Everything in Moderation

Loyal constituents. My position as Chief of Staff in the administration typical doesn't involve more than ensuring our President hasn't been the victim of a brazen shirt theft before recording public announcements in the White Unit, and always having a fresh cigar (and a Ben Franklin to light it with) handy in case any of the ministers stub out their current stogie. I do feel compelled however to overstep my role briefly and bring to your attention a disturbing realisation I have come to whilst strolling the hallway of power. Capitalism is a heartless bastard, and left unchecked it will oppress a good many of us.

It all started when my good friend Blackbird and his mate Squash decided they wanted rid of Pokies from their beloved South Sydney Leagues Club. They had a few reasons for wanting to do this and most people would agree they were pretty valid ones - most notably is that Pokies harm the community. They offer a gaming experience unique in that it requires nil human contact and nil thought. Drinks coasters jammed in buttons regurlarly play poker machines when an addict has run out of hands and someone could literally win the jackpot post-mortem (albeit heavily decomposed) if they died leaning on 'spin'. Every facet of Poker machines has been purposely tailored to be the most addictive it can be, and although not unique in the gaming world it is a mathematical certainty you'll lose in the end - operators can even tailor what percentage of your dole cheque they fleece. They are arguably the most addictive form of gambling available, although if I even need to argue then perhaps you'd be better spending your time at the Museum of Creation than reading this blog so as not to waste your time with silly stuff like thinking. For the record 85% of people in treatment for problem gambling are poker machine players.

Anyhow i digress, this isn't meant to be an anti-pokies blog. This was a simple matter for the boys, their club has a patronage on the lower end of the socio-economic scale and various sources estimated some 30-70% of poker machine revenue was coming directly from welfare payments, aka. 'our tax dollars' (that should have the attention of all you Alan Jones listeners out there). They figured the damaging impact was incompatible with the motives of the club and decided to axe the machines. Here's where it started to get a little scary for mine. Because the club is a little like Milo Minderbinder's sydnicate from Catch 22 (everybody has a share) it also has a board of directors bound by law to act "With the best interests of shareholders in mind". Roughly translated this means they are bound by law to chase the mighty dollar with all the one-eyed fervour of a lurch after a hare, using every legal means available to them, and completely disregard any other factors like taking food off people's tables. Pokies are a brilliant source of income - incredibly addictive and no human interaction (labour costs) means you jam them in the ground and sit back and count your money, in Souths' case over $1 million per annum after taxes and costs. This meant the directors could be hauled before the courts, banned from holding directorships or event sent to the big house for having a social conscience if they couldn't find a way to make throwing away that many Kerrys a good financial move. I personally can't believe they've done anything but fudge the numbers, and I think they've held onto the licenses so when that becomes painfully apparent they can at least say to ASIC that they've still got the license to print the money, they just need to restart the press.

Of course all companies can hold a shareholder vote to make a move that isn't necessarily the most financially sound, if over 50% agree there are other compelling reasons. But trying to get over 50% of thousands of shareholders to take a hit on their bottom line (many being businesses themselves who in turn would have an obligation to vote for more money for their own shareholders) is harder than the proverbial honeymooner's appendage, and this is where the government needs to step in to provide the necessary balance. I mentioned before companies are bound to use all legal means available to make money, and so it is the job of the government to restrict which means are legal to ensure the lurch doesn't proper fuck Joe Average. Just ask the average American if they think fully profit-driven privatised health care is a good idea? Evidently it makes terrible business sense to pay claims and you should avoid it all all costs! How did they not see that coming? So i'm not proposing we need radical changes in this country, nor am I anti-capitalism, everything in moderation. I'm just encouraging you all to be aware of the dangers of allowing the dollar to get too powerful, and of the creep away from government ownership and regulation. Because governments are meant to have a social conscience, and big business is required not to.