All those who have written upon civil institutions demonstrate…that whoever desires to found a state and give it laws, must start with assuming that all men are bad and ever ready to display their vicious nature, whenever they may find occasion for it. 

If their evil disposition remains concealed for a time, it must be attributed to some unknown reason; and we must assume that it lacked occasion to show itself.  But time, which has been said to be the father of all truth, does not fail to bring it to light.

–Niccolo Machiavelli, The Discourses

The Treasury Department fears that widespread public anger at some of its major economic programs–such as the bank bailout–will deter government officials from intervening in future crises.

As a result, the Treasury Department hopes to regain the public’s trust by issuing a series of economic charts.

Unfortunately, the Treasury’s chart-topping effort will go for nothing.

Emotionally-charged matters–such as child molestation or government bailouts to the rich–don’t lend themselves to “appeals to reason.”

But a different approach might well salvage some public faith in the Treasury Department’s judgment: Greed-test CEOs for future government loans.

After all, drug-testing welfare recipients has become the new mantra for Republicans.

He admitted that he was “shocked” at the breakdown in U.S. credit markets and said he was “partially” wrong to resist regulation of some securities.

“Those of us who have looked to the self-interest of lending institutions to protect shareholder’s equity–myself especially–are in a state of shocked disbelief,” said Greenspan, who had ruled the Fed from 1987 to 2006.

As a disciple of the right-wing philosopher, Ayan Rand, Greenspan had fiercely held to her belief that “The Market” was a divine institution. As such, “it” alone knew what was best for the nation’s economic prosperity.

“Enlightened self-interest,” he believed, would guarantee that those who dedicated their lives to making money would not allow mere greed to steer them–and the country–into disaster.

As he saw it, any attempt to regulate greed-based appetites could only harm that divine institution: The Market.

Greenspan was proved wrong. And the nation will be literally paying for such misguided confidence in profit-addicted men for decades to come.

So if Republicans want to protect the “poor, oppressed taxpayer,” they should demand background investigations for those whose addiction truly threatens the economic future of this country.

That means the men (and occasionally women) who run the nation’s most important financial institutions, such as banks, insurance and mortgage companies.

Thus, in the future, all CEOs–and their topmost executives–of financial institutions seeking Federal bailouts should be required to:

• Undergo “full field investigations” by the FBI and IRS.
• Submit full financial disclosure forms concerning not only themselves but all members of their immediate families.
• Be subject to Federal prosecution for perjury if they provide false information or conceal evidence of criminal violations.
• Periodically submit themselves for additional background investigation.
• Be subject to arrest, indictment and prosecution if the background investigation turns up evidence of criminal activity.

In addition:

• If a bailout-seeking financial institution refuses to comply with these criteria, it should be refused the loan.
• If a CEO and/or other top officials are judged ineligible for a loan, the company should be asked to replace those executives with others who might qualify.
• Those alternative executives should be subject to the same background investigation requirements as just outlined.
• If the institution refuses to replace those executives found ineligible, the Government should refuse the loan.
• If the Government is forced to take over a troubled financial institution, its CEO and top executives should be replaced with applicants who have passed the required security screening.

The United States has a long and embarrassing history of worshipping wealth for its own sake. Part of this can be traced to the old Calvinistic doctrine that wealth is a proof of salvation, since it shows evidence of God’s favor.

Another reason for this worship of mammon is the belief that someone who is wealthy is automatically endowed with wisdom and integrity.

By that criteria, the capos of the Mafia must be presumed to be saints and geniuses.

Following these beliefs to their ultimate conclusion will transform the United States into a plutocracy–a government of the wealthy, by the wealthy, for the wealthy.

Every day we see fresh evidence of the destruction wrought by the unchecked greed of wealthy, powerful men.

When they–and their paid shills in Congress–demand, “De-regulate business,” it’s essential to remember what they really mean.

It means: “Let criminals be criminals.”

The Treasury Department fears that widespread public anger at some of its major economic programs–such as the bank bailout–will deter government officials from intervening in future crises.

