5 ms·
> And the finance industry isn’t even that rich. Johnson & Johnson is bigger than any bank in the world, why aren’t the rich and powerful in the pocket of Big B
by fractionalhare 6y ago
> And the finance industry isn’t even that rich. Johnson & Johnson is bigger than any bank in the world, why aren’t the rich and powerful in the pocket of Big Band-Aid?
Well, no. Maybe by market cap, but that isn't the important metric here. Power consists of what is controlled and stewarded, not just what is owned.
JnJ controls billions of dollars of capital. The largest banks control trillions of dollars of capital, each.
JnJ is core infrastructure for healthcare; banks are core infrastructure for everything that exists in the capitalist fabric of society.
Banks may not be that wealthy by ownership, but this isn't really the right lens for critically examining how much power they wield compared to other industries.
EDIT: To whoever downvoted me: this comment isn't a defense of finance. It's a statement of fact refuting one of the author's points.
- twic 6y agoMaybe they downvoted you because they thought it wasn't a very convincing refutation.
- fractionalhare 6y agoMaybe, but why wouldn't they find it convincing? Any one of the major banks literally controls at least an order of magnitude more money in the economy than Johnson and Johnson does. Market cap and valuation has nothing to do with capital that is controlled. The author doesn't do a good job of rebutting the idea that finance is incredibly powerful in society by focusing on what financial firms are technically worth if you discount their client liabilities.
- twic 6y agoI think your argument would be stronger if you unpacked "controlled and stewarded" a bit. What capital are you talking about, and in what sense do banks control it? How can and do banks use that capital to exert power?