we should demand DEMOCRATIC CAPITALISM

[yurbud]

The money people still genuflect toward democracy even as they corrupt and work around it in the public sector, but we ought to be pushing for more democracy in corporations.

Apart from abolishing corporations altogether, what what limit a lot of their sociopathic behavior is changing their governance from one dollar one vote to one person one vote, which should also include workers.

That would prevent decisions like outsourcing, dismantling modestly profitable businesses for short term profit, mass layoffs to goose profits, and decisions that harm the community like polluting since workers live where their corporation shits.

Those who bring more money to the table could still get a proportionately bigger share of the profits--they just wouldn't get a bigger share of the vote. That would tamp down the speculative and quick profit agendas of some of the big money people since they would be countered by the workers. It would also give them a stable, long term investment.

I don't imagine everyone would want to take part in every decision, but the potential for them to do so might stay the hand of those at the top from much of the worst corporate behavior, and make excessive executive compensation a lot harder to get the stamp of approval.

Corporations exist at the mercy of our government, so we have the right to impose these or other necessary correctives.

If someone wants to maintain dictatorial power over their business, they can keep it as a sole proprietorship or partnership--and also keep their individual or small circle of owner financial and legal responsibility.

If there is some problem with this proposal, I'd like to here.

Pragmatically, it is hard to see how someone can argue with more democracy.

[ClassWarrior]

1. Spot on as usual, yurbud.

:yourock:

NGU.

[yurbud]

2. NGU?

thanks in any case.

[ClassWarrior]

4. That's...

..."Never Give Up," my personal DU slogan. Thanks for asking. :hi:

NGU.

[JDPriestly]

3. That is a possibility that should be considered, yurbud.

The fact is that if a person owns 10 shares of stock in a company, and those shares represent 10% of that person's savings or wealth, then they may actually have a greater interest in the welfare of the company and its ultimate profitability than the investor with a 40% share in the company but whose 40% share represents only a tiny portion of their wealth.

Who is more likely to try to help the company make the right decisions?

I wouldn't worry about who is better qualified to help the company make the right decisions, because the person with more personal wealth can still speak his opinion and persuade those who own smaller shares of the country to vote as he believes wise.

But especially if you gave employees votes, it is probably that corporations would no longer be vulnerable to raids by vulture companies.

This would encourage a lot of ordinary people to invest in the stock market.

[TBF]

5. I'm fine with the democracy -

it's the capitalism that distorts the picture. Freedom to oppress? Freedom to steal from others? Freedom to push others down so you can get ahead? Freedom to chase obscene profits because that is the only thing capitalism rewards? Freedom to bankrupt folks because they can't pay their medical bills? Freedom for them to die in the streets?

[yodermon]

6. List of Employee-owned Companies

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_employee-owned_companies


Not exactly what you were talking about in your OP, but along the same lines.

Our system of government should elevate People above Corporations.
Not only have Corporations been codified as People, they are supra-people. (immortal, not punishable by imprisonment or execution, vastly more powerful, taxed on profits not income, etc etc.)

[yurbud]

7. that's an improvement--co-ops are even better. But somehow, they've gotten an anti-market rep

that is probably more about the fear of their democratic structure.

[Taverner]

8. Sounds like you're warming to the idea of Socialism

Socialism is not as bad as you might think

Worker-owned businesses are a form of socialism after all

[yurbud]

9. I was trying to frame it in a way that would be hard to dispute

[LWolf]

10. Well, it would be better than the current status quo.

I'd still prefer Democratic Socialism.

[yurbud]

12. me too. This is a may to frame it to make it easier for people to agree with

[blindpig]

11. You've got it. This is how it works. n/t