The public has fused the $700 billion Wall Street bailout with the $787 billion stimulus–and had fiercely attacked the latter.

As a result, the Treasury Department hopes to regain the public’s trust by issuing a series of economic charts.

The new Treasury charts are intended to underscore:

• the severity of the economic dip;
• the recovery has been happening faster than many people realize;
• the lower-than-expected costs of the financial stability programs; and
• the country has a long way to go to recover from the recession.

Alas, the Treasury’s chart-topping effort will go for nothing.

Emotionally-charged matters–such as child molestation or government bailouts to the rich–don’t lend themselves to appeals to reason.

It was the Wall Street bailout that ignited the Tea Party movement.  And Tea Partiers won’t stop demanding the firing of Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner just because his agency draws up a few pie-charts.

Yet the Treaasury Department might yet salvage at least some part of the public trust.

The solution: Greed-testing for CEO’s.

Throughout 2012r Republican lawmakers pursued welfare drug-testing in Congress and more than 30 states.

Some bills even targeted people who claim unemployment insurance and food stamps, despite scanty evidence the poor and jobless are disproportionately on drugs.

The concept of background screening is actually sound.  But Republicans are aiming it at the wrong end of the economic spectrum.

Since 2008, the government has handed out billions of dollars in bailouts to the wealthiest corporations in the country.

The reason: To rescue the economy from the calamity produced by the criminal greed and recklessness of those same corporations.

For example:

• The Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) has invested $118.5 billion in restoring liquidity to the financial markets.
• Federal Reserve rescue efforts: $1.5 trillion invested.
• Federal stimulus programs designed to save or create jobs and jumpstart the economy from recession. $577.8 billion invested.
• American International Group: Multifaceted bailout to help insurers through restructuring, minimize the need to post collateral and get rid of toxic assets. $127.4 billion invested.
• FDIC bank takeovers: Cost to FDIC fund that insures losses depositors suffer when a bank fails. $45.4 billion billion invested.
• Other financial initiatives designed to rescue the financial sector. $366.4 billion invested.
• Other housing initiatives designed to rescue the housing market and prevent foreclosures. $130.6 billion invested.

Total of federal monies invested: $3 trillion.

It’s important to note that these figures–supplied by the Federal Reserve, Treasury Department, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Congressional Budget Ooffice and the White House–date from November 16, 2009.

And it’s equally important to remember that welfare recipients did not

• hold CEO positions at any of the banks so far bailed out;
• run such insurance companies as American International Group (AIG);
• administer the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, known as Freddie Mac;
• command the Federal National Mortgage Association, known as Fannie Mae.

The 2010 documentary “Inside Job” chronicles the events leading to the 2008 global financial crisis. One of its most insightful moments occurs at a party held by then-Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson.

“We can’t control our greed,” the CEO of a large bank admits to his fellow guests.

“You should regulate us more.”

Greed is defined as an excessive desire for wealth or goods. At its worst, greed trumps rationality, judgment and concern about the damage it may cause.

Greed begins in the neurochemistry of the brain. A neurotransmitter called dopamine fuels our greed. The higher the dopamine levels in the brain, the greater the pleasure we experience.

Cocaine, for example, directly increases dopamine levels. So does money.

Harvard researcher Hans Breiter has found, via magnetic resonance imaging studies, that the craving for money activates the same regions of the brain as the lust for sex, cocaine or any other pleasure-inducer.

Dopamine is most reliably activated by an experience we haven’t had before. We crave recreating that experience.

But snorting the same amount of cocaine, or earning the same sum of money, does not cause dopamine levels to increase. So the pleasure-seeker must increase the amount of stimuli to keep enjoying the euphoria.

In time, this incessant craving for pleasure becomes an addiction. And feeding that addiction–with ever more money–becomes the overriding goal.

Thus, the infamous line–”Greed is good”–in the 1987 film, “Wall Street,” turns out to be both false and deadly for all concerned.

But the situation need not remain this way.