what rights they have at the sufferance of the government of the nation
>they operate in. If they do not reasonably protect it, or if they begin
>abusing it, the government can and will take it away. Yes, it would cause
>economic hardship. Yes, the repercussions would be drastic. No, these
>are not reason enough to keep the government from doing so if it gets its
>ire up.
> The reason that megacorporations hold as much power as they do in
>Shadowrun is precisely because they *cooperate* with governments. The two
>are totally in bed together. The thought of the megacorporation
>threatening to nuke a nation is as ludicrous as the thought of the
>government shutting down Ford for arming its security guards with MP5's.
>The megacorporation would not exist without heavy concessions from the
>government. Similarly, those heavy concessions wouldn't exist if the
>megas weren't feeding a large portion of that money straight back into the
>system. It's a two-way street, but when push comes to shove, it's the
>government that makes the rules. They have the ability to make national
>policy, and the military force to back that policy up. No corporation can
>exist without a consumer base, but if a consumer base exists, it doesn't
>take long to fill a megas empty shoes.
> Because of this, megacorporations tread the thin line between
>maximizing their profits and funneling money back into the system that
>lets them maximize their profits. Without this balance, megecorporations
>(and especially extraterritoriality) would not exist.

<whistles and applause> Bravo! Bravo!

My whole problem with the megas since the beginning was that everyone seemed
to grant them all of the rights, powers, and strengths of superpowers, with
none of the responsibilities or watch-dogs. Now, as much as I dislike
America's tendency to keep telling us how great a nation they are, the
U(CA)S is still the most powerful and coherent country in the world -
militarily, politically, and (arguably) economically - and if there's one
thing no government would willingly relinquish, it is power.

Before, I could never quite get my head around the relationship between the
national governments and the megacorps, and the limits governments can (and
should!) impose on megacorporate power; now, it's crystal-clear. Marc's
perspective on the whole thing nailed it right on the head for me, and I
hope everyone is taking notes.

Danyel Woods - 9604801@****.ac.nz <mailto:9604801@****.ac.nz>
_Just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they're not out to get you._
Message no. 3
From: Wordman wordman@*******.com
Subject: Megacorporate Power (or lack thereof)
Date: Thu, 06 May 1999 22:18:05 -0400
> If extraterritoriality were so powerful, it would be the rule
> everywhere. Yet there are nations that do not recognize it. In order to
> do business in those nations, the corporations must have nationalized
> subsidiaries, which are bound by the rules and laws that apply to
> corporations of that country. If megacorporations had such power,
> wouldn't extraterritoriality be the rule rather than the exception?

In Shadowrun, extraterritoriality _is_ rule rather than the exception for
any corporation big enough to enforce it. This would basically be the megas
and not many others.

> Just
> because your research facility is off-limits to the cops doesn't mean that
> you can thumb your nose at the government with impunity.

To me, most corps would not do this, but not for fear of government
reprisal. Rather, they would avoid it because it is bad PR and tends to
annoy the people you are looking employ locally. In most types of business,
pissing off skilled workers is a really bad idea.

> You still need
> to pay taxes in order to operate within that nation's boundaries. Your
> employees probably still pay income tax to the federal government,
> especially if they still live on UCAS soil. Whatever concessions the
> corps may have gotten, tax-exempt status for corporate employees and
> entities is certainly *not* one of them. No government in its right mind
> would kiss of so much tax revenue.

Unfortunately, most governments are not in their right mind.
Megacorporations are in a position to literally buy legislators. Not by
bribing them, but by funding their elections. They also have other kinds of
leverage, like opening a major office in a region pleasing to the
politician's constituency. This gives megas a great deal of control over
laws, particularly in the area of taxes. The vast majority of politicians
have the following priorities (in this order):

1) Do what is good for me.
2) Do what is good for my supporters.
3) Do what is good for my country, provided it doesn't interfere with the
first two.

In many ways, dictatorships have a greater ability to resist/nationalize
corporations, because their power is centralized. Historically, however,
most dictators have been easily corrupted.

> And with extraterritoriality comes a new dimension: international
> espionage. Yes, that's right, your corp activities and facilities are no
> longer domestic and now fall squarely within the province of the CIA.
> Yes, you have given the government the legal loophole it needs to spy on
> you, becuase you claim to be a "sovereign" entity. This is especially
> true of megacorporations that control industries deemed vital to national
> security (like defense contractors). And if the government determines
> that your activities represent a "clear and present danger" to that
> nation's strategic interests, you can bet your socks they'll take action.

The problem here is that the intelligence apparatus of most megas will dwarf
that of a nation (at least in SR). The CIA is not horribly effective now; it
will be worse when it's budget is greatly reduced. Keep in mind that in the
world of SR, there are no more real superpowers. Global powers, especially
the U.S., are shadows of what they are now. In addition most megas will have
a higher operating budgets than even large countries.

> Let's keep things in perspective. The government can seize assets
> and properties, detain people, and reduce a corporation's holdings to
> nothing without resorting to an act of Congress. Less democratic
> governments have an even easier time of it. Megecorporations only retain
> what rights they have at the sufferance of the government of the nation
> they operate in.

I do not buy this, at least for the megas as presented in Shadowrun. If a
country decides to pull this kind of stuff on an SR mega, the mega can pull
out of the country, using scorched earth is necessary. A mega corporation
pulling out of a country would cause dramatic problems for that country. The
country's only hope would be to court a competing mega and hope it would
bolster their economy.

While a country could do what you say, megas have the ability to annihilate
a country's economy very rapidly. Most countries would not take this risk.

As always, when dealing with megacorporations: it's not about force, weapons
or power -- it's about money.

As you mentioned, a country as a whole does have some leverage against the
mega as well. I just don't think that this leverage comes from the
government of that country. It stems from the population of that country.
Big difference.

Wordman
Message no. 4
From: Ahuizotl cuellare@***.telmex.net.mx
Subject: Megacorporate Power (or lack thereof)
Date: Fri, 07 May 1999 11:29:57 -0500
Danyel Woods escribió:
>
> So says Marc Renouf (1150 05-5-99):
>

> My whole problem with the megas since the beginning was that everyone seemed
> to grant them all of the rights, powers, and strengths of superpowers, with
> none of the responsibilities or watch-dogs. Now, as much as I dislike
> America's tendency to keep telling us how great a nation they are, the
> U(CA)S is still the most powerful and coherent country in the world -

I dont think so, UCAS have the lost of most of his territory, lost every
militar confrontacion they have in this century (shadow run century).
They have to make a aliance whit Canadians, to made UCAS, they lost CA,
Hawaii and CFS. The last the corps as far as i know with corp
intervencion. And aobout the most powerful country and coherent i only
have a name in my mine:
Japan
Newyens, you know, even the mafia is not as powerfull as the yakuza.

> militarily, politically, and (arguably) economically - and if there's one
> thing no government would willingly relinquish, it is power.

Power is in Megas, remember this is Shadowrun no RL.

> Before, I could never quite get my head around the relationship between the
> national governments and the megacorps, and the limits governments can (and
> should!) impose on megacorporate power; now, it's crystal-clear. Marc's
> perspective on the whole thing nailed it right on the head for me, and I
> hope everyone is taking notes.

All this explain relations in RL, that could have nothing to do with
Shadorun univers.


Ahuizotl

>From a play session:
runner: "MAN thatīs imposible"
GM: "Next to you are a dragon, and you send fireballs with the power
of magic, what you said was imposible?
Message no. 5
From: Paul J. Adam Paul@********.demon.co.uk
Subject: Megacorporate Power (or lack thereof)
Date: Sat, 8 May 1999 00:15:57 +0100
In article <S.0000166737@*******.com>, Wordman
<wordman@*******.com> writes
>The problem here is that the intelligence apparatus of most megas will dwarf
>that of a nation (at least in SR). The CIA is not horribly effective now; it
>will be worse when it's budget is greatly reduced.

And why will a corporation's intelligence services be any better? Intel is
_never_ a precise art.

>Keep in mind that in the
>world of SR, there are no more real superpowers.

Beg to differ. Imperial Japan and the UCAS qualify - if you have carrier
groups that size, you can project a fearful amount of power pretty much
where you want.

>Global powers, especially
>the U.S., are shadows of what they are now. In addition most megas will have
>a higher operating budgets than even large countries.

Not hardly. Check Corporate Shadowfiles.

Also, big budgets don't translate to strong militaries. Armed forces don't
generate profit: they're a _loss_, representing lost sales and support
opportunities. Every aircraft, tank or ship you build for your own showcase
military is one you didn't earn profit on by selling... but they all cost the
same in man-hours and materials to make.

>I do not buy this, at least for the megas as presented in Shadowrun. If a
>country decides to pull this kind of stuff on an SR mega, the mega can pull
>out of the country, using scorched earth is necessary. A mega corporation
>pulling out of a country would cause dramatic problems for that country.

Horse excrement. One megacorporation pulling out leaves market gaps
that scores of competitors eagerly scramble to fill.

Let's say the megacorp gets nasty and - for instance - plays scorched-
earth on the data grids. See many other customers rapidly terminate their
contracts with that megacorp as a result. There's plenty of other suppliers
in the market...

More to the point, suppose it's a squabble with only _part_ of a megacorp.
The UCAS and Renraku(Vehicles) get into an argument that escalates to
the UCAS sealing off Renraku(Vehicles) factories and refusing to allow
their ships in and out of harbour. No imports, no exports.

Renraku (Data Systems), which has no problems with the UCAS at the
moment, is asked to do some creative mischief to support Vehicles in
their fight. This will... cost Data Systems several lucrative contracts, wipe
out the stock options of many senior executives, hit their share price, and
generally be a real loser for them. What do they get? Just a a warm happy
glow from having subsidised those macho idiots in Vehicles Division.

Think those executives will rush to comply?

>The
>country's only hope would be to court a competing mega and hope it would
>bolster their economy.

One of the seven other megas (more, now) and scores or hundreds of AA
and A corporations that will eagerly grab the available market share.

>While a country could do what you say, megas have the ability to annihilate
>a country's economy very rapidly.

The megacorporations acting in unison, yes. One megacorporation, no,
and against the more powerful nations - UCAS, CAS, Japan, Britain - a
megacorporation alone is likely to lose.

>Most countries would not take this risk.

Depends what's at stake, doesn't it?

>As always, when dealing with megacorporations: it's not about force, weapons
>or power -- it's about money.

And how do they make their money? By manufacturing goods and selling
them. Interdict the sea lanes and you can bleed their balance sheets
white. There's an excellent reason why the UCAS still operates nuclear-
powered hunter-killer submarines: a finer tool for commerce raiding's yet
to be invented.

--
Paul J. Adam
Message no. 6
From: Ahuizotl cuellare@***.telmex.net.mx
Subject: Megacorporate Power (or lack thereof)
Date: Fri, 07 May 1999 20:20:33 -0500
Marc Renouf escribió:
>
> I've followed this thread for a while now, and watched both sides
> debate the issue. So now, I'll throw my own pair of ducats into the pot.

Thanks for this :-)

> The thing that people are forgetting when dealing with
> corporations versus governments is the concept of "nationalization" of an
...
> bound by all of the laws and strictures that apply to companies operating
> in the UK.

Ok but all this is in pour world in the Shadowrun univers the way i saw
it the thing are very different IMHO

> The second usage is far more drastic. It's where the government
> says "this company/factory/refinery no longer belongs to private industry,
...
> luck. They lose it all, and if they bitch, well, that's what the military
> is for.

The prime difference i saw in this is that now the sare holders and no
way sit an wait to see what the goberment deside.
IMHO the Megas dont give a damn what goberments think about, they have
the power, they are the power as far as i understand for what the books
said.

> Will the company/factory/refinery run as well under government
...
> refinery two years ago).

Yes but must of the time companies that the state own didnt make a good
stand in a free market enviroment. Do you remember Comunis.

> "But what about extraterritoriality," you say.
> Extraterritoriality isn't worth the paper it's printed on. It can be

...

> and violating the "sovereign" territory of) the Yugoslavian Embassy three
> weeks ago. And it didn't require an act of Congress. We're not even

Yes but this happend because you are the world power. If the URSS still
was a World power you would think two times before do something like
this. But UCAS is not the most powerfull nation in the world the place
is for Japan. And also is the reason of why almos nobody is going to run
to save UCAS. (no ofence but you are the fu... Gringos ;), nor South
american Aztlan or Amazonia (is still argentina and Chile free countries
or part of Amazonia?) neither Asian Japanese or China going to support
you. Did you help nazis? Thats the way Aztlan story books portrain USA
(no ofence, IMHO, and the way we play shadowrun in our group. remember
that you put american indian in concentration camps )

> formally at war with Yugoslavia. This could result in *no warning* when
> and if the government decides to take action.
> If extraterritoriality were so powerful, it would be the rule
> everywhere. Yet there are nations that do not recognize it. In order to

Yeah but the ET is POWERFULL and thats why they are not going to take
the privilage away with the arms cross.

