Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Hey guys,

I was wondering to myself why there were no interplanetary corporations in 40k and figured that the IoM would never allow power to be concentrated in civilian associations to that degree... but it left me wondering about the state of financial institutions (banks, etc.) and services and to what degree companies are allowed to grow.

I presume that industry is all controlled by the Mechanicum but are there any other organisations in the IoM that prevent private enterprise?

Or does it exist?

The only example of powerful businessmen I can think of are Rogue Traders... and they operate pretty far out.

Hope this post was understandable, my thoughts were certainly fragmented.

Anyhoo, discuss!

Nope, corporations are everywhere, entire Hive cities can be owned by a single wealthy nobel.

There is a very distinct rich and poor line for the IoM.

The rich are all slaanesh worshippers, the poor worship nurgle. XD

I wondered that too actually. Specifically wondering if the ideas of what victor davis hanson says in his book carnage and culture about western warfare might apply to the imperium.
basically, victor hanson talks about how ideas of freedom and individualism and capitalism forced into the cauldron of war decided that shock battle deciding the outcome of a war is the best decision. Wester civilization has been doing it this way ever since the Greeks. Its been the most successful, Western armies or armies style after Western armies are by far the most deadly in open battle, and have been for a long time and will continue to be. Well, in this far future where no freedom is allowed, individual initiative is reduced and effectiveness is reduced.

There are got to be imperial worlds that still are run on ideas of freedom instead of nobility. These worlds must be the back bone of the imperium in production because free markets are the most productive. Citizen soldiers are also the most effective and must make the most dangerious IoM armies. I know this isn't in fluff but just my own extrapolation

Any and all economical systems you have ever heard of or can think of exist somewhere in the IoM. From full blown communism to Laissez-faire to bartering with pebbles.

KamikazeCanuck wrote:Any and all economical systems you have ever heard of or can think of exist somewhere in the IoM. From full blown communism to Laissez-faire to bartering with pebbles.

Or teef. Don't forget da teef.

Happygrunt wrote:

KamikazeCanuck wrote:Any and all economical systems you have ever heard of or can think of exist somewhere in the IoM. From full blown communism to Laissez-faire to bartering with pebbles.

Or teef. Don't forget da teef.

well....teef is for Orks.

KamikazeCanuck wrote:

Happygrunt wrote:

KamikazeCanuck wrote:Any and all economical systems you have ever heard of or can think of exist somewhere in the IoM. From full blown communism to Laissez-faire to bartering with pebbles.

Or teef. Don't forget da teef.

well....teef is for Orks.

Was a joke. Although I am sure some Rouge Trades use some big ol' teef.

My guess is 99.9% of the time, all the wealth is horded by the Imperial Governor and his family. In addition he as well as the nobility and business tycoons determine all economic policy to benefit themselves.

Why? Because as long as the governor pays his tithe, doesn't collaborate with Chaos/Xenos, provides conscripts to the Imperial Guard, and venerates the Imperial Cult he can pretty much do whatever he wants and is kept in power not only by his own PDF but also the local Arbites garrison, which has off-worlders not likely to participate in any revolt. With this kind of laissez-faire approach to rule by the Imperium, you'll naturally get a system where this 1 Governor will horde everything freely.

It should however be noted that merchant fleets, i.e. trade between worlds, is under the control of the Imperial Fleet, the same body that controls the Imperial Navy.

There has never been a clear statement of how the Imperium is run. Usually the gist of the economy in the Imperium is that there's so many different worlds, planet types etc etc. that each world is run a little different.

Rogue Trader families are the closest to a Corporation-type entity, I think.

Although corporations exist in name, the focus on nobles and "houses" in hive cities such as Necromunda suggests there are still societal and Imperial scale pressures towards oligarchy or noble family organization. Corporations might exist but all shareholders might be institutional organizations or be rich noble families.

Remember a key difference between modern society and the Imperium is that of consumerism. The vast majority of Imperial society produces for the sake of the Imperium or for the select consumption of the rich. There is no widespread middle class driving retail consumption. The way it is described is that most of the Imperium lives in a hand to mouth existence of subsistence or wage slavery. On Necromunda in Hive Primus for example, the major commercial contracts are enacted between houses, whether the noble upper spire houses or the more common houses of the main hive city, not between individuals or corporations.

