Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
The Smartest Guys in the Tomb
Joshua Micah Marshall digs up an old ad and writes:
It's an ad for Enron -- entitled "Metalman" -- that ran not long before the company's implosion -- probably some time in 2000. As you'll see, it's a man encased in a confining suit of metal, hobbling his way across tableaus of 90s go-go capitalism, mainly, mostly set in Asia. As pure ad making, it's good stuff. But I always remembered it because it so boldly and expressively captured the ethos of that moment -- old, slow, regulation, limits giving way to new, unbounded, deregulated, liberated. 'Metalman' is the old sclerotic, regulated past falling behind in the deregulated, faster, freer, richer, better world.
Knowing, as we soon would, that Enron was a colossal scam adds some zing to the morality tale. But this sort of deregulatory chic wasn't confined to Enron. And it played a sizable role in bringing us where we are today.
Marshall is onto something, but he's missing an important piece of the puzzle: In the real world, as opposed to the ad world, Enron didn't embrace deregulation. It was happy to roll back the regulatory burden when that helped the business's bottom line, but—like many other companies—it was just as quick to lobby for limits when that looked like it would boost profits. As Jerry Taylor pointed out in The Wall Street Journal seven years ago,
Since ending the legally protected franchises that utilities had on those services was a prerequisite for Enron's strategy, the company lobbied aggressively for competition and "consumer choice" for gas and electricity services.
But while donning the garb of Ronald Reagan on the one hand, the company was donning the mantle of Ralph Nader when it came to the transmission and distribution side of the energy business. Enron, you see, was worried that the incumbent utilities would either under-price the non-utility competitors that Enron wanted on their trading floors or, alternatively, would charge such high prices for access to their transmission systems that non-utility gas and electricity providers would be unable to effectively compete for business.
So Enron insisted that electric utilities be forced by law to get out of the generation business, that strict price controls be set for the rates charged for access to the various transmission grids, and that the day-to-day operation of the electricity distribution systems be handed over to state officials who were directed to govern those systems at the behest of the system's "stakeholders" (read: Enron and friends). So Reaganite competition, according to Enron, required new micromanagerial rules about industrial organization and the de-facto nationalization of the transmission systems by officials who'd have to answer to Enron.
Taylor also notes the company's support for energy subsidies, carbon controls, and various taxes, as well as its ability to preach the exact opposite of its usual policy preferences in a few jurisdictions where it managed to buy its own transmission systems. This sort of political capitalism may have "played a sizable role in bringing us where we are today." But if you call it "deregulatory," you're buying too much of what Enron was selling. The ethos was much more complicated than that.
Leftists and liberals have a word for polluters who pose as careful environmental stewards: greenwashing. We need a similar word for times when the eager beneficiaries of the corporate state pose as free-market entrepreneurs. A word, that is, for propaganda like the Enron ad.
High Every Body|4.3.09 @ 12:02PM|#
I don't know this word game as well as the others here so I will just read.
kinnath\'s dafynitions|4.3.09 @ 12:05PM|#
Deregulation -- political slang -- the re-configuration of the regulatory environment to favor companies that give the most campaign donations to incumbant politicians.
High Every Body|4.3.09 @ 12:07PM|#
Wait, wait. What happened to rentseeking? Is that inappropriate here?
Joshua Holmes|4.3.09 @ 12:09PM|#
We've had a name for a long time: bootleggers, as in the pro-Prohibition forces "Baptists and Bootleggers".
Reinmoose|4.3.09 @ 12:10PM|#
High Every Body -
it needs to imply deception in order to work.
We have a win for the moose.
[Pumps fist]
High Every Body|4.3.09 @ 12:13PM|#
it needs to imply deception in order to work.
Ah! See, I told you I was not good at this game.
Congrats and your next green tea is on me.
Reinmoose|4.3.09 @ 12:15PM|#
what's wrong with green tea? It's full of antioxidants. Are you in favor of bad skin and free radicals?