> do business in those nations, the corporations must have nationalized
> subsidiaries, which are bound by the rules and laws that apply to
> corporations of that country. If megacorporations had such power,
> wouldn't extraterritoriality be the rule rather than the exception?

ET as far as i know is the rule.

> While megacorporations are powerful, they are not untouchable.
> While they can have vast and far reaching economic effects, they are not
> immune from oversight. They still have to follow some rules. Just

Yes but they put the rules, that why they have the court.

> because your research facility is off-limits to the cops doesn't mean that
> you can thumb your nose at the government with impunity. You still need
> to pay taxes in order to operate within that nation's boundaries. Your

I dont think so, I see as Megas doing wathever they want, and only
mantaining goberments to dont have the worries about social security and
things like that. I saw the Shadowrun Universo as a place when the corp
could have the power to overtrow the goberments.

QUESTION; Megas paid taxes? they are ET What taxes did they paid? They
left IRA people audit his acounts?.

> employees probably still pay income tax to the federal government,
> especially if they still live on UCAS soil. Whatever concessions the
> corps may have gotten, tax-exempt status for corporate employees and
> entities is certainly *not* one of them. No government in its right mind
> would kiss of so much tax revenue.

UCAS wasnt in his right mind in the time all of this happend, remember.

> And with extraterritoriality comes a new dimension: international
> espionage. Yes, that's right, your corp activities and facilities are no
> longer domestic and now fall squarely within the province of the CIA.

Yes but, if i was a corp i will "buy" CIA agents. The same way they
"Buy" the people of "Echo mirage" IIRC

> Yes, you have given the government the legal loophole it needs to spy on
> you, becuase you claim to be a "sovereign" entity. This is especially
> true of megacorporations that control industries deemed vital to national
> security (like defense contractors). And if the government determines
> that your activities represent a "clear and present danger" to that
> nation's strategic interests, you can bet your socks they'll take action.

You can try, but i dont see a easy task. Because of the reason i expouse
lines back. The good operatives "Bond alike" are already corp people.

> Let's keep things in perspective. The government can seize assets
> and properties, detain people, and reduce a corporation's holdings to
> nothing without resorting to an act of Congress. Less democratic
> governments have an even easier time of it. Megecorporations only retain

Goberments in RL, in the Shadowrun universo (from now SU. I write in
spanish to point that is the point of view of the group that we play,
yes i ask them and maybe we are going to play a else word "Mega VS UCAS"
thats why i am so stubborn in the subject.)

> what rights they have at the sufferance of the government of the nation
> they operate in. If they do not reasonably protect it, or if they begin
> abusing it, the government can and will take it away. Yes, it would cause
> economic hardship. Yes, the repercussions would be drastic. No, these
> are not reason enough to keep the government from doing so if it gets its
> ire up.

Thats why the Megas keep thinks of goberments and soo.

> The reason that megacorporations hold as much power as they do in
> Shadowrun is precisely because they *cooperate* with governments. The two
> are totally in bed together. The thought of the megacorporation
> threatening to nuke a nation is as ludicrous as the thought of the
> government shutting down Ford for arming its security guards with MP5's.

I think the case is the other one Goberments cooperate with Megas.

> The megacorporation would not exist without heavy concessions from the
> government. Similarly, those heavy concessions wouldn't exist if the
> megas weren't feeding a large portion of that money straight back into the
> system. It's a two-way street, but when push comes to shove, it's the
> government that makes the rules. They have the ability to make national
> policy, and the military force to back that policy up. No corporation can
> exist without a consumer base, but if a consumer base exists, it doesn't
> take long to fill a megas empty shoes.

I insist sorry the same you say but the megas are the real power.

> Because of this, megacorporations tread the thin line between
> maximizing their profits and funneling money back into the system that
> lets them maximize their profits. Without this balance, megecorporations
> (and especially extraterritoriality) would not exist.

more or less, thats why they couldnt alow UCAS to do the ET change.
>
> Marc Renouf (ShadowRN GridSec - "Bad Cop" Division)
>

Ahuizotl
"I have a interesting run for you my friends " using the EvilGM tone of
voice.
Message no. 7
From: Ahuizotl cuellare@***.telmex.net.mx
Subject: Megacorporate Power (or lack thereof)
Date: Fri, 07 May 1999 20:20:24 -0500
Marc Renouf escribió:
>
> I've followed this thread for a while now, and watched both sides
> debate the issue. So now, I'll throw my own pair of ducats into the pot.
> The thing that people are forgetting when dealing with
> corporations versus governments is the concept of "nationalization" of an
> industry. It happens all the time, all over the world. Most frequently,
> it happens with large entities that control goods or services vital to a
> nation's economy, like oil companies. What is "nationalization"? It has
> two colloquial usages, both of which are bad for the corp in question.
> The first is usually applied to multinational corporations, and
> results from the government declaring that the corporation's
> holdings in that nation are bound by the nation's laws, and often must be
> owned or controlled by citizens of that nation. It's like creating
> another company, like Ford UK. Ford owns Ford UK, but Ford UK is still
> bound by all of the laws and strictures that apply to companies operating
> in the UK.
> The second usage is far more drastic. It's where the government
> says "this company/factory/refinery no longer belongs to private industry,
> and will henceforth be controlled by the state."
> Why does this happen? Because the people who run said
> company/factory/refinery get cocky and start doing things the government
> doesn't like, such as jacking prices or playing with production quotas in
> order to get leverage or concessions.
> And how do the shareholders view this? It depends on the laws of
> the country pulling the nationalization. In some, the stock holders are
> given a fair value for their stock ("fair" as defined by the government,
> not the corp - think "eminent domain"). In some, the shareholders get an
> equal "share" in new government-run entity, sort of like a government
> bond. This bears no voting privileges, however (though it may provide
> dividends). And in some cases, the shareholders are just shit out of
> luck. They lose it all, and if they bitch, well, that's what the military
> is for.
> Will the company/factory/refinery run as well under government
> control? Probably not. They'll probably have to bring in at least some
> new personnel (unless the government nationalizes the employees as well -
> something that happened to refinery workers in Lithuania's largest oil
> refinery two years ago).
> "But what about extraterritoriality," you say.
> Extraterritoriality isn't worth the paper it's printed on. It can be
> revoked at any time. It's easy, and doesn't even need the sanction of
> congress. Can you say "War Powers Act"? Embassies are extraterritorial
> too, but that didn't stop us from seizing (i.e. confiscating, occupying
> and violating the "sovereign" territory of) the Yugoslavian Embassy three
> weeks ago. And it didn't require an act of Congress. We're not even
> formally at war with Yugoslavia. This could result in *no warning* when
> and if the government decides to take action.
> If extraterritoriality were so powerful, it would be the rule
> everywhere. Yet there are nations that do not recognize it. In order to
> do business in those nations, the corporations must have nationalized
> subsidiaries, which are bound by the rules and laws that apply to
> corporations of that country. If megacorporations had such power,
> wouldn't extraterritoriality be the rule rather than the exception?
> While megacorporations are powerful, they are not untouchable.
> While they can have vast and far reaching economic effects, they are not
> immune from oversight. They still have to follow some rules. Just
> because your research facility is off-limits to the cops doesn't mean that
> you can thumb your nose at the government with impunity. You still need
> to pay taxes in order to operate within that nation's boundaries. Your
> employees probably still pay income tax to the federal government,
> especially if they still live on UCAS soil. Whatever concessions the
> corps may have gotten, tax-exempt status for corporate employees and
> entities is certainly *not* one of them. No government in its right mind
> would kiss of so much tax revenue.
> And with extraterritoriality comes a new dimension: international
> espionage. Yes, that's right, your corp activities and facilities are no
> longer domestic and now fall squarely within the province of the CIA.
> Yes, you have given the government the legal loophole it needs to spy on
> you, becuase you claim to be a "sovereign" entity. This is especially
> true of megacorporations that control industries deemed vital to national
> security (like defense contractors). And if the government determines
> that your activities represent a "clear and present danger" to that
> nation's strategic interests, you can bet your socks they'll take action.
> Let's keep things in perspective. The government can seize assets
> and properties, detain people, and reduce a corporation's holdings to
> nothing without resorting to an act of Congress. Less democratic
> governments have an even easier time of it. Megecorporations only retain
> what rights they have at the sufferance of the government of the nation
> they operate in. If they do not reasonably protect it, or if they begin
> abusing it, the government can and will take it away. Yes, it would cause
> economic hardship. Yes, the repercussions would be drastic. No, these
> are not reason enough to keep the government from doing so if it gets its
> ire up.
> The reason that megacorporations hold as much power as they do in
> Shadowrun is precisely because they *cooperate* with governments. The two
> are totally in bed together. The thought of the megacorporation
> threatening to nuke a nation is as ludicrous as the thought of the
> government shutting down Ford for arming its security guards with MP5's.
> The megacorporation would not exist without heavy concessions from the
> government. Similarly, those heavy concessions wouldn't exist if the
> megas weren't feeding a large portion of that money straight back into the
> system. It's a two-way street, but when push comes to shove, it's the
> government that makes the rules. They have the ability to make national
> policy, and the military force to back that policy up. No corporation can
> exist without a consumer base, but if a consumer base exists, it doesn't
> take long to fill a megas empty shoes.
> Because of this, megacorporations tread the thin line between
> maximizing their profits and funneling money back into the system that
> lets them maximize their profits. Without this balance, megecorporations
> (and especially extraterritoriality) would not exist.
>
> Marc Renouf (ShadowRN GridSec - "Bad Cop" Division)
>
> Other ShadowRN-related addresses and links:
> Mark Imbriaco <mark@*********.html.com> List Owner
> Adam Jury <adamj@*********.html.com> Assistant List Administrator
> DVixen <dvixen@****.com> Keeper of the FAQs
> Gurth <gurth@******.nl> GridSec Enforcer Division
> David Buehrer <dbuehrer@******.carl.org> GridSec "Nice Guy" Division
> ShadowRN FAQ <http://shadowrun.html.com/hlair/faqindex.php3>;
Message no. 8
From: Ahuizotl cuellare@***.telmex.net.mx
Subject: Megacorporate Power (or lack thereof)
Date: Fri, 07 May 1999 21:03:26 -0500
"Paul J. Adam" escribió:
>
> And why will a corporation's intelligence services be any better? Intel is
> _never_ a precise art.

Of course because ( i already said it) They "buy" the best.

>
> >Keep in mind that in the
> >world of SR, there are no more real superpowers.
>
> Beg to differ. Imperial Japan and the UCAS qualify - if you have carrier
> groups that size, you can project a fearful amount of power pretty much
> where you want.

UCAS again, sorry to insist but i dont see UCAS as a power. Is big, is
good is a kind of Spain, the most i give is France in our world.

>
> >Global powers, especially
> >the U.S., are shadows of what they are now. In addition most megas will have
> >a higher operating budgets than even large countries.
>
> Not hardly. Check Corporate Shadowfiles.
>
> Also, big budgets don't translate to strong militaries. Armed forces don't
> same in man-hours and materials to make.

Ok They made no profile, but defense of my assets made sense. Isnīt it.
And again we go with the probes that corps HAVE armies.

>
> >I do not buy this, at least for the megas as presented in Shadowrun. If a
> >pulling out of a country would cause dramatic problems for that country.
>
> Horse excrement. One megacorporation pulling out leaves market gaps
> that scores of competitors eagerly scramble to fill.

But why did you think this happends automatic.
Second What mega is going to fill the space?

>
> Let's say the megacorp gets nasty and - for instance - plays scorched-
> earth on the data grids. See many other customers rapidly terminate their
> contracts with that megacorp as a result. There's plenty of other suppliers
> in the market...

Agains why are the others Megas supply you if you attack them leving
without the privilege of ET. And why are iīm going to trust you
goberment that you are not going to do whatever you want agains me
again. You take away my toy (ET) you tell me you are going to rent MY
TOY TO ME (taxes) and you think im not going to fight, and ask the help
of mi big brother (nations Japan, Tirs, Aztlan and etc..) :-) get my
point

>
> More to the point, suppose it's a squabble with only _part_ of a megacorp.
> The UCAS and Renraku(Vehicles) get into an argument that escalates to
> the UCAS sealing off Renraku(Vehicles) factories and refusing to allow
> their ships in and out of harbour. No imports, no exports.

