Skip to content


February 6, 2013


Commercial banks all over the world will tell you that still, today, it takes a few days to wire or transfer funds from accounts in different, and sometimes even the same banks.

Following this basic bank business model of holding on to money in a systemic sense through time as long as the public will tolerate it, other companies have also copied this same mechanism and will delay payments for a period of, for example, 5 days before giving transfer instructions to their own bank.

And in fact any commercial activity from an organizational standpoint as a company, that has suppliers, contractors, consultants and service needs of its own of any kind, can, if it has enough de facto leverage (usually because of its size) over the individuals and companies it engages with, also systematically delay payments (or financial movements of any kind) for as long as it viably can.

And the first thing that must be established in this business model as deceit is a plausible rationalization that we all can hold on to, to explain why, especially as individuals, we are forced to wait some times for more than a week to actually have spendable money in a personal bank account.

Of course you, as an individual, can snarl and bitch about the most serious inconveniences you are put to, but the moral issue here, obviously, is at the macro or systemic level where thousands, or hundreds of thousands, or even millions of people are subjected to those same inconveniences permanently, through time as part of a clear and studied business model of the Harvard MBA to accumulate interest on bank-deposited money.

And the plausibility is based-there is no other word for this-on lies and the misleading of people through a intentionally erroneous vision of technology.

What I have come cross, at lower levels, is the excuse companies use in the form of references to “administrative requirements”-and I have been lied to again, and again.

And they say that they have payroll matters to take care of before you can be paid; they say “the books take time to do”, and that they just can’t immediately pay out; and they say that they have yet to charge their client and therefore cannot pay you-when you know (from having spoken to your student, for example) that classes through this particular education company only take place after full prepayment on the part of those students as clients.

But when you address this matter with the most lowly email or telephone customer service people, you conclude-pretty quickly-that they themselves don’t really understand the model that is the core of their company’s activity.

And they give you policy, FAQ answers; and tell you that they are sorry, but no changes will be made in regards to that policy.

And when you answer that, in reality, they can’t afford to change those policies because the financial level generation of interest through time is really the true objective of their business activity, they are unable to continue communication with you.

Because anybody who is sufficiently knowledgeable in regards to organizations and the use, after the 1990s, that is made of all kinds of software products and now, server platforms, and clouds, etc., the whole of financial activity of even the biggest corporation, spanning different geographical areas and countries, in all its accounting activities at any second in time, can be visualized, in real time, on a single personal computer screen.

But the need for duplicity, in that there are in fact limits that even the most Tony Soprano-like Harvard MBA cannot viably cross in terms of integrity, never ceases to be present even in the imposition of silence by companies-that it is, in the last resort, silence that maintains a minimum of a necessary moral ease for all parties involved.

And at the higher levels, within the structure of banks themselves, silence created by different tiered levels of complicity in this fraud according to the degree of awareness the employees of said tiers are in, is absolutely essential to maintain this duplicity and the moral ease that is its direct consequence.

For at a corporate cookout at some country club or private resort, or down at some kind of corporate gang bang for salesman at Cancun, Mexico, or somewhere in the Bahamas, you can’t actually talk about the culture of deception that, at the highest levels, is corporate culture itself-your employees cannot be asked to morally bear this, so they don’t; and you don’t ever dare make them privy of this to the degree you are.

And I write this now thinking of the different conversations I have had with differently tiered employees at American banks that I have spoken to, although I have never come close, in any way, to the pinnacle.

But even at the lower levels, it seems clear that bank branch mangers, even, cannot give you a clear and exact understanding as to how money is moved form one institution to another-even in more candid, non business conversations, and they just say that delays are because of the technical aspects of the computer system and because of the federal government’s requirements regarding that computer data system.

But when you ask them to confirm your understanding of a day, hour, minute-or even seconds-as having crucial economic value at a systemic level in terms of overall bank balances, they answer, “Oh, yes”-and they often make some kind of faint facial gesture indicating irony and a mild insinuation towards resignation.

And one time the gentleman, in what for me was a most warm and candid informal instructional session on banks and their data transfers, drew my attention to the fact this only really kicked in as an industry modus operandi after the early 1990s when computers themselves made this possible in the way it is done to today.

And it is on this understanding from these types of conversations that I conclude that in American banks there must be an elaborate system of initiation of executives, who gradually work their way into the outer halls around the inner chamber of power itself-but even in these outer halls, the initiation process is being able to personally and morally accept that you are part, now, of an elaborate architecture of deception with regards to your lower-level co-workers and to the consumer public in general, whom you have always called the “market”, and that your initiator is in fact sure that you really can personally accept this.

And to facilitate this, of course, you get hefty raises and those bonuses, baby!:


(20oct2013: Because video and image (very important the combination of both) has been removed at some point since original posting, here they are again albeit separately-somebody just may have found original mounting of text-song and image-a little disturbing, as was the intention:



Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s