system relevance

Post Photo: Solar System | © Shutterstock

When an individual citizen dies, it is always a tragic thing, especially for those close to them. For our society, however, this is an everyday process and therefore does not endanger any state structure. Even if the world comes to an end for a "head of state" in his full creative power, this is also tragic for a society, but also manageable. In short, our cemeteries are full of people who thought they were irreplaceable.

And what applies to natural persons also applies to legal entities! Hardly anyone remembers B. to Mannesmann, Borgward, Horten or Commodore, which once again confirms that nothing is everlasting. 

That's why I'm particularly amazed when people talk about systemic relevance in relation to companies. This means that they assume such an important economic role that their insolvency could not be accepted by the state. And if these supposedly "systemically important" companies are threatened with insolvency, it is now regularly averted with public funds. The so-called “bank bailout” can serve as a striking example. The catch is who determines which company is actually systemically important and according to which criteria?!

To put it in a nutshell: there is no systemic relevance of persons of a natural or legal nature. Our society will also be able to cope with the "fall" of the entire economy - which, by the way, would not be the first time.

But since no one seriously wants to take this proof, one should consider how to counteract the "danger" of supposedly systemically important companies. If the government speaks of systemic importance, the following problem is likely to arise: either this company is too big for our state or our state is too small for this company. In my opinion, there are now two possible solutions to this problem. The company is reduced to a size that the state can tolerate, or the state hands over the “responsibility” for such a company to a community of sufficient size – this is where the European Union comes into play.

Personally, I continue to assume that there are no systemically important people and rather suspect that the term systemic importance is used to put the economic interests of individuals before those of the community and to redistribute the resulting costs to the latter!