And in lest that a day you are going to have the Imperial Navy in your
cost.
I have a good Corp idea How Seattle Free State sound to you.

>

> >The
> >country's only hope would be to court a competing mega and hope it would
> >bolster their economy.
>
> One of the seven other megas (more, now) and scores or hundreds of AA
> and A corporations that will eagerly grab the available market share.

Again the same, what of this are completly FREE of Mega present. How
many of this have the mojo to suport a international fight. etc..

>
> >While a country could do what you say, megas have the ability to annihilate
> >a country's economy very rapidly.
>
> The megacorporations acting in unison, yes. One megacorporation, no,
> and against the more powerful nations - UCAS, CAS, Japan, Britain - a
> megacorporation alone is likely to lose.

Is all megas actian in unison. Because ?
Because they have to made a example to the world of what happend if you
fool around with corp privilage
Again the powerful nations if UCAS is so powerful why:
didnt reunit California with the UCAS
Finish the insects in Chicago
Play a stand agains NAN nations
Reunit the CAS states

If CAS is so powerfull why
didnt ask Aztlan his territory back.
Reunit the UCAS states.
Play a stand agains NAN nations.

I donīt know about Britania, but the two above didnt sounds like super
power to me.
>
> >Most countries would not take this risk.
>
> Depends what's at stake, doesn't it?

And whatīs at stake in your point of view

> >As always, when dealing with megacorporations: it's not about force, weapons
> >or power -- it's about money.
>
> And how do they make their money? By manufacturing goods and selling
...
> to be invented.

You do that are you asking for made things worse

> --
> Paul J. Adam


Ahuizotl
Message no. 9
From: Wordman wordman@*******.com
Subject: Megacorporate Power (or lack thereof)
Date: Sun, 09 May 1999 03:15:41 -0400
Paul J Adam wrote:
> In article <S.0000166737@*******.com>, Wordman
> <wordman@*******.com> writes
>>The problem here is that the intelligence apparatus of most megas will dwarf
>>that of a nation (at least in SR). The CIA is not horribly effective now; it
>>will be worse when it's budget is greatly reduced.
>
> And why will a corporation's intelligence services be any better? Intel is
> _never_ a precise art.

True. But all other things being equal, the better funded apparatus wins.

>>Keep in mind that in the
>>world of SR, there are no more real superpowers.
>
> Beg to differ. Imperial Japan and the UCAS qualify - if you have carrier
> groups that size, you can project a fearful amount of power pretty much
> where you want.

Military might is not the only measure of a superpower. Russia has a
fearsome nuclear arsenal, which (in spite of having no real army) makes them
militarily powerful. I don't consider Russia a superpower, though. They have
almost no economic might at all, and, to me, economic might is what matters.

On that basis, I'll concede that Japan might be a superpower in SR, but the
UCAS? No way. In the eyes of the Sixth World, the UCAS is a defeated power.
Defeated on their own soil by some old men who knew how to dance.

>>Global powers, especially
>>the U.S., are shadows of what they are now. In addition most megas will have
>>a higher operating budgets than even large countries.
>
> Not hardly. Check Corporate Shadowfiles.

Where? If Corporate Shadowfiles used real numbers, this sort of discussion
would not be needed.

> Also, big budgets don't translate to strong militaries.

Mr. Adam tends to view power in purely military sense. I feel this is a very
limited view of how the world really works, especially where corporations
are concerned.

>>I do not buy this, at least for the megas as presented in Shadowrun. If a
>>country decides to pull this kind of stuff on an SR mega, the mega can pull
>>out of the country, using scorched earth is necessary. A mega corporation
>>pulling out of a country would cause dramatic problems for that country.
>
> Horse excrement. One megacorporation pulling out leaves market gaps
> that scores of competitors eagerly scramble to fill.

By "pull out", I did not mean to indicate that a corporation would stop
selling in a country. Rather, they would stop _producing_ there. They would
not hire workers, pay rent or taxes and so on.

> Let's say the megacorp gets nasty and - for instance - plays scorched-
> earth on the data grids. See many other customers rapidly terminate their
> contracts with that megacorp as a result. There's plenty of other suppliers
> in the market...

Eventually, but not immediately.

Remember that the whole point here was "why would governments allow
corporate extraterritoriality". Let me try to explain by way of example.

Let's say the UCAS decides that it will no longer honor extraterritoriality
within their borders. Mr. Renouf and Mr. Adam are saying (I think) that the
corps would not have the power to resist such a move. I think otherwise.

Ares would treat this as great news. They know that other megacorps may not
have the pull to resist, but they are confident that they can arrange an
exception for themselves, because they are a huge portion of the American
economy. I maintain that they would be able to pull political strings to
keep their extraterritoriality (and, indeed, would have been able to stop
the UCAS from banning extraterritoriality in the first place), but let's
pretend for a moment that this is not the case.

The UCAS holds the line and says the Ares assets are now on American turf
and all American laws apply to Ares, its assets and its employees. It is
likely that this would make a number of projects on Ares sites suddenly
illegal. They were legal under Ares law, but not that of the UCAS. This does
not please Ares.

Ares is almost certainly the largest employer in the UCAS. It is possible
(though unlikely) that the various levels of UCAS government employ more
people, but Ares would still probably pay out more salary than the
government. This means they are the supplier of a large segment of the
buying power of the UCAS.

Ares sets up a secret headquarters outside American soil. Once set up, Ares
abandons two thirds of its American holdings. Once stripping them of
everything useful, they burn them to the ground. They keep only key
manufacturing facilities operational.

Suddenly, a sizable chunk of America is unemployed.

This move costs Ares a bit. They have to pay to relocate equipment, and
their empire is disrupted. Their production in some good drops. Ares still
produces goods elsewhere (in fact, America makes comparatively few of the
consumer goods that it uses), but many Americans now despise Ares for
putting them out of work, so there is likely reduced demand for Ares goods.
Still, Ares had time to set this all up, plan it all. You can bet they will
minimize this damage wherever possible.

Mr. Adam says that at this point, other corps will fill the gap. They will
sell the products that Ares no longer produces. But to who? To buy things,
you need money from employment, and Ares just sacked a good chunk of the
work force. Also, Ares is still selling goods in America, just not as many
as before.

So, the other corps will hire them up. But where will they work? Ares
torched massive amounts of real estate, and if the other corps had the room,
they would have done the hiring before Ares abandoned America. It will take
them months to build new office space and plants (probably on Ares' old
property).

Also, don't forget that the other corps are probably pissed about having
their extraterritoriality revoked in the UCAS, and may not be in a hurry to
save the country. They'll make a buck and gain market share where they can,
certainly, but they may not be keen on investing on infrastructure that they
can't control completely.

So, for at least six months or so unemployment ravages the economy of the
UCAS. Without effective leadership, this can build on itself into a
recession or even depression. And, face it, if the UCAS had effective
leaders, they wouldn't have pulled such a dumb-ass move in the first place.

Meanwhile, Ares has made some other nation extremely happy by relocating
there. They employ the locals in the workforce, build factories and so on.
To top it off, the local workforce probably works for less than the
Americans do. Ares might even convince some yanks to come work for them in
the new place.

All without firing a shot.

My contention remains that Ares' ability to do this acts a deterrent against
governments trying to mess with them.

> And how do they make their money? By manufacturing goods and selling
> them.

There is more to a megacorp than consumer goods. Prudential, for example,
makes millions of dollars a year, but doesn't produce a damn thing. Banks
and mutual fund companies are much the same. (My roommate, an IT guy for a
mutual fund company here in Boston, was recently in the position of
accidentally deleting 4 _billion_ dollars in transactions. Backups are a
good thing.) A larger portion of an economy that you might think is based on
finance and information, not making things. This is especially true in
America, where labor is extremely expensive.

> Interdict the sea lanes and you can bleed their balance sheets
> white. There's an excellent reason why the UCAS still operates nuclear-
> powered hunter-killer submarines: a finer tool for commerce raiding's yet
> to be invented.

Yeah, but Ares makes those submarines.

Wordman
Message no. 10
From: Paul J. Adam Paul@********.demon.co.uk
Subject: Megacorporate Power (or lack thereof)
Date: Sun, 9 May 1999 14:15:00 +0100
In article <S.0000167624@*******.com>, Wordman
<wordman@*******.com> writes
>Paul J Adam wrote:
>> And why will a corporation's intelligence services be any better? Intel is
>> _never_ a precise art.
>
>True. But all other things being equal, the better funded apparatus wins.

And why will a corporation's intelligence apparatus be better funded for
operations against the UCAS? Corporations are mostly focussed on each
other: dealing with nations is a lower priority. Out of that lower priority,
you have several nations.

>> Beg to differ. Imperial Japan and the UCAS qualify - if you have carrier
>> groups that size, you can project a fearful amount of power pretty much
>> where you want.
>
>Military might is not the only measure of a superpower.

No, but it's one of the requirements.

>Russia has a
>fearsome nuclear arsenal, which (in spite of having no real army) makes them
>militarily powerful. I don't consider Russia a superpower, though. They have
>almost no economic might at all, and, to me, economic might is what matters.

Japan in the 1980s was not a superpower, for all its economic might. Why
not? No ability to project force. Britain is nearer to superpower status
than either Japan or Russia: we can put a brigade of elite troops ashore,
with air support, just about anywhere in the world with a coastline, and
maintain control of the sea lanes between there and home base.

>On that basis, I'll concede that Japan might be a superpower in SR, but the
>UCAS? No way. In the eyes of the Sixth World, the UCAS is a defeated power.
>Defeated on their own soil by some old men who knew how to dance.

They lost a guerilla war, and most other nations are profoundly glad that
the Ghost Dance happened to someone else. Who would _not_ have been
caught out by such a shift?

>> Not hardly. Check Corporate Shadowfiles.
>
>Where? If Corporate Shadowfiles used real numbers, this sort of discussion
>would not be needed.

Page 14.

>> Also, big budgets don't translate to strong militaries.
>
>Mr. Adam tends to view power in purely military sense. I feel this is a very
>limited view of how the world really works, especially where corporations
>are concerned.

That's because you don't think it through. How does a corporation make
money? It manufactures goods and sells them at a profit. That entails
getting raw materials from source to factory, goods from factory to
market.

Look at those huge RO-RO car carriers unloading in ports like
Southampton, bringing tens of thousands of luxury cars from the Far East
to Britain. If something fatal happens to that ship en route, that's a half-
billion dollars lost in an eyeblink.

One thing military forces - navies in particular - excel at is sinking
merchant ships. In just five months of 1942, during _Paukenschlag_, the
Kriegsmarine sank 303 ships totalling 2,015,252 tons without loss: most
within sight of the US coast, using primitive submarines and crude
weapons by today's standards.


What could a modern nuclear-powered hunter-killer submarine do? This is
a report from a Royal Navy SSN, HMS Warspite, during Exercise OCEAN
SAFARI 82, attacking an escorted convoy.

"In the next forty minutes, Warspite slices through the convoy. At 10.04
we attack an unidentified bulk carrier of 20,000 tons: at 10.06 the motor
vessel Mercadian, 4300 tons: at 10.10 the motor vessel Seatrain: at 10.10
the Dutch warship Zuiderkruiz."

The attack opened with a successful attack on a tanker, ended with
Captain Cooke of Warspite 'sinking' the MV Gothia of 2000 tons as he
withrdraws under ineffective attack from the surviving escort.

"The climax comes on the afternoon of 13 January, when Warspite
penetrates into the middle of an eight-ship convoy with at least four
protecting escorts in sight. The captain attacks the escorts, and then
hides among the convoy, picking most of them off too. He spends the
afternoon with a large grin on his face...

We finish the exercise with a tally of twelve warships, three Fleet
auxiliaries and thirteen merchant ships totalling 300,000 tons sunk."

>> Horse excrement. One megacorporation pulling out leaves market gaps
>> that scores of competitors eagerly scramble to fill.
>
>By "pull out", I did not mean to indicate that a corporation would stop
>selling in a country. Rather, they would stop _producing_ there. They would
>not hire workers, pay rent or taxes and so on.

So what? They were extraterritorial! They were not paying rent, hiring
national citizens or paying taxes anyway.

>> Let's say the megacorp gets nasty and - for instance - plays scorched-
>> earth on the data grids. See many other customers rapidly terminate their
>> contracts with that megacorp as a result. There's plenty of other suppliers
>> in the market...
>
>Eventually, but not immediately.

