impossibility of soc dem in U.S.

[William S. Lear]

On Friday, September 17, 1999 at 09:58:52 (-0400) Doug Henwood writes:
>rc-am wrote:
>
>>so, let me get this right: by 'bank-centred systems' you mean what?  a
>>central govt bank? the US does not have a central govt bank, ever had?
>>only treasury?  is this what you see as the key or rather that in
>>combination with (as the astract alluded to) the degree of connection
>>between ownership and control, the extent of public enterprises (i was
>>unclear about which of these was being referred to or highlighted)?
>
>Bank-centered means ...

As usual, a very fine off-the-cuff instructional paragraph from one of
the masters.

I would like to add that William Lazonick has looked at the
consequences of the differing approaches to governing the market taken
in England, Japan, and the United States.  Very illuminating reading,
particularly the essay "The Anglo-Saxon Corporate System" in the book
*The Corporate Triangle*, in which he has the following to say:

     In historical perspective, compared with Britain the American

     corporate system has been over the course of the twentieth

     century far more organization-oriented, particularly in terms of

     its relations with managerial personnel and its control over

     financial resources for industrial development. ... This

     organization orientation --- manifested in what has been called

     "the managerial revolution in American business" [Alfred

     Chandler] --- is, moreover, a prime reason why US enterprises and

     the US economy have persistently outperformed their British

     counterparts during this century. (pp. 3-4)

Much more good stuff in this essay which I highly recommend to Angela
(and others), of course along with Doug's book *Wall Street*, which
should be required reading for anyone with a conscience.

Bill