Big Business VS Big Government

I usually like to find articles and discussions that spark interesting conversation. I mean I read the handful of articles on a given day that talk about this topic/issue or that topic/issue. However, the pieces that I usually enjoy a lot are the commentaries and opinions. Sometimes I agree with individuals' statements and there are times that I don't necessarily agree, but look at their view with a grain of salt. A little while back I wrote a blog about a discussion I came across on CNN.com involving whether it is better to be feared or loved. Well, today I came across another such one or the other. Like the previous one, it was issued by Jack Cafferty in his Cafferty File. Today big discussion: Do you have more faith in the government or big business? Both sides seem to draw a lot of criticism and often times take much of the taxpayers money.

For starters, big business often has a hand on the pulse of Washington DC and the federal government. But the same can be said to a slightly lesser extent with the government keeping a hand on what goes on involving big business. Polls of the last few years echo that sentiment with an overwhelming majority saying that big business has too much control in DC. It has not been uncommon, either, for a story to come out involving scandal involving politicians and lobbyists getting money and facing allegations of bribery. The big business heads (CEOs) are consistently talking to members of the federal government and one must only wonder what their discussions are about.

What exactly is big business doing with all this say and influence? Noted historian, Arthur Schlesinger, was once quoted saying that "Liberalism in America [the progression of the welfare state and government intervention in the economy] has been ordinarily the movement on the part of the other sections of society to restrain the power of the business community." However, unfortunately evidence points in the opposite direction. Examples of the power of the business community not being restrained include:

•Enron was a tireless advocate of strict global energy regulations supported by environmentalists. Enron also used its influence in Washington to keep laissez-faire bureaucrats off the federal commissions that regulate the energy industry.
•Philip Morris has aggressively supported heightened federal regulation of tobacco and tobacco advertising. Meanwhile, the state governments that sued Big Tobacco are now working to protect those same large cigarette companies from competition and lawsuits.
•A recent tax increase in Virginia passed because of the tireless support of the state's business leaders, and big business has a long history of supporting tax hikes.
•General Motors provided critical support for new stricter clean air rules that boosted the company's bottom line.

The biggest thing to look at, then, is the fact that as the federal government has gotten larger; every significant introduction of government regulation, taxation, and spending has been beneficial to some big business. The evolution and connecting lines between government and business has its roots in the Progressive Era of the early 1900s. At the time, President Theodore Roosevelt was adamant about breaking up big business and was one of the biggest "trust busters". It would be revealed in "The Jungle" by Upton Sinclair that there was more than met the eye at the time and Roosevelt was not completely true to his word when it came to the meat-packing industry.

Another example; well look at U.S. Steel. The steel industry was booming during the latter end of the 19th century, but things began to go down in the early 20th century. The situation brought about "an emergency" meeting in late 1907, where it was decided that there would be "gentlemen's agreements" against cutting steel prices. Shortly, thereafter, another meeting emphasized the need to not lower prices. Working against U.S. Steel was the free market and aspect of equality and levelness it causes. U.S. Steel made a business problem into a political strategy. They looked to make their financial well-being and success a political matter and looked to cut a deal with the federal government. Andrew Carnegie, the steel magnate, even went as far as to write a public letter in 1909 stating that there should be government control of the steel industry. Government and business have their own priorities and by having them mix; it usually doesn't serve a proper purpose for those both entities are supposed to serve.

As the century moved forward and through a world war, more the same existed. Business would scream out to Washington to regulate them and they would call on those there to control aspects like workers' hours and wages as well details pertaining to production. When Herbert Hoover entered the White House, he brought with him a reputation of being a major endorser of working alongside big business. At the brink of the Great Depression, he pressured big business to lead the way on a wage freeze; which prevented the drop in pay that earlier depressions had brought about. Major business figures of the time including Henry Ford and Pierre DuPont embraced the policy of allowing wages to stay high as the economy went downward. In addition, Hoover would launch the Reconstruction Finance Corporation. The RFC extended government loans to banks and railroads. Sound familiar? Just a bit...eerie I would say.

The Great Depression and election of Franklin Roosevelt did not change things. FDR would implement similar policies and government controls on the economy during World War II that Wilson used during World War I. Big business was able to profit from the controlled economy in ways it had done in earlier years. The Marshall Plan that followed World War II was influenced by many business leaders. In 1971, President Nixon outlined his New Economic Policy with the federal government prohibiting any increase in wages, prices, or rents for 90 days. This would be followed by a wage and price council dictating to businesses when and how much they could increase wages, salaries, and prices. These announcements by the President were enthusiastically favored by business leaders as they applauded them. And the previous administration under George W. Bush handed big business large favors. These favors were a prescription drug benefit from Medicare, an energy bill full of brand new special tax credits and subsidies to energy companies, and record loan guarantee to facilitate business with known nuclear proliferators in China. One report estimated that slightly more than 60% of Medicare dollars that are spent to buy more prescriptions remained in the hands of drug makers as added profits. Add it up and we are talking about $139 billion in increased profits over eight years.

Taking everything into perspective, big business and big government prosper from the perception that they are enemies and rivals as opposed to partners (in deception). Big business's history has involved cooperation with big government and major expansions of government's power are usually to the liking and request of big business. So, instead of always thinking that it is big business vs big government; maybe we should look closer at the decisions and moves of the government and who they favor most. A deeper analysis shows that time after time that the government chooses to favor the interests of the big businesses, who have power and money, over the common man, who elect them and they are supposed to represent. When we get big business out of the ear of big government, than truly will there actually be big business vs big government. Until then, history will most likely repeat itself. And I for one have had enough of it.