Think also this. Renraku says "hell with you, UCAS!" and thoroughly trashes
the Seattle data grid. Nobody can talk to anyone...

...including all the other corporations in the Seattle area, who can now no
longer talk to their suppliers, or get messages out to Head Office.

Now, whether Renraku was wrong or whether they were right, they've
just massively inconvenienced many, many paying customers beside their
intended target.

>Remember that the whole point here was "why would governments allow
>corporate extraterritoriality". Let me try to explain by way of example.
>
>Let's say the UCAS decides that it will no longer honor extraterritoriality
>within their borders. Mr. Renouf and Mr. Adam are saying (I think) that the
>corps would not have the power to resist such a move. I think otherwise.
>
>The UCAS holds the line and says the Ares assets are now on American turf
>and all American laws apply to Ares, its assets and its employees. It is
>likely that this would make a number of projects on Ares sites suddenly
>illegal. They were legal under Ares law, but not that of the UCAS. This does
>not please Ares.
>
>Ares is almost certainly the largest employer in the UCAS.

The largest employer? Not of UCAS citizens. You can't have it both ways -
either its business is extraterritorial, or it isn't.

>Ares sets up a secret headquarters outside American soil. Once set up, Ares
>abandons two thirds of its American holdings. Once stripping them of
>everything useful, they burn them to the ground. They keep only key
>manufacturing facilities operational.
>
>Suddenly, a sizable chunk of America is unemployed.

Not of America. A large number of corporate citizens. Not the UCAS's
problem. Ares is retaining extraterritoriality? Fine: the unemployed Ares
citizens can starve in their ruined compounds. Do they have UCAS
passports? Visas to enter the UCAS? No? Then too bad.

>My contention remains that Ares' ability to do this acts a deterrent against
>governments trying to mess with them.

Your problem is, you fail to understand the implications and inherent
weakness of extraterritoriality.

For your strategy to work, the employees have to be UCAS citizens
working in Ares facilities, creating enormous weaknesses (thousands of
workers flooding in and out every morning? Think of the security
nightmares, given any state of hostility between a corporation and a
nation!)

If the employees and facilities are extraterritorial, then they don't pay
taxes and they aren't UCAS citizens and their employment or otherwise
means relatively little to the UCAS. Second-tier suppliers would miss the
corporate custom... except corporations _own_ their second-tier
suppliers, to play complex voodoo economics and minimise their tax
liabilities, and so that ability to cause the UCAS pain is irrelevant too.

If they _aren't_ extraterritorial, then what do they lose?

>> And how do they make their money? By manufacturing goods and selling
>> them.
>
>There is more to a megacorp than consumer goods. Prudential, for example,
>makes millions of dollars a year, but doesn't produce a damn thing. Banks
>and mutual fund companies are much the same.

The megacorporations don't do banking: that's one of the reasons they
have Zurich Orbital.

>A larger portion of an economy that you might think is based on
>finance and information, not making things. This is especially true in
>America, where labor is extremely expensive.

Yep. But the core of an economy is manufacturing goods. Financial
services and service industries are valuable and useful, but someone has to
create the wealth and add the value first.

>> Interdict the sea lanes and you can bleed their balance sheets
>> white. There's an excellent reason why the UCAS still operates nuclear-
>> powered hunter-killer submarines: a finer tool for commerce raiding's yet
>> to be invented.
>
>Yeah, but Ares makes those submarines.

Not according to Cyberpirates. "The NEW HAMPSHIRE-class attack
submarine is the latest attack sub developed by the UCAS Navy..."

Now, Ares may bid to _build_ some boats, but so will Federated-Boeing
and Tenneco and Electric Boat; just as shipyards compete to build
warships to Government designs today (the same class of destroyers are
being turned out at Bath Iron Works and Ingalls today, for instance)

And if Ares shows signs of being less than reliable, they can kiss that
defence work goodbye, now and for the foreseeable future. When was the
last time Israel bought any military materiel from France? Thirty-two
years since France screwed them and _still_ they're blocked from that
market.



--
Paul J. Adam
Message no. 11
From: Ereskanti@***.com Ereskanti@***.com
Subject: Megacorporate Power (or lack thereof)
Date: Sun, 9 May 1999 09:56:08 EDT
In a message dated 5/9/1999 8:17:27 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
Paul@********.demon.co.uk writes:

> >Remember that the whole point here was "why would governments allow
> >corporate extraterritoriality". Let me try to explain by way of example.
> >
> >Let's say the UCAS decides that it will no longer honor
extraterritoriality
> >within their borders. Mr. Renouf and Mr. Adam are saying (I think) that
the
> >corps would not have the power to resist such a move. I think otherwise.
> >
> >The UCAS holds the line and says the Ares assets are now on American turf
> >and all American laws apply to Ares, its assets and its employees. It is
> >likely that this would make a number of projects on Ares sites suddenly
> >illegal. They were legal under Ares law, but not that of the UCAS. This
> does
> >not please Ares.
> >
> >Ares is almost certainly the largest employer in the UCAS.
>
> The largest employer? Not of UCAS citizens. You can't have it both ways -
> either its business is extraterritorial, or it isn't.

Of this one statement and counterpoint PJA, this is where I agree with
Lester. You *can* and most likely *do* have the ability to hire at this
level. I did a mild check before my mother arrived for the weekend, and
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 (the corporate stuff, which financially is so
much greener than the governmental stuff ;-) and still retain various tax
evasions problems. The one trick is that "Import Taxation" does NOT apply to
employees.

-K

-K
Message no. 12
From: Kate . liliths_childe@*******.com
Subject: Megacorporate Power (or lack thereof)
Date: Sun, 09 May 1999 14:15:20 GMT
>>Ares is almost certainly the largest employer in the UCAS.
>
>The largest employer? Not of UCAS citizens. You can't have it both ways -
>either its business is extraterritorial, or it isn't.

I don't see where you're getting the idea that an
extraterritorial entity cannot or does not hire citizens
of some nation.

IMHO, unless the Mega specifically refuses to hire citizens,
most of their staff will be citizens of whatever country
houses said employees.

Could you please give me a source for your supposition?

My supposition comes from current maritime practices of
ship registry. The crews are not citizens of the nation
of registry of the vessel, but rather of whatever country
they're citizens of...

This whole idea of corporate citizens baffles me. I don't
see the need, nor the source for this to be the case.

Thanks in advance,

Kate


_______________________________________________________________
Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com
Message no. 13
From: Steve Collins einan@*********.net
Subject: Megacorporate Power (or lack thereof)
Date: Sun, 9 May 99 10:37:05 -0400
>
>The UCAS holds the line and says the Ares assets are now on American turf
>and all American laws apply to Ares, its assets and its employees. It is
>likely that this would make a number of projects on Ares sites suddenly
>illegal. They were legal under Ares law, but not that of the UCAS. This does
>not please Ares.
>
>Ares is almost certainly the largest employer in the UCAS. It is possible
>(though unlikely) that the various levels of UCAS government employ more
>people, but Ares would still probably pay out more salary than the
>government. This means they are the supplier of a large segment of the
>buying power of the UCAS.
>
>Ares sets up a secret headquarters outside American soil. Once set up, Ares
>abandons two thirds of its American holdings. Once stripping them of
>everything useful, they burn them to the ground. They keep only key
>manufacturing facilities operational.
>

You seem to underestimate the cost here. I work for a modern day Mega
(General Electric) in a small but fairly proffitable organization. At my
office there are about 180 people 120 of which would be considered
irreplacable. That is if they loose them they effectively loose that
business because it will take months to years to get people trained in
that specific field. The office supplies are not that important there but
the data is. So they could easily download all of the information to
portable media and abandon the building. But do you think that no one of
those 60 people being left behind are going to report the corps
activities top the government? Even if no one says anything how many of
the 120 are going to be willing to just up and move? Finally I work at a
very small facility (just 1 floor of an 8 story building) do you think it
would be possible to hide the activities at the Jet Engine facility in
Lynn? It's the size of a small college but has large ammounts of heavy
equiptment. It is also a vital part of National Security as they make
like 70% of the military jet engines we use there. The government would
know months in advance what ARES was planning and would act exactly as
Paul and I have described, One morning important ARES facilities would be
invaded by a motorized infantry unit and siezed with no warning. They
would be shut down for maybe 2 weeks with the salaries for that period
being picked up by the government and sold top the highest bidder while
the heads of ARES were charged with all manner of crimes including
treason and as many as could be caught would be arrested.

Point 2 Have you any idea how much it would cost to move 2/3 of a Mega's
facilities? We are talking in the Trillions of Nuyen and it would take
years as there would need to facilities built for them to move into.
There just isn't that kind of empty office/manufacturing space available
anywhere in the world. Corps have money but not that kind of money just
sitting around. Any that tried it would quickly find themselves overtaken
by the AA corps who aren't having 60% of their available capital going to
a project that generates no profit.

>Suddenly, a sizable chunk of America is unemployed.
>
>This move costs Ares a bit. They have to pay to relocate equipment, and
>their empire is disrupted. Their production in some good drops. Ares still
>produces goods elsewhere (in fact, America makes comparatively few of the
>consumer goods that it uses), but many Americans now despise Ares for
>putting them out of work, so there is likely reduced demand for Ares goods.
>Still, Ares had time to set this all up, plan it all. You can bet they will
>minimize this damage wherever possible.
>
>Mr. Adam says that at this point, other corps will fill the gap. They will
>sell the products that Ares no longer produces. But to who? To buy things,
>you need money from employment, and Ares just sacked a good chunk of the
>work force. Also, Ares is still selling goods in America, just not as many
>as before.
>
>So, the other corps will hire them up. But where will they work? Ares
>torched massive amounts of real estate, and if the other corps had the room,
>they would have done the hiring before Ares abandoned America. It will take
>them months to build new office space and plants (probably on Ares' old
>property).

You don't build a corprate facility overnight or unannounced So it's not
like this will not be a suprise and you are talking years not months. The
Government will be well prepared as well.

>
>Also, don't forget that the other corps are probably pissed about having
>their extraterritoriality revoked in the UCAS, and may not be in a hurry to
>save the country. They'll make a buck and gain market share where they can,
>certainly, but they may not be keen on investing on infrastructure that they
>can't control completely.
>
>So, for at least six months or so unemployment ravages the economy of the
>UCAS. Without effective leadership, this can build on itself into a
>recession or even depression. And, face it, if the UCAS had effective
>leaders, they wouldn't have pulled such a dumb-ass move in the first place.
>
>Meanwhile, Ares has made some other nation extremely happy by relocating
>there. They employ the locals in the workforce, build factories and so on.
>To top it off, the local workforce probably works for less than the
>Americans do. Ares might even convince some yanks to come work for them in
>the new place.
>

Except, There needs to be a LARGE pool of unemployed trained workers at
the new location.If there were such a location the corps would have moved
there for proffit reasons already. With all of the other Mega's pulling
out of the UCAS there is a mad grab for the few there are to fill the
holes of employees they couldn't get out of the UCAS and the cost of
employment shoots through the roof. Also many corps that pulled out
wouldn't have any choice but to hire inferior employees loweroing their
quality of work. The smaller corps that remained in the UCAS and hired
the cream of the newly available crop of workers start putting out
superior products with superior marketing. In a few years those are
challanging the Mega's that pulled out. They can also do it far cheaper
that the others can do it because office/manufacturing space is cheaper
as is payroll.

>All without firing a shot.
>
>My contention remains that Ares' ability to do this acts a deterrent against
>governments trying to mess with them.
>
>> And how do they make their money? By manufacturing goods and selling
>> them.
>
>There is more to a megacorp than consumer goods. Prudential, for example,
>makes millions of dollars a year, but doesn't produce a damn thing. Banks
>and mutual fund companies are much the same. (My roommate, an IT guy for a
>mutual fund company here in Boston, was recently in the position of
>accidentally deleting 4 _billion_ dollars in transactions. Backups are a
>good thing.) A larger portion of an economy that you might think is based on
>finance and information, not making things. This is especially true in
>America, where labor is extremely expensive.
>

Fidelity right. So they leave, your friend isn't important enough to be
taken with them but how do they replace him, there is already a severe
shortage of It workers in the world. Assume they try to take him How many
people does Fidelity employ in Boston 5000, 10000, More? How many of them
could they get out before the government shuts down Logan? we won't even
mention their data how many million terra pulses of data do they have to
transfere to another location? How long will it take to set up the
computer network to accept that data? how long will it take to transfere
the data? don't you think the government can just invade the building and
shut down the transfere before they finish (remember they will know
months in advance what is up)?