High Every Body|4.3.09 @ 12:19PM|#
Reinmoose,
It may shock you to know that I am in favor of armed free
radicals.
Now get those sandals off of my workbench, please?
High Every Body|4.3.09 @ 12:28PM|#
What you got against Birkenstocks?!
THAT'S WHAT THOSE ARE!?!?!? OUT OF MY WORKSHOP HIPPY!
|4.3.09 @ 12:37PM|#
Shouldn't that be:
[Enron] was happy to roll back
ignore the regulatory burden when that helped the
business's bottom line,
Problems caused by violating a law are very different from problems
caused by repealing a law. Did Enron blow up because of it wanted
some markets regulated and some not? Or did it blow up because it
was a fraud, and violated the law?
Jesse Walker|4.3.09 @ 12:40PM|#
Shouldn't that be: [Enron] was happy to roll
back ignore the regulatory burden when that helped the
business's bottom line
No. I mean, Enron obviously was willing to break the law as well.
But I was referring to its lobbying activity.
High Every Body|4.3.09 @ 12:41PM|#
Naga,
Sorry man I thought you
lost the Nick duel yesterday. Better go tell your chick before
she goes ninja!
Naga Sadow|4.3.09 @ 12:47PM|#
Nope. I won. I pulled the Melanthus trick on him. He totally fell for it!
High Every Body|4.3.09 @ 12:57PM|#
Nope. I won. I pulled the Melanthus trick on him. He totally
fell for it!
Dude, you rock! I can't even spell that trick!
|4.3.09 @ 1:09PM|#
I was there the whole time. Waiting.
(strikes hard and fast)
(disappears again...or does he?)
High Every Body|4.3.09 @ 1:12PM|#
I was there the whole time. Waiting.
(strikes hard and fast)
(disappears again...or does he?)
So does that mean I have to hang out by myself in the Mega Cab
again?
Naga Sadow|4.3.09 @ 1:14PM|#
HEB,
It's the ol' "Holy shit! What's that behind you!" trick.
Story goes like so: Two greek armies march out against each other.
One lead by Xanthus, a Boeotion, the other Melanthus, an Athenian.
Xanthus challenges Melanthus to single combat at noon the next day.
Melanthus accepts and meets Xanthus face to face the next day.
Melanthus then says "Your conduct is unfair. Here I have come as
agreed to face you man to man, and you bring a companion to slay me
while fighting you". Xanthus turns around to send away whoever had
followed him, and when he does Melanthus cuts him down.
Oh and I wanna get in on some of this word game.
"Corporate faux"?
Naga Sadow|4.3.09 @ 1:15PM|#
DHEX!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ARRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHH!!!!
*shakes fist at Dhex*
|4.3.09 @ 1:24PM|#
Naga, the trick is on you. The Nick you slayed was that turd
pimping his website the last couple days like a douche. (evil grin
as he gives Naga a wet willy on his way back into the
shadows)
Douchebaggery would be the word I use,
specifically Enronian Douchebaggery.
Pastafarian|4.3.09 @ 1:26PM|#
Ninja Nick, I shall run ye through for deceptively relieving me
of me rum. Arrgh.
RAmen.
|4.3.09 @ 1:28PM|#
Truce. Let's grill some cheddar burgers and drink some of that pirate bitch's beer!
High Every Body|4.3.09 @ 1:30PM|#
Truce. Let's grill some cheddar burgers and drink some of
that pirate bitch's beer!
I'm in.
|4.3.09 @ 1:55PM|#
So Enron insisted that electric utilities be forced by law
to get out of the generation business, that strict price controls
be set for the rates charged for access to the various transmission
grids, and that the day-to-day operation of the electricity
distribution systems be handed over to state officials who were
directed to govern those systems at the behest of the system's
"stakeholders" (read: Enron and friends). So Reaganite competition,
according to Enron, required new micromanagerial rules about
industrial organization and the de-facto nationalization of the
transmission systems by officials who'd have to answer to
Enron.