Although the Imperium technically might have no objections to how a world is run including if it were a republic or democracy, I suspect its demands on its worlds has a selection effect. In other words, the Imperium's tithe demands may be so great as to mean only harsh methods of rule would be able to consistently meet such demands. Furthermore, the consistent nature of the Imperium's regular demands may select against regimes where there is a constant rotation of power figures due to the possible disruption in tithes. Thus there may be a selection for "stable" conservative regimes such as autocracies or stable oligrachies.

The Ultimate private corporation is the Rogue Trader, there can be entire miniature planetary empires operated by these tycoons.

everything scales down from there.


There would be things like Restaraunt chains, Clothing designers, food producers, weapon manufacturers... all manufacturing would of course be regulated by the Ad Mech, nothing that's Tech heresy.

The Ad Mech doesn't really run every little factory and shop in the Imperium. It doesn't even make sense that they would even care to make toothbrushes for the average citizen or whatever. They probably have at least some kind of manufacturing base on any given planet, and maybe they'll check in to make sure people aren't engaging in blatant tech heresy, bless their machines, whatever, but they're mostly making the really complicated, closely guarded stuff, and cranking out the STC stuff. Local manufacture is mentioned plenty of times in Black Library books, especially the Eisenhorn trilogy if I remember correctly. Lots of crappy local vehicles and weapons exist. I'm sure most PDF equipment is subpar local manufacture. All the real stuff goes to the tithe for the guard.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
(That's my interpretation anyway)

Private groups, such as Trade Guilds, can license the templates, and the factory blueprints, from the AdMech in order to produce whatever they want to produce. These are called "Fanes" in some areas (like Gunmetal City). Fanes are basically private corporations that lease a line of tech from the AdMech so that they can build it (let's say guns) and then sell them on the open market, to custom-order clients, to PDF quartermasters, to Rogue Trader crews, and anyone else that can meet the price and broker the deal.

Outside of this, there's all sorts of private mining, ore smelting and similar industrial-production companies out there in the Imperium. They buy their tech from the AdMech (or a licensed Fane), and then hire some techno-mats to operate it, or train others to operate it, and then go to work.

There is, of course, many nobles and such in Imperial society. These are people who are, generally, already rich, possibly because their far-distant ancestor was a Miner Baron or a Fane Master or in some other way made his name (and his fortune) and his descendants now live off of that wealth, engaging in trade, perhaps, of fine and/or rare goods (not directly, but by hiring RTs or at least funding them) and making profit that way. Nobles do not work, it's a perk of being a noble, but they may invest.

Throughout the Imperium, though, the "old blood" of noble families is threatened by a rising "merchant class" of people who *do* work, and are growing rich from their own labors. Funnily enough, this exact situation took place during the Renaissance and later centuries in Europe.

Well, in all of history, money equals nobility.


You have money, you are basically a noble. Other nobles that have it through bloodlines may look down upon you, but in the end you have the money and are noble.


It was funny, in the first half of the 20th century, most nobles were actually quite poor in cash. they had these vast estates, but were forced to lease most of their land to merchantmen just so they could keep themselves fed. It was that, sell the land, or work.

I belive it was/is a little joke that went around about the British Parliment that the representitives of the House of Commons were actually a richer lot then the House of Lords was.

In the Dark Heresy books, it lists some major noble houses of the sector, and notes that, while some of the organizations are strict family lineages, other "houses" are effectively corporations that span across subsectors.

The Calpurnia trilogy also mentions powerful Houses-Syndicates, where Household members even adopt the name of the Syndicate as their second name.

Psienesis wrote:
Throughout the Imperium, though, the "old blood" of noble families is threatened by a rising "merchant class" of people who *do* work, and are growing rich from their own labors. Funnily enough, this exact situation took place during the Renaissance and later centuries in Europe.

I don't see this happening in the Imperium. Where is your evidence of this?

Grey Templar wrote:Well, in all of history, money equals nobility.


You have money, you are basically a noble. Other nobles that have it through bloodlines may look down upon you, but in the end you have the money and are noble.