>> Interdict the sea lanes and you can bleed their balance sheets
>> white. There's an excellent reason why the UCAS still operates nuclear-
>> powered hunter-killer submarines: a finer tool for commerce raiding's yet
>> to be invented.
>
>Yeah, but Ares makes those submarines.
>

Along with several other companies and since it takes well over a year to
manufacture a SUB the loss of manufacturing ability wouldn't be noticed
for a while. Remember the UCAS already has them in large quantities, the
corps have a few at most.

Steve

>Wordman
>
>
>
Message no. 14
From: Paul J. Adam Paul@********.demon.co.uk
Subject: Megacorporate Power (or lack thereof)
Date: Sun, 9 May 1999 15:46:31 +0100
In article <19990509141520.90736.qmail@*******.com>, Kate .
<liliths_childe@*******.com> writes
>>The largest employer? Not of UCAS citizens. You can't have it both ways -
>>either its business is extraterritorial, or it isn't.
>
>I don't see where you're getting the idea that an
>extraterritorial entity cannot or does not hire citizens
>of some nation.

Of course they can. But then they open security holes, and - crucially -
have to pay those staff in hard currency instead of corporate scrip.

Better by far, from a profitability standpoint, to have your employees
living in corporate housing (which they pay _you_ for), able to buy only
the goods you choose, with their savings worthless outside your company.

>IMHO, unless the Mega specifically refuses to hire citizens,
>most of their staff will be citizens of whatever country
>houses said employees.
>
>Could you please give me a source for your supposition?

Corporate Shadowfiles, specifically page 54, "Corporate Scrip"

--
Paul J. Adam
Message no. 15
From: Paul J. Adam Paul@********.demon.co.uk
Subject: Megacorporate Power (or lack thereof)
Date: Sun, 9 May 1999 15:43:43 +0100
In article <c654fd06.2466edf8@***.com>, Ereskanti@***.com writes
>In a message dated 5/9/1999 8:17:27 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
>Paul@********.demon.co.uk writes:
>> The largest employer? Not of UCAS citizens. You can't have it both ways -
>> either its business is extraterritorial, or it isn't.
>
>Of this one statement and counterpoint PJA, this is where I agree with
>Lester. You *can* and most likely *do* have the ability to hire at this
>level. I did a mild check before my mother arrived for the weekend, and
>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 (the corporate stuff, which financially is so
>much greener than the governmental stuff ;-) and still retain various tax
>evasions problems. The one trick is that "Import Taxation" does NOT apply
to
>employees.

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.

You also then have to pay those employees in UCAS dollars, not corporate
scrip, because they live in the UCAS, pay rent in the UCAS, shop there...
thus destroying _that_ valuable shell game.

Finally, as UCAS citizens living outside your influence, they're _far, far_
easier for competitors to headhunt, subvert or just eliminate - _not_
what you really want.


--
Paul J. Adam
Message no. 16
From: Nexx Many-Scars nexx@********.net
Subject: Megacorporate Power (or lack thereof)
Date: Sun, 9 May 1999 12:55:16 -0500
----- Original Message -----
From: Paul J. Adam <Paul@********.demon.co.uk>
>
> You also then have to pay those employees in UCAS dollars, not corporate
> scrip, because they live in the UCAS, pay rent in the UCAS, shop there...
> thus destroying _that_ valuable shell game.
>
> Finally, as UCAS citizens living outside your influence, they're _far,
far_
> easier for competitors to headhunt, subvert or just eliminate - _not_
> what you really want.

I think living in enclaves is pretty common. I'm too lazy to get up and
walk the 6 feet to my books, but I remember in NS, when they're talking
about Boeing... apparently Boeing, not even a AAA, has the better part of
their important people living on-site, for security reasons. Why do these
highly trained and qualified people put up with this? Well, for one thing,
it's likely par for the course. For another. it's practically the perfect
environment. Your kids are in a nice, safe, neighborhood with good
schools, CorpSec makes sure they don't get involved in any of that gang
crap, and you likely don't have to pay much for the housing (since it's
taken directly from your check, and it's cheaper for the corp to keep up
its own facilities than to pay you a Cost of Living allowance to live
elsewhere). Not to mention your co-workers are close by, so if you get an
idea that just _has_ to be worked on, you can go next door in your bathrobe
and wake up Sue, dragging her to the office for some hot and funky
engineering.

The corps love going into the landlord biz, and their employees love doing
it. The few that don't can likely be replaced by someone who does, or, if
not, will be few enough that you can absorb that little cost. Those living
off-site will also be cut out of a chunk of corporate culture, making their
job more difficult, and putting pressure on them to come in and live on
site...

*****
Nexx Many-Scars
aka Mark Hall
*
Three hateful things in speech: stiffness, obscurity, a bad delivery.
*
http://www-personal.interkan.net/~nexx/mainpage.html
-Last Update: 2-5-99
Message no. 17
From: Gurth gurth@******.nl
Subject: Megacorporate Power (or lack thereof)
Date: Sun, 9 May 1999 21:02:21 +0200
According to Ereskanti@***.com, at 9:56 on 9 May 99, the word on
the street was...

> > >Ares is almost certainly the largest employer in the UCAS.
> >
> > The largest employer? Not of UCAS citizens. You can't have it both ways -
> > either its business is extraterritorial, or it isn't.
>
> Of this one statement and counterpoint PJA, this is where I agree with
> Lester. You *can* and most likely *do* have the ability to hire at this
> level. I did a mild check before my mother arrived for the weekend, and
> 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 (the corporate stuff, which financially is so
> much greener than the governmental stuff ;-) and still retain various tax
> evasions problems. The one trick is that "Import Taxation" does NOT apply
to
> employees.

IMHO a UCAS citizen working in an extraterritorial Ares facility would be
very much the same as today working in a different country than in which
you live -- e.g., a Canadian citizen working in the US (to keep this close
to home for all the North Americans on the list :) I guess this is what K
is saying as well, but in many more words... This sort of thing happens a
lot in border areas, at least here in Europe and I suppose in North
America as well.

The only place where I suppose this could cause problems is if the
employing corp pays in its own money which it has declared illegal to use
outside corp-owned stores. Things like paying the rent, if you live in a
non-corp building, would become difficult that way.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Another year and then you'll be happy.
-> NERPS Project Leader * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
->The Plastic Warriors Page: http://shadowrun.html.com/plasticwarriors/<-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+
PE Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 18
From: Paul J. Adam Paul@********.demon.co.uk
Subject: Megacorporate Power (or lack thereof)
Date: Sun, 9 May 1999 20:22:05 +0100
In article <199905091901.VAA07633@*****.xs4all.nl>, Gurth
<gurth@******.nl> writes
>The only place where I suppose this could cause problems is if the
>employing corp pays in its own money which it has declared illegal to use
>outside corp-owned stores.

...which is one of the major reasons corporations use extraterritoriality
and nations resent it...

>Things like paying the rent, if you live in a
>non-corp building, would become difficult that way.

Yep.

Thing is, if the workers are paid in UCAS money and thus spending their
wealth within the UCAS, then a big part of the problem with corporate
extraterritoriality goes away - but then, it becomes much less attractive
to the corporations too.

--
Paul J. Adam
Message no. 19
From: Wordman wordman@*******.com
Subject: Megacorporate Power (or lack thereof)
Date: Sun, 09 May 1999 16:07:08 -0400
Paul J Adam wrote:
> In article <S.0000167624@*******.com>, Wordman
> <wordman@*******.com> writes
>>Paul J Adam wrote:
>>Military might is not the only measure of a superpower.
>
> No, but it's one of the requirements.

No argument on this point.

>>> Not hardly. Check Corporate Shadowfiles.
>>
>>Where? If Corporate Shadowfiles used real numbers, this sort of discussion
>>would not be needed.
>
> Page 14.

I don't see how this page indicates how large megas are in relation to
nations.

I think that is at the heart of the disagreement here: how big are megas?
The origin of this whole thread was whether or not extraterritoriality was
realistic/feasible. I will totally agree with you that if megacorporations
are less powerful than nations, than extraterritoriality is not feasible
because nations would never stand for it.

I, however, approach the topic from the other end. If you assume, as FASA
does, that extraterritoriality is feasible in SR, then it means that
megacorporations are much more powerful than nations are.

>>Mr. Adam tends to view power in purely military sense. I feel this is a very
>>limited view of how the world really works, especially where corporations
>>are concerned.
>
> That's because you don't think it through.
>
> One thing military forces - navies in particular - excel at is sinking
> merchant ships.

Mr. Adam's point here is that nations exert leverage on corporations,
because they can prevent the corporation from getting goods to market using
military force.

This is, of course, true, but take it a step further: what happens when Ares
and the UCAS go to war? Both Ares and the UCAS lose. The UCAS has to deal
with huge political problems in attacking Ares abroad, while Ares has no
such problem. Ares can threaten to nuke the UCAS, but the UCAS has very
little option of nuking Ares back.

Ares, on the other hand, will get eaten by it's competitors. Naturally, the
UCAS has competitors of its own.

All in all, Ares is better off buying control of the UCAS's next elections.
More cost effective and less disruptive. Don't forget that this war would
cost the UCAS money as well. People seem to assume that cost doesn't apply
to national military.

(Note: this particular example is muddied a bit by the fact that Ares is a
key supplier of arms to the UCAS. The UCAS would need to re-tool to fight
Ares successfully.)

>>By "pull out", I did not mean to indicate that a corporation would stop
>>selling in a country. Rather, they would stop _producing_ there. They would
>>not hire workers, pay rent or taxes and so on.
>
> So what? They were extraterritorial! They were not paying rent, hiring
> national citizens or paying taxes anyway.

Not anymore, the UCAS made them no longer extraterritorial.

In any case, I do not believe that all wageslaves live on corporate land.
Look in the Seattle source book and check out how little land is
extraterritorial compared to where corporate workforce actually lives.

> Think also this. Renraku says "hell with you, UCAS!" and thoroughly trashes
> the Seattle data grid. Nobody can talk to anyone...
>
> ...including all the other corporations in the Seattle area, who can now no
> longer talk to their suppliers, or get messages out to Head Office.
>
> Now, whether Renraku was wrong or whether they were right, they've
> just massively inconvenienced many, many paying customers beside their
> intended target.

And Renraku would blame this all on the UCAS. "We didn't want to do this,
the UCAS _made_ us...". Besides, if Renraku had this much control over
Seattle's data grid, "trashing" it would be stupid. They could just
interfere with communications of UCAS government.

> The largest employer? Not of UCAS citizens. You can't have it both ways -
> either its business is extraterritorial, or it isn't.

Again, because a business is extraterritorial, that does not mean that all
employees live on corporate land.

People have made a big deal that this would be a "security risk", but I fail
to see the logic. Corps don't want extraterritoriality to stop security
leaks. They want it to prevent local prosecution for acts committed on their
own property.

If you have a plant that makes candy, for example, corps don't particularly
care about security as they would for an R&D facility. They would have no
need for elaborate checks of every passing employee. They don't care. All
they want is the ability to, say, shoot trespassers without getting hassled
by local law.

As for the corporate script argument, that really doesn't require on-site
employee living either. A corporation can make contract offers like this:
"on a yearly basis, we will pay you (at your option), either a) 90,000Y in
our own scrip or b) 30,000Y in local currency". Which do you pick?

> The megacorporations don't do banking: that's one of the reasons they
> have Zurich Orbital.

Megacorporations will do anything that earns profit. And banking can be very
profitable. The argument above is like saying Citybank doesn't do banking:
that's one of the reasons Fleet Bank exists.

>>A larger portion of an economy that you might think is based on
>>finance and information, not making things. This is especially true in
>>America, where labor is extremely expensive.
>
> Yep. But the core of an economy is manufacturing goods. Financial
> services and service industries are valuable and useful, but someone has to
> create the wealth and add the value first.

Yet the USA imports more goods than it produces. How do you account for
this? By the logic above, the USA should be in shambles, because it can't
produce the consumer goods it needs.

Wordman
Message no. 20
From: Steve Collins einan@*********.net
Subject: Megacorporate Power (or lack thereof)
Date: Sun, 9 May 99 17:17:11 -0400
>> Think also this. Renraku says "hell with you, UCAS!" and thoroughly
trashes
>> the Seattle data grid. Nobody can talk to anyone...
>>
>> ...including all the other corporations in the Seattle area, who can now no
>> longer talk to their suppliers, or get messages out to Head Office.
>>
>> Now, whether Renraku was wrong or whether they were right, they've
>> just massively inconvenienced many, many paying customers beside their
>> intended target.
>
>And Renraku would blame this all on the UCAS. "We didn't want to do this,
>the UCAS _made_ us...". Besides, if Renraku had this much control over
>Seattle's data grid, "trashing" it would be stupid. They could just
>interfere with communications of UCAS government.
>

And their customers reply would be I don't care why you did it I want my
data network back online. Most government data of any importance would be
going through a private government owned LTG/RTG network. The rest would
still be difficult to filter and just intefere with that.