This is an excellent point, and one that I believe Reason warned
about well before California's energy crisis. (IIRC)
California's energy privatization scheme was nothing of the sort.
The most crucial factor though was that they explicitly barred
utilities from signing long-term contracts with generators, forcing
them to trade for electricity in a day-to-day stock-market like
exchange.
The fact that the price-inelasticity of electricity made long-term
contracting the natural and logical choice for purchasers didn't
enter into their considerations.
They effectively tied the hands of the buyers - the utilities.
Because they could only buy electricity at the last minute it
enabled the sellers (Enron and others) to jack up the price.
Moreover, the sellers eventually figured out that by selling less
energy they could could jack up the price even higher to
compensate. That's what caused the brownouts. It's like if I
cornered the market on widgets - say if there was a million widgets
out there, and then sold one widget for a billion dollars. There'd
be a shortage of widgets, but I'd be richer than if I sold my
entire stock for 50 cents each.
That's what Enron and others were doing in California. But the
reason they were able to do it, was because the state prohibited
long-term contracting.
The utilities were literally begging the state electricity
commission for permission to enter into long-term agreements
directly with generators, but the assholes in the Grey Davis
government refused to let them until they had already gone
bankrupt. At which point the state did exactly that - entered
long-term contracts and at much higher prices than the utilities
would have gotten if they had been allowed to in the first
place.
The whole thing, really is illustrative of the economic illiteracy
of the Democratic party. They don't understand how markets
function, so when they try to set one up, it's jury-rigged and
infested with perverse incentives.
|4.3.09 @ 2:08PM|#
they explicitly barred utilities from signing long-term
contracts with generators, forcing them to trade for electricity in
a day-to-day stock-market like exchange.
I remember seeing an awesome quote at the time (possibly from an
ENRON employee): "It's not my job to teach the State of California
how the market works."
I also remember the reports that aluminum companies were shutting
down their smelters and reselling the electricity to California,
because it was more profitable to do so.
I love the smell of unintended consequences in the morning.
Naga Sadow|4.3.09 @ 2:20PM|#
Mad Scientist,
Interesting. Like how Ponzi scheme came about . . . hmmmmmm . . .
this requires much thought.
|4.3.09 @ 2:38PM|#
"It's not my job to teach the State of California how the
market works."
Oh, they gave them some teaching, all right. The real question is
if anyone actually learned anything.
dhex|4.3.09 @ 2:43PM|#
"DHEX!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ARRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHH!!!!
*shakes fist at Dhex*"
aw c'mon man, it's not THAT bad.
try saying it in a dismissive coastal elite latte drinking kinda
voice. it works.
Naga Sadow|4.3.09 @ 2:51PM|#
It IS that bad. I come up with a guinenely good phrase and you beat me to it! Damn your quick thinking and fast typing! Damn them straight to hell!!!
|4.3.09 @ 2:58PM|#
how about "faux marketeers"?
Perfect.
best part is it's convertible to "faux market" and "faux
marketeering".
|4.3.09 @ 3:15PM|#
I don't crony capitalists declaring themselves to be free marketeers is half the problem as pinkos pointing to rent seekers and saying "There's the free market for ya".
|4.3.09 @ 4:17PM|#
The whole thing, really is illustrative of the economic illiteracy of the Democratic party. They don't understand how markets function, so when they try to set one up, it's jury-rigged and infested with perverse incentives.
Wait and see what they do with cap-and-trade for Co2...
|4.7.09 @ 8:04PM|#
Here is a word for the eager beneficiaries of the corporate
state who pose as free-market entrepreneurs: capitalists. Or
corporatists.
It's taken me a while to realize that capitalism and a free market
are not the same thing at all. I think that "capitalism" now means
a system where the state serves to protect established business
interests. But because the terms are conflated so much, by
capitalists espousing free market principles while using the state
to suppress competition through regulation, I think the word
"capitalist" should probably be abandoned and the terms "free
market" or "corporatist" substituted, depending on what you're
trying to say.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245