Actually for most of history, no you weren't. You were noble only if you had the name and bloodline. You could be rich but still a commoner. Merchants in the European Middle Ages could be vastly wealthy but still forbidden from such things as bearing arms or calling themselves nobles. Likewise in Asian empires, like China or Japan. The merchant class there was rich but power was in the hands of landed nobility and/or scholar officials.

It was funny, in the first half of the 20th century, most nobles were actually quite poor in cash. they had these vast estates, but were forced to lease most of their land to merchantmen just so they could keep themselves fed. It was that, sell the land, or work.

I belive it was/is a little joke that went around about the British Parliment that the representitives of the House of Commons were actually a richer lot then the House of Lords was.

Part of the reason for this was because nobles relied upon land rents and other customary fees for use of fixed assets like mills, ponds, or forests. Their income was therefore fixed and limited by the productivity of the land. Merchants were not and could use money to make even more money.

How do you think those Nobles become Nobles in the first place?


someone at the very beginning had wealth.

a Warlord, through extensive raiding of the surrounding area, aquires wealth. He maintains power with his power, but his descendents maintain it through the wealth it brought.

You can aquire power through force, but power is maintained with wealth(not always money)


If its by sheer strength alone, the power stays with the person only. it doesn't become hereditary untill wealth is in the mix.

Grey Templar wrote:How do you think those Nobles become Nobles in the first place?


someone at the very beginning had wealth.

a Warlord, through extensive raiding of the surrounding area, aquires wealth. He maintains power with his power, but his descendents maintain it through the wealth it brought.

You can aquire power through force, but power is maintained with wealth(not always money)


If its by sheer strength alone, the power stays with the person only. it doesn't become hereditary untill wealth is in the mix.

No, if it is by sheer strength as it was often with the founding noble, then it is passed on. For much of history, the nobility commanded the right to use force on behalf of the king or emperor. That was their right alone and why for much of ancient history, societies with nobles forbid commoners from bearing weapons. Their right to their land rents and fees was enforced through the threat of force. This income then allows them to continue to fund the acquisition and maintenance of the means to impose force, such as weapons and retainers.

Why nobles were eventually superceded in wealth by merchants was because their income could not grow at the same pace as that of people engaged in commercial endeavors. A successful trade run by a cargo ship in the ancient era could bring vast wealth, far more than could be eked out by land rents.

This differs partially from the Imperium's noble classes such as that found in hive cities. There, they maintain their income through wealth and the control or distribution of commercial contracts and favors. That is more akin to how the wealthy class of today maintains their power. Sure, some of these may hire private armies, but the foundation of their power lies in their wealth rather than a monopoly on force.

It only stays around with wealth.

simple brute strength isn't enough. you need strength + wealth to make nobility.


Wealth being land and material posessions.

Grey Templar wrote:It only stays around with wealth.

simple brute strength isn't enough. you need strength + wealth to make nobility.


Wealth being land and material posessions.

Wealth does not make nobility. You are viewing this through a modern viewpoint. Nobility may have originally been gained through force, which brought with it wealth. However societies like this did not have the modern fluidity and upward mobility of modern day society. A noble, whether rich or poor, was still a noble by right of birth. A wealthy commoner, like a merchant, might have been able to afford more material possessions than a poor noble, but there were still societal restrictions on what he could or could not do. Unlike in today's society where often wealth does equal nobility/upper class, you could be rich but still low class or upper class but poor.

That was the whole basis of sumptuary laws, which were aimed at enforcing class distinction. People were prohibited from certain materials, colors, or styles of clothing or consumption by their social class. A merchant no matter how rich could not wear certain things. Certain modes of dress were reserved exclusively for the nobility. The restriction on the use of the color purple (from expensive purple dye) in ancient Rome is another example. Such restrictions on consumption may seem strange or discriminatory in today's eyes, but it just serves to illustrate the different mindset.

And the Imperium has roughly the same upward mobility as modern US has (which is to say, not as much as most people think there is; if you're born poor, you'll probably die poor). Depends on the planet of course, but any person can come across something important or valuable, sell it, and raise their class-- or do something important and become famous, or manage to land a lucky job, etc.