>> The largest employer? Not of UCAS citizens. You can't have it both ways -
>> either its business is extraterritorial, or it isn't.
>
>Again, because a business is extraterritorial, that does not mean that all
>employees live on corporate land.
>
>People have made a big deal that this would be a "security risk", but I fail
>to see the logic. Corps don't want extraterritoriality to stop security
>leaks. They want it to prevent local prosecution for acts committed on their
>own property.
>
>If you have a plant that makes candy, for example, corps don't particularly
>care about security as they would for an R&D facility. They would have no
>need for elaborate checks of every passing employee. They don't care. All
>they want is the ability to, say, shoot trespassers without getting hassled
>by local law.
>
>As for the corporate script argument, that really doesn't require on-site
>employee living either. A corporation can make contract offers like this:
>"on a yearly basis, we will pay you (at your option), either a) 90,000Y in

I agree with your point here but as I said in another post it matters not
whether they are corp citizens or national citizens the logistics
involved with moving that many of them make it impossible for a corp to
pull out either quickly or quietly, while the government can fairly
easily act in both ways once they get word of the corps plans. And NO the
corp doesn't have the option of just leaving them behind, I'm essentially
a nobody (a mid level software test engineer) and it would take them 6
months to a year to replace me and train my replacement to be anywhere
near profficient. That's just 1 employee, now imagine you have to replace
75% of your workforce including the Human Resources personel that do the
hiring. It will take you 5 years to be back up to speed. Look at all of
the business you will loose in that time period.

Extraterrateritoriality was granted at a time of great flux in the world,
when governments didn't have the stability to fight the corps. Right now
in SR the governments and corps are sort of like the cops and the maffia
when the cops have been bought. As long as things stay clean and under
the table and the cops are thrown a bone every now and then everybody is
happy. But if the corps get out of hand and their actions become too
public or too outrageous the government has to step in and make an
example out of them. The corps can either take it or fight. If they
fight they WILL loose and loose big. So they take it, deny
responsability, pay the fines, hang some junior execs out to dry, and
wait for the next election. This is why Shadow runners exist, plausable
deniability. When the corps get caught with their hands in the cookie jar
it costs them money because they can't fight a major government and win.
If on the other hand the cops are the ones to interfere with the
arraingement first then the corps can easily organize a lot of
opposition, neutralize the cause of the problem and keep going on their
merry way.

Steve

Steve
Message no. 21
From: runnerpaul@*****.com runnerpaul@*****.com
Subject: Megacorporate Power (or lack thereof)
Date: Sun, 9 May 1999 18:58:57 -0400 (EDT)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

At 05:17 PM 5/9/1999 -0400, Steve Collins wrote:
>I agree with your point here but as I said in another post it matters

>not
>whether they are corp citizens or national citizens the logistics
>involved with moving that many of them make it impossible for a corp
>to
>pull out either quickly or quietly, while the government can fairly
>easily act in both ways once they get word of the corps plans. And NO

>the
>corp doesn't have the option of just leaving them behind, I'm
>essentially
>a nobody (a mid level software test engineer) and it would take them
>6
>months to a year to replace me and train my replacement to be
>anywhere
>near profficient. That's just 1 employee, now imagine you have to
>replace
>75% of your workforce including the Human Resources personel that do
>the
>hiring. It will take you 5 years to be back up to speed. Look at all
>of
>the business you will loose in that time period.

Maybe in today's market. By Shadowrun time though, there are possible
workarounds.

Here's a little blurb from the Corporate Security Handbook, p. 52.
It's from the section of how security screens potentially risky
employees from the workforce, but what's mentioned can also apply
here:

"Another problem can arise when corporate clients whose operations
require high degrees of technical skill undercut the effectiveness of
their own screening programs.
<<Snip>>
>>[I've heard about one place that gets around this problem -- at
least among its mid-level technocrats -- by fitting them with
high-level skillsofts. As long as the job in question doesn't require
creative thinking, the savings in security are enough to recoup the
cost of fitting everybody. It also gives the corp a workforce with a
uniform set of skills that can be quickly updated without incurring
education expenses or paying for lost working time. The biggest
advantage though, is the fact that the workers check their skills at
the door before they go home. It's easier to guard a vault full of
skillsoft chips than 300 microcircut engineers who might want to go
and work across the street.]<<
-- The Chromed Accountant (10:34:56/12-01-55)"

It's true that you couldn't replace a mega's entire workforce with
skillsoft driven labor (and especially not the R&D and product testing
departments), but for quite a few jobs, it can be done. This would cut
down on the amount of people the corp would have to move.

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

iQCVAwUBNzYSeaPbvUVI86rNAQGC+AP/U9WXjMVVpYrH9Ik3fueycX+x72ntrZFI
wAUFSfvjmkPR2QIogt/ddZtQJb2iOfBRuspox+i8uPQca6WYuVyfRH0R0A8ivKoj
v7VuGhoqPKfUCtEOOu41Us9Y8RPyU+FRyBn985Z3bY8vR4tf20Rn9rxFLkj6DZVE
KiXCcLsqeXM=0sNj
-----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. 22
From: Gurth gurth@******.nl
Subject: Megacorporate Power (or lack thereof)
Date: Mon, 10 May 1999 10:37:48 +0200
According to Paul J. Adam, at 20:22 on 9 May 99, the word on
the street was...

> Thing is, if the workers are paid in UCAS money and thus spending their
> wealth within the UCAS, then a big part of the problem with corporate
> extraterritoriality goes away - but then, it becomes much less attractive
> to the corporations too.

OTOH, if a megacorp pays its employees in corporate money, and that same
corp also owns some housing estates near its facilities (even if those
estates are not extraterritorial), the employees have little choice but to
live there, since they can't use their money to rent/buy a house somewhere
else. Paying taxes to the national government would still be difficult,
though I'm sure some kind of construction could be figured out by the
megacorp. Like paying employees in corporate scrip, except precisely the
part they would have to pay in taxes to the government. UCAS taxes are
what, a flat 30% rate? *looks in Holy^H^H^H^H Shadowbeat* 33%, to be
precise. So if someone makes 1,500 nuyen a month -- enough to live in a
Low lifestyle and have some money to spare -- 1,000 would be in corporate
money (say Ares scrip) and the rest in national currency (UCAS dollars).

Not a completely ideal solution, but it is a way to bind non-corporate
citizens to an extraterritorial corporation.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Another year and then you'll be happy.
-> NERPS Project Leader * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
->The Plastic Warriors Page: http://shadowrun.html.com/plasticwarriors/<-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+
PE Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 23
From: James Vaughan boss_dawg@***.net
Subject: Megacorporate Power (or lack thereof)
Date: 10 May 99 14:48:28 CDT
"Paul J. Adam" <Paul@********.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> That's because you don't think it through. How does a corporation make
> money? It manufactures goods and sells them at a profit. That entails
> getting raw materials from source to factory, goods from factory to
> market.
You have a rather simplified view of economics.

> So what? They were extraterritorial! They were not paying rent, hiring
> national citizens or paying taxes anyway.
>
> >Ares is almost certainly the largest employer in the UCAS.
>
> The largest employer? Not of UCAS citizens. You can't have it both ways -
> either its business is extraterritorial, or it isn't.
>
Exactly MY point. If they are no longer extraterritorial then they are now
UCAS citizens. Unless you are going to declare them illegal aliens and deport
them. Imagine what kind of political bombshell that would be. "Daddy where is
mommy? I'm sorry honey the government took her away because she worked for
Ares."
> >Suddenly, a sizable chunk of America is unemployed.
>
> Not of America. A large number of corporate citizens. Not the UCAS's
> problem. Ares is retaining extraterritoriality? Fine: the unemployed Ares
> citizens can starve in their ruined compounds. Do they have UCAS
> passports? Visas to enter the UCAS? No? Then too bad.
>
See my previous comment.
> >There is more to a megacorp than consumer goods. Prudential, for example,
> >makes millions of dollars a year, but doesn't produce a damn thing. Banks
> >and mutual fund companies are much the same.
>
> The megacorporations don't do banking: that's one of the reasons they
> have Zurich Orbital.
Once again you picked out the one word you liked and ignored the rest. What
about the insurance angle?

> >A larger portion of an economy that you might think is based on
> >finance and information, not making things. This is especially true in
> >America, where labor is extremely expensive.
>
> Yep. But the core of an economy is manufacturing goods. Financial
> services and service industries are valuable and useful, but someone has to
> create the wealth and add the value first.
The core of the WORLD economy not the UCAS economy. The UCAS economy of the
sixth world is in all probability a tertiary information based economy. Which
are coincidentally easily relocated. As for the manufacturing look at the
numbers in Corporate Shadowfiles. Who is the big manufacturer? Saeder-Krupp
thats who. Are YOU going to tell the dragon you just nationalized his UCAS
based assets??? Nice knowing you chummer.

____________________________________________________________________
Get free e-mail and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1
Message no. 24
From: Marc Renouf renouf@********.com
Subject: Megacorporate Power (or lack thereof)
Date: Mon, 10 May 1999 17:57:05 -0400 (EDT)
On 10 May 1999, James Vaughan wrote:

> As for the manufacturing look at the numbers in Corporate Shadowfiles.
> Who is the big manufacturer? Saeder-Krupp thats who. Are YOU going to
> tell the dragon you just nationalized his UCAS based assets??? Nice
> knowing you chummer.

Dragons are not invulnerable. Dunkelzahn's assassination proved
that. While Lofwyr certainly wields a substantial amount of personal and
corporate power, he is not god. He holds no more influence over the UCAS
than any other national superpower. In the absence of his corporate
power, he holds almost none. Telling Lofwyr that you just nationalized
his UCAS assets would be like telling Bill Gates that you're going to
nationalize Microsoft. Yes, he has enough money and influence to have you
(specifically) killed. Heck, he might even do it himself. But what does
killing a specific person solve?
If Clinton were to go to Belgrade to tell Milosevic that we were
about to nuke them, would Milosevic's killing Clinton change anything?
Probably not.
Governments (and even corporations) do not bend just because their
opponents have the power to crush any individual - because they *all* have
the ability to crush any individual.

Marc
Message no. 25
From: James Vaughan boss_dawg@***.net
Subject: Megacorporate Power (or lack thereof)
Date: 11 May 99 18:40:05 CDT
Marc Renouf <renouf@********.com> wrote:
> Dragons are not invulnerable. Dunkelzahn's assassination proved
> that.

Apparently you have forgotten or just do not know how Dunkelzahn really died.

> While Lofwyr certainly wields a substantial amount of personal and
> corporate power, he is not god. He holds no more influence over the UCAS
> than any other national superpower. In the absence of his corporate
> power, he holds almost none. Telling Lofwyr that you just nationalized
> his UCAS assets would be like telling Bill Gates that you're going to
> nationalize Microsoft. Yes, he has enough money and influence to have you
> (specifically) killed. Heck, he might even do it himself. But what does
> killing a specific person solve?

Fear, whether founded or unfounded, is a power unto itself.

> If Clinton were to go to Belgrade to tell Milosevic that we were
> about to nuke them, would Milosevic's killing Clinton change anything?
> Probably not.
> Governments (and even corporations) do not bend just because their
> opponents have the power to crush any individual - because they *all* have
> the ability to crush any individual.
You are forgetting that even the government is made up of people too. Clinton
would never do that. Why? Because he values his skin too much.

Also Lofwyr is not just a corporate dragon(as if that's not enough) he's also
a prince of Tir Tairngire.

____________________________________________________________________
Get free e-mail and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1
Message no. 26
From: Paul J. Adam Paul@********.demon.co.uk
Subject: Megacorporate Power (or lack thereof)
Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 23:21:47 +0100
In article <9905091858575Z.12659@*****.iname.net>,
runnerpaul@*****.com writes
>It's true that you couldn't replace a mega's entire workforce with
>skillsoft driven labor (and especially not the R&D and product testing
>departments), but for quite a few jobs, it can be done. This would cut
>down on the amount of people the corp would have to move.

