Much too little thought is given to fundamental ways of fixing society’s most pressing problem, which is massive inequality of wealth. Banking regulation is an important part of the problem. But to attack the root cause of corporatism, you need to look at the make-up of corporations.
Two simple measures can make a radical improvement. The first is share ownership by workers. This appears to have gone completely out of political discussion.
Whatever the legal basis of a company – private, public limited, partnership etc – a substantial share in it should be given to all those who work in it and actually create the wealth. This share should come with full voting and distribution rights. I would advocate that 40% of the ownership of every company should be given to those who work in it. The distribution of that 40% should be adjusted annually according to the number of man hours put in, on the basis that everyone’s man hours are equal. Retired and ex-employees would retain rights until death, with all hours ever worked in that company included.
Thus if Jane were one of four people working in a start-up and they all worked equal hours, after one year she would own ten percent of the company. If the next year four more staff joined, and they all continued to work the same hours, Jane’s share would fall but she would still own more than those who joined later. If eventually there were thousands of staff, her percentage would become very small, but of a very large company, and she would still own significantly more than people who had put in far less accumulated hours over the years. On retirement, in addition to her pension, she would still own a share in the company, but this would diminish as other people built up their own contribution to the enterprise.
It would make no difference if Jane were the cleaner or the MD, and if she owned or not other kinds of non-worker shares in the company,
The other major difficulty in society’s relationship to remuneration is the ludicrous over-valuation of “management” work. The gulf in salary and remuneration between higher and lower paid employees of a company has grown enormously in the last thirty years. This is an easy fix. There should be a limit on the multiple of total remuneration (including all benefits) between the highest and lowest paid person in a single company or other body, including government department, agency or authority. I should suggest a multiple of six as appropriate. So if the cleaner is on £18,000, the CEO can get no more than £108,000.
This measure would solve the low wage problem overnight, as the CEO’s prime drive becomes increasing the cleaner’s remuneration. Attempts to evade (ie management by separate consultancy company) should be a criminal offence.
“Further to Chris Rogers’ Post, no point tinkering around the edges when the system itself is the problem;”
And what is the alternative system being proposed – let me have a guess Mr Goss’s Marxist-Leninism
BTW if there are any children here – Tony M is a silly old fool, and the limits of his stupidity do not stop at mobile phone batteries.
@RD,
The difference between Mr. John Goss and you, is unlike you, at least John has the moral conviction to actually utilise his real name and identity to post, whilst you pontificate behind a shadow, a moral coward too ashamed to reveal itself – what is their to fear?
And why don’t you offer use us glimmer of an alternative, or is all you do daily is slag off folk who actually do hold firm beliefs and convictions, which they air freely and do not hide from.
Resident Dissident; “And what is the alternative system being proposed”
Yes a pedestrian mind is rather a handicap to forward thinking ! 🙂
How about trying the opposite of what has got us to our present state, where Greed is not Good, where the emphasis is not the welfare of actual people & not the profit lines of Corporations, where Nations engage in fair trade instead of waging wars/regime changes as a pretext to stealing other countries natural resources, I could go on but surely even your limited mind has got the idea.
Typo; “ON the welfare