Most won't, but I could say the same thing about modern US, too.

Melissia wrote:And the Imperium has roughly the same upward mobility as modern US has (which is to say, not as much as most people think there is; if you're born poor, you'll probably die poor). Depends on the planet of course, but any person can come across something important or valuable, sell it, and raise their class-- or do something important and become famous, or manage to land a lucky job, etc.

Most won't, but I could say the same thing about modern US, too.

Merely finding a one off valuable and selling it for a large sum of money wouldn't necessarily result in raising of class. See my earlier posts on the whole historical phenomenon of rich commoner merchants and poor nobles. Simply having wealth in and of itself was not a direct determinant of social class.

They'd then have the wealth necessary to utilize wealth to make more wealth. Someone being a poor noble could very well simply be assassinated or bought out and have the new family take their place-- assassination is considered a perfectly valid political tool in the Imperium after all. 40k isn't medieval Europe, the comparison is mostly moot.

I don't know about that "upward mobility". It's pretty common for administratum file clerks to be 20th generation administratum file clerks.

Melissia wrote:They'd then have the wealth necessary to utilize wealth to make more wealth. Someone being a poor noble could very well simply be assassinated or bought out and have the new family take their place-- assassination is considered a perfectly valid political tool in the Imperium after all. 40k isn't medieval Europe, the comparison is mostly moot.

Are you familiar with the whole "parvenu" or "noveau riche" phenomenon? Simply having wealth and buying your way into a wealthy area or buying large swathes of real estate/assets doesn't mean you are accepted into a social class. It is still possible to be ostracized and snubbed. Wealth certainly opens doors but it doesn't open all doors. Social mores, etiquette, and upbringing are all factors as well. In today's more egalitarian society (at least ideologically), this may be viewed as snobbish but in historical societies things such as lineage, upbringing, your accent, etc... all were viewed as important indicators of one's worth or place in the hierarchy. Wealth was just one among these other factors.

That is why historically one of the key ways to try and climb was through marriage, and for the next generation to be born into that class. Social mobility in one's own lifetime was a rare thing.

Grey Templar wrote:It only stays around with wealth.

simple brute strength isn't enough. you need strength + wealth to make nobility.


Wealth being land and material posessions.

Simply not correct.

Check the history of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, where many of the noble families were no more than peasants with a Noble title.

I am sure on a local level you could have a variety of economic systems. However, the iimperium's economy is ran by guilds. The Navigator Houses, Mars.

The planetary lords can also be seen as feudal lords. To me it seems like pre-reformation Europe is being represented with some Stalinist aesthetics added (comisars).

Of Scifi universes I have read, the imperium looks like the Old Empire from Dune (Navigator Guilds, Nobel Houses).

Its not like Battltech, where there are thousands of interstellar corporations competing to provide services to a fractured political economy.

EDIT: This thread has turned to gak. People are just using this as a vehicle to push their ideologies, not give an accurate account of the 40k's universes properties. I think an admin should remove posts that don't have to do with this (social mobility in the US?).

MediumYellow wrote:I am sure on a local level you could have a variety of economic systems. However, the iimperium's economy is ran by guilds. The Navigator Houses, Mars.

The planetary lords can also be seen as feudal lords. To me it seems like pre-reformation Europe is being represented with some Stalinist aesthetics added (comisars).

The Necromunda rulebook clearly shows the planetary governor as a feudal lord. They are at the apex of the planetary economy. The feudal system just proceeds downwards from the planetary lord through to the noble houses that receive power from him, such as shipping and landing rights, all the way down to the common houses of the actual mid and lower hive. Throughout the entire system, central control is somewhat tenuous and relies on the loyalty of lesser entities and on playing these entities off one another.

Melissia wrote:And the Imperium has roughly the same upward mobility as modern US has (which is to say, not as much as most people think there is; if you're born poor, you'll probably die poor). Depends on the planet of course, but any person can come across something important or valuable, sell it, and raise their class-- or do something important and become famous, or manage to land a lucky job, etc.

Most won't, but I could say the same thing about modern US, too.

That's far too blanket a statement, I think that class mobility is something that would vary more planet by planet.