On the other hand, for such labour all you need's a warm body with a
datajack, or at most skillwires. So, why bother going for countries with
educated, skilled workforces in the first place? Joe Blow signs a twenty-
year contract: for ten hours a day he slots his skillchip, for the rest of his
or her life he's got a place to live, food to eat, trideo to watch, can live
without people trying to kill him, rob him or steal his possessions. Even
today, that qualifies as "luxury" in some corners of the world.

Corporations will already be mostly based wherever's most profitable for
them. No business keeps a branch open because it feels generous: if it
doesn't earn a return, it gets reformed, sold or shut down. If businesses
are sited in the UCAS, it's because it makes better sense to have them
there than elsewhere.


>
>

--
Paul J. Adam
Message no. 27
From: Paul J. Adam Paul@********.demon.co.uk
Subject: Megacorporate Power (or lack thereof)
Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 23:15:29 +0100
In article <199905091901.VAA07633@*****.xs4all.nl>, Gurth
<gurth@******.nl> writes
>IMHO a UCAS citizen working in an extraterritorial Ares facility would be
>very much the same as today working in a different country than in which
>you live -- e.g., a Canadian citizen working in the US (to keep this close
>to home for all the North Americans on the list :)

Except that, in Shadowrun, you would be commiting a major felony by
spending your salary (paid in US dollars) anywhere in Canada. Corporate
scrip is _not_ convertible.

>The only place where I suppose this could cause problems is if the
>employing corp pays in its own money which it has declared illegal to use
>outside corp-owned stores. Things like paying the rent, if you live in a
>non-corp building, would become difficult that way.

That's a main reason corporations have their own currencies: you can then
_only_ buy what your own corporation sells, at the prices they set, unless
you can find someone willing to illegally convert your corporate scrip into a
hard currency. In other words, the "company store" mentality: you pay
your employees in money they can only spend with you.

Similarly, how does such an employee run away? Their money is almost
worthless outside the company, making savings useless.


--
Paul J. Adam
Message no. 28
From: Paul J. Adam Paul@********.demon.co.uk
Subject: Megacorporate Power (or lack thereof)
Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 23:41:19 +0100
In article <19990510194828.25106.qmail@www02.netaddress.usa.net>;,
James Vaughan <boss_dawg@***.net> writes
>"Paul J. Adam" <Paul@********.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> That's because you don't think it through. How does a corporation make
>> money? It manufactures goods and sells them at a profit. That entails
>> getting raw materials from source to factory, goods from factory to
>> market.
>You have a rather simplified view of economics.

As compared to what? :)

>> The largest employer? Not of UCAS citizens. You can't have it both ways -
>> either its business is extraterritorial, or it isn't.
>>
>Exactly MY point. If they are no longer extraterritorial then they are now
>UCAS citizens.

No, they aren't. They're stateless aliens. And if Ares insists on maintaining
sovereignty, and has indulged in hostilities against the UCAS, they're
belligerents.

>Unless you are going to declare them illegal aliens and deport
>them. Imagine what kind of political bombshell that would be. "Daddy where is
>mommy? I'm sorry honey the government took her away because she worked for
>Ares."

Daddy lives in the UCAS, Mommy lives in a secure UCAS enclave, how likely
are they to even meet let alone produce children?

But, then, Mommy could have come to visit _every day_ and those nasty
men from CorpSec wouldn't have been coming round asking nasty
questions, but Ares said that wasn't right and won't let her out of where
she works...

Don't "deport". Offer asylum. Anyone walking out of the Ares compound
gets UCAS citizenship on the spot. Inside, hunger and desperation.
Outside, freedom. A new life, your skills being paid for in convertible
currency instead of corporate scrip, freedom to say "I quit!" and go where
you damn well want...

Shades of the Berlin Wall. Especially if Ares security opt for the East
German solution and start firing at anyone running for the UCAS.

>> Not of America. A large number of corporate citizens. Not the UCAS's
>> problem. Ares is retaining extraterritoriality? Fine: the unemployed Ares
>> citizens can starve in their ruined compounds. Do they have UCAS
>> passports? Visas to enter the UCAS? No? Then too bad.
>>
>See my previous comment.

Again - these aren't UCAS citizens. The reason they're in the fertiliser is
because they (or their bosses) refuse to accept UCAS sovereignty. Anyone
who wants to leave will be welcomed into the UCAS.

>> The megacorporations don't do banking: that's one of the reasons they
>> have Zurich Orbital.
>Once again you picked out the one word you liked and ignored the rest. What
>about the insurance angle?

Sure, insurance will be a noticeable issue - try buying any consumer goods
these days without being offered "extended warranty and customer care
plans". i pretty much took that for granted. Not sure if the megas would
do their own underwriting, though - I'm inclined to think they merely sell
policies for specialists.

>> Yep. But the core of an economy is manufacturing goods. Financial
>> services and service industries are valuable and useful, but someone has to
>> create the wealth and add the value first.

>The core of the WORLD economy not the UCAS economy. The UCAS economy of
>the
>sixth world is in all probability a tertiary information based economy. Which
>are coincidentally easily relocated.

Shades of Thatcherism in the 1980s. Manufacturing doesn't matter,
service industries are enough.

Didn't work then, why would it work in 2060?

>As for the manufacturing look at the
>numbers in Corporate Shadowfiles. Who is the big manufacturer? Saeder-Krupp
>thats who. Are YOU going to tell the dragon you just nationalized his UCAS
>based assets??? Nice knowing you chummer.

The UCAS had a dragon for a President. Briefly. Even dragons can be
gotten to...

Besides, what is Lofwyr going to do if he's told that if he wants to sell into
the UCAS market, he's got to accept the following rules? Is he going to
give up the profits that market offers, or will he shrug, check to make
sure he's not being screwed worse than anyone else, start negotiating to
get his own business "overlooked" or "concessed" or otherwise negate
the
effects, and meanwhile be loudly compliant with the legitimate national
authority?

As long as he's no worse off than anyone else, he'll accept it. If he can
leverage it to get some advantage for himself over the competition,
Lofwyr will back the UCAS to the hilt... in exchange for a discreet
shredding of certain files, the IRS being kept on a short leash for a while,
and various other quid pro quos. As long as he gets the biggest piece of
the cake, he wins.


--
Paul J. Adam
Message no. 29
From: Robert Watkins robert.watkins@******.com
Subject: Megacorporate Power (or lack thereof)
Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 10:28:28 +1000
Paul J Adam writes:
> >The only place where I suppose this could cause problems is if the
> >employing corp pays in its own money which it has declared
> illegal to use
> >outside corp-owned stores. Things like paying the rent, if you live in a
> >non-corp building, would become difficult that way.
>
> That's a main reason corporations have their own currencies: you can then
> _only_ buy what your own corporation sells, at the prices they set, unless
> you can find someone willing to illegally convert your corporate
> scrip into a
> hard currency. In other words, the "company store" mentality: you pay
> your employees in money they can only spend with you.
>
> Similarly, how does such an employee run away? Their money is almost
> worthless outside the company, making savings useless.

OTH, that means the corp has to provide ALL the facilities their employees
need. That means accomodation, food, entertainment. And corp scrip has to be
convertible to an extent (though you probably have limits on how much you
can convert, and probably at a hideous markup), otherwise Jane Wage-Slave
can't take that holiday in gay Pah-ree she wants.

Given the expense of providing all the facilities, I would say corp scrip
would only be used for employees living in major corporate enclaves.

Consider the situation with national currencies these days. You can only
convert so much at a time, without notice being taken; you can't take too
much out of the country in one hit; you may have severe limits on how much
you can take if you emigrate. These are the sort of limitations you would
have with corp scrip.

Hmm... here's a scenario that would be applicable. A (non-Renraku) store in
the Arcology, before the shut-down. Renraku employees can shop there, but
they only have scrip. Obviously the store accepts scrip, thanks to an
arrangement with Renraku. They also accept nuyen and UCAS dollars. As a
matter of fact, Mr and Mrs Bloggs, who run the store, are UCAS citizens who
live in Bellevue, so they prefer nuyen.

At the end of the working week, or whatever, Mr Bloggs takes the hard
currency they've been given (not much... everyone uses credsticks these
days, after all), and deposits it at the bank. He also goes to the Renraku
Bureau de Change, and converts the scrip he has been paid into nuyen (zero
markup for him... it was built into his prices already). What Renraku don't
know is that he also does some black market trading... his friends buy
products in scrip, take them back, and get refunded nuyen. If he gets
caught, he'll be fined, or possibly even kicked out of the Arcology mall.

--
.sig deleted to conserve electrons. robert.watkins@******.com
Message no. 30
From: Paul J. Adam Paul@********.demon.co.uk
Subject: Megacorporate Power (or lack thereof)
Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 00:53:50 +0100
In article <19990511234005.25228.qmail@*****.netaddress.usa.net>,
James Vaughan <boss_dawg@***.net> writes
>Also Lofwyr is not just a corporate dragon(as if that's not enough) he's also
>a prince of Tir Tairngire.

Why would that matter a tinker's damn, if nations are weak irrelevances
in the face of corporate power? :)

If nations are so irrelevant, why would the head of a megacorp trouble
himself with a role as _a_ Prince of a nation?

--
Paul J. Adam
Message no. 31
From: Paul J. Adam Paul@********.demon.co.uk
Subject: Megacorporate Power (or lack thereof)
Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 02:43:27 +0100
In article <S.0000167739@*******.com>, Wordman
<wordman@*******.com> writes
>Paul J Adam wrote:
>> One thing military forces - navies in particular - excel at is sinking
>> merchant ships.
>
>Mr. Adam's point here is that nations exert leverage on corporations,
>because they can prevent the corporation from getting goods to market using
>military force.
>
>This is, of course, true, but take it a step further: what happens when Ares
>and the UCAS go to war? Both Ares and the UCAS lose. The UCAS has to deal
>with huge political problems in attacking Ares abroad, while Ares has no
>such problem. Ares can threaten to nuke the UCAS, but the UCAS has very
>little option of nuking Ares back.

Ares nukes Seattle. Thermal pulse and blast effects, plus residual
radiation, cause serious damage to the Aztechnology Pyramid and the
Renraku Arcology (although that last may be moot) and many other
smaller corporate facilities, and cause the closure for a prolonged period
of the only UCAS port on the Pacific coast. The damage to infrastructure
seriously injures many corporate facilities outside the prompt damage
area.

Meanwhile, the prevailing winds blow the plume of radioactive fallout
across NAN lands: doubtless they'll accept being irradiated gladly in order
to protect the profits of an extranational corporation.

Explain to me why this is a good idea?

>Ares, on the other hand, will get eaten by it's competitors. Naturally, the
>UCAS has competitors of its own.

But rather less immediate ones. The corporations are engaged in
immediate financial competition: whereas, in extremis, the UCAS must be
invaded and conquered, and that's a serious undertaking in manpower and
casualties (similarly, hawkish notions about the UCAS seizing CAS or NAN
territory are just lunatic rantings - it can't be done with the forces
available)

>All in all, Ares is better off buying control of the UCAS's next elections.

You assume the other seven megacorps would _allow_ a competitor to
control the UCAS after the next elections?

>More cost effective and less disruptive. Don't forget that this war would
>cost the UCAS money as well. People seem to assume that cost doesn't apply
>to national military.

Governments answer to the electorate every four or five years, and while
the military's an inefficient way to play Keynsian economics (the end
result's unproductive) it tends to be popular. Also, governments can appeal
to patriotism - there's never been a "vote of no confidence" during
wartime to my knowledge in Britain. By contrast, a CEO presiding over a
collapse in share prices due to his or her policy is quickly going to discover
how good or otherwise their golden parachute is...

Corporations with military pretensions _need_ nations to have decent
defence budgets, to fund development and worthwhile producion runs of
various weapon systems...

>(Note: this particular example is muddied a bit by the fact that Ares is a
>key supplier of arms to the UCAS. The UCAS would need to re-tool to fight
>Ares successfully.)

Why? Look at the current situation in Serbia. Estimated damage inflicted
on Serbia varies between $50 and $150 billion - enough to make the
richest megacorporation blink - and yet the only noticeable shortfall in
ordnance is of AGM-86 CALCMs, themselves hasty conversions from a
nuclear strike system.

War's a come-as-you-are business. After the dust settles, contracts are
awarded to replenish depleted stocks of ordnance and replace losses, but
the days of wars long enough for production rates to matter are gone
even between nations.

As for the notion of "secret codes" buried in weapons to prevent them
being used on their manufacturers... it doesn't work. If the "Don't Kill Me!"
code is simple, it'll be simply broken: if it's complex, it's too easily lost in
the incredible electronic noise of warfare. We can't get even explicit, clear
IFF systems to work reliably...

>> So what? They were extraterritorial! They were not paying rent, hiring
>> national citizens or paying taxes anyway.
>
>Not anymore, the UCAS made them no longer extraterritorial.

And anyone who wants UCAS citizenship can have it. Those who don't can
appeal to whatever other state they claim citizenship of for aid.

>In any case, I do not believe that all wageslaves live on corporate land.

Corporate Shadowfiles seems to disagree.

>Look in the Seattle source book and check out how little land is
>extraterritorial compared to where corporate workforce actually lives.

The concept was far less developed back then.

>> Think also this. Renraku says "hell with you, UCAS!" and thoroughly
trashes
>> the Seattle data grid. Nobody can talk to anyone...
>>
>> ...including all the other corporations in the Seattle area, who can now no
>> longer talk to their suppliers, or get messages out to Head Office.
>>
>> Now, whether Renraku was wrong or whether they were right, they've
>> just massively inconvenienced many, many paying customers beside their
>> intended target.
>
>And Renraku would blame this all on the UCAS. "We didn't want to do this,
>the UCAS _made_ us...".

Yeah, right. Your fight was with the UCAS. Your _contract_ was with us.
We give you money, you give us telecomms. You screwed up our system.
Can you say "liquidated damages"?

>Besides, if Renraku had this much control over
>Seattle's data grid, "trashing" it would be stupid. They could just
>interfere with communications of UCAS government.

You think the UCAS Government runs essential services through a
potentially hostile system? I can't even send CONFIDENTIAL data via e-
mail! Renraku trashing a public data grid won't interfere with _important_
government communications, but it will massively inconvenience many,
many people and businesses.

"But we _had_ to break our contract with you! Those nasty Federal people
were trying to make us pay tax!" Yeah, make _that_ one sell to most
UCAS citizens and businesses...

>> The largest employer? Not of UCAS citizens. You can't have it both ways -
>> either its business is extraterritorial, or it isn't.
>
>Again, because a business is extraterritorial, that does not mean that all
>employees live on corporate land.

If they don't live on corporate land, they have to be resident in the UCAS -
that means they pay UCAS taxes on their income and spend _real_ money
in the UCAS, where their purchases are liable to sales tax. They can easily
be approached and persuaded to talk about what _really_ happens in
Building 4C. In other words, what's the problem?

Of course, this blows the _zaibatsu_ model presented in Corporate
Shadowfiles all to hell...

>People have made a big deal that this would be a "security risk", but I fail
>to see the logic. Corps don't want extraterritoriality to stop security
>leaks. They want it to prevent local prosecution for acts committed on their
>own property.

They really, as far as Corporate Shadowfiles states, want it as a tax
dodge. Having to pay UCAS rates in UCAS currency for their workforce
deprives them of that advantage.

>As for the corporate script argument, that really doesn't require on-site
>employee living either. A corporation can make contract offers like this:
>"on a yearly basis, we will pay you (at your option), either a) 90,000Y in
>our own scrip or b) 30,000Y in local currency". Which do you pick?

Depends. What can I buy in corporate scrip?

>> The megacorporations don't do banking: that's one of the reasons they
>> have Zurich Orbital.
>
>Megacorporations will do anything that earns profit. And banking can be very
>profitable.

Say that in Japan these days. Any idea _how_ screwed their entire
banking sector is these days?

>> Yep. But the core of an economy is manufacturing goods. Financial
>> services and service industries are valuable and useful, but someone has to
>> create the wealth and add the value first.
>
>Yet the USA imports more goods than it produces. How do you account for
>this? By the logic above, the USA should be in shambles, because it can't
>produce the consumer goods it needs.

And yet the influx of funds seeking to invest in the United States balances
the outflow of current-account payments. If the two go out of balance,
the currency shifts value, altering the relative cost of imports vs. exports.
(We'll leave interest rates out of it for now...) If a nation can't finance its
current-account deficit the currency depreciates to suit, making its
exports cheaper but imports more expensive. Similarly, if a country runs a
prolonged trade surplus, its currency appreciates, making imports
comparatively cheaper and raising the price of its exports.


If you want to play economics, explain the FASA model of megacorporate
supply chains (entirely, totally in-house, with pricing controlled for tax
evasion) compared to the real-world model of supplier management.
Doesn't work, does it?

--
Paul J. Adam
Message no. 32
From: Paul J. Adam Paul@********.demon.co.uk
Subject: Megacorporate Power (or lack thereof)
Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 02:04:42 +0100
In article <000501be9c0e$5b017550$375211ac@******.oz.au>, Robert
Watkins <robert.watkins@******.com> writes
>Paul J Adam writes:
>> That's a main reason corporations have their own currencies: you can then
>> _only_ buy what your own corporation sells, at the prices they set, unless
>> you can find someone willing to illegally convert your corporate
>> scrip into a
>> hard currency. In other words, the "company store" mentality: you pay
>> your employees in money they can only spend with you.
>>
>> Similarly, how does such an employee run away? Their money is almost
>> worthless outside the company, making savings useless.
>
>OTH, that means the corp has to provide ALL the facilities their employees
>need. That means accomodation, food, entertainment.

Yep. As described in Corporate Shadowfiles where they describe 'corporate
scrip' and its use.

>And corp scrip has to be
>convertible to an extent (though you probably have limits on how much you
>can convert, and probably at a hideous markup), otherwise Jane Wage-Slave
>can't take that holiday in gay Pah-ree she wants.

Holiday? Outside corporate control? To the Headhunter Hotel, booked
through Relocations-R-Us? No chance! :)

You talk as though working for a corporation granted you some sort of
freedom. Though, certainly, you could probably trade corp scrip for a
convertible currency... on a tagged credstick.

>Given the expense of providing all the facilities, I would say corp scrip
>would only be used for employees living in major corporate enclaves.

FASA claim otherwise, in Corporate Shadowfiles.

>Consider the situation with national currencies these days. You can only
>convert so much at a time, without notice being taken; you can't take too
>much out of the country in one hit; you may have severe limits on how much
>you can take if you emigrate. These are the sort of limitations you would
>have with corp scrip.

Nope. According to CS, mere _possession_ of corporate scrip by any non-
employee of the corporation is illegal. Corporate currency is completely,
totally, unconvertible: people get _killed_ for trading in it.

>Hmm... here's a scenario that would be applicable. A (non-Renraku) store in
>the Arcology, before the shut-down. Renraku employees can shop there, but
>they only have scrip. Obviously the store accepts scrip, thanks to an
>arrangement with Renraku. They also accept nuyen and UCAS dollars. As a
>matter of fact, Mr and Mrs Bloggs, who run the store, are UCAS citizens who
>live in Bellevue, so they prefer nuyen.

In the Arcology? Renraku extraterritorial turf. Everything in there is
Renrakuland.

>What Renraku don't
>know is that he also does some black market trading... his friends buy
>products in scrip, take them back, and get refunded nuyen. If he gets
>caught, he'll be fined, or possibly even kicked out of the Arcology mall.

No - according to Corporate Shadowfiles, if he gets caught making deals
like that he'll be _killed_.

It's technically _legal_ to trade in corporate scrip off that corporation's
territory... that doesn't mean it's safe to do so. _On_ their territory?
You're committing suicide.

--
Paul J. Adam
Message no. 33
From: Robert Watkins robert.watkins@******.com
Subject: Megacorporate Power (or lack thereof)
Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 12:13:53 +1000
Paul J Adam writes:
> >In any case, I do not believe that all wageslaves live on corporate land.
>
> Corporate Shadowfiles seems to disagree.

Paul, I'll have to disagree here... Corporate Shadowfiles indicates that
_some_ corp wageslaves live in corporate enclaves.

Take, say, Mitsuhama. They've probably get a few thousand employees in
Seattle, most of them either blue-collar or low-level administrative staff.

Now, they can either pay them in nuyen, or put them up in totally equipped
corporate enclaves. Remeber, these people are not vital to the success of
the company, they just your typical commoditized employee. I can't see them
being put up in enclaves...

--
.sig deleted to conserve electrons. robert.watkins@******.com
Message no. 34
From: Demonnic Bloodbather demonnic@*********.net
Subject: Megacorporate Power (or lack thereof)
Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 14:55:11 +1200
> while the heads of ARES were charged with all manner of crimes including
> treason and as many as could be caught would be arrested.
>

Ok, I've seen this idea too many times not to say something about it... The UCAS
kept the USA's constitution, if I've read and remember correctly... Do you know
how many people have been accused, tried, and convicted of treason in the US in
over 200 yrs? I believe the answer is 1, maybe 2. The constitution makes it VERY
hard for someone to be convicted of treason. And by the same token, why hasn't
the US today just started arresting the heads of major companies which are moving
out of our borders with treason? It's not plausible under our constitution,
that's why. Not ONLY that, but it would most likely cause a huge panic in the
populace now that 'anyone can be picked up for treason for pissing off the govt.'
The French had a huge bloody revolution because of this very same thing (unless I
misremember my history, which is entirely possible) Would YOU want to live in a
country where you could be charged for treason simply because you didn't like the
government and decided to move out of the country? I know I wouldn't...


Demonnic
Non Illegitimi Carborundum Est
Message no. 35
From: Steve Collins einan@*********.net
Subject: Megacorporate Power (or lack thereof)
Date: Tue, 11 May 99 23:50:50 -0400
On 5/11/99 10:55 pm, Demonnic Bloodbather said:

>> while the heads of ARES were charged with all manner of crimes including
>> treason and as many as could be caught would be arrested.
>>
>
>Ok, I've seen this idea too many times not to say something about it...
>The UCAS
>kept the USA's constitution, if I've read and remember correctly... Do you
>know
>how many people have been accused, tried, and convicted of treason in the
>US in

I said charged with not convicted of, and in the scenario in question it
is indeed likely that a few of the corp bigwigs could have been convicted
of it, or if they are treated as corp citizens instead of UCAS citizens
then it could be crimes against Humanity or some such.

>over 200 yrs? I believe the answer is 1, maybe 2. The constitution makes
>it VERY
>hard for someone to be convicted of treason. And by the same token, why
>hasn't
>the US today just started arresting the heads of major companies which are
>moving

Because none of those companies are either A: Major Defense Contractors,
or B: essentially engaged in a war with the US. This corp would be
blatantly defying national law, endangering the safety and security of
it's citizens, and attempting to destroy the national economy. Imagine if
Lockheed announced tomorrow that they were moving All of it's operations
to China. How do you think the government would react? There are laws
against exporting certain technologies. A moot point if the corp is
extraterritorital but if the Government has declared the corp in question
no longer extraterritorial then those laws could conceivably be enforced.


>out of our borders with treason? It's not plausible under our constitution,
>that's why. Not ONLY that, but it would most likely cause a huge panic in the
>populace now that 'anyone can be picked up for treason for pissing off the
>govt.'

Only a few (5 at most) would be accused of treason the rest would be
tried for lesser offenses.

>The French had a huge bloody revolution because of this very same thing
>(unless I
>misremember my history, which is entirely possible) Would YOU want to live
>in a
>country where you could be charged for treason simply because you didn't
>like the
>government and decided to move out of the country? I know I wouldn't...
>
>
That revolution had less to do with the possibility of arrest than the
huge difference between rich and poor. The Soviet Union existed for 70
years as a country where one could be arrested for treason at the whim of
some bureaucrat They didn't throw the communists out for that either,
again it was the poverty that caused it.

Steve
Message no. 36
From: Sommers sommers@*****.umich.edu
Subject: Megacorporate Power (or lack thereof)
Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 23:40:59 -0400
At 10:55 PM 5/11/99 , Demonnic Bloodbather wrote:
>> while the heads of ARES were charged with all manner of crimes including
>> treason and as many as could be caught would be arrested.
>>
>
>Ok, I've seen this idea too many times not to say something about it... The
>UCAS
>kept the USA's constitution, if I've read and remember correctly... Do you
know
>how many people have been accused, tried, and convicted of treason in the
US in
>over 200 yrs? I believe the answer is 1, maybe 2. The constitution makes it
>VERY
>hard for someone to be convicted of treason. And by the same token, why hasn't

Actually, a lot of people have been convicted of treason. I can think of
two off of the top of my head: the Rosenbergs in the 50's were convicted of
treason for selling atomic secrets. Almost anyone convicted of spying is
convicted of treason.

The constitution makes it very hard to IMPEACH an official, although
treason is one of the reasons that can be used. Conviciting a person of
treason is about as hard as any other capital crime.

Sommers
Insert witty quote here.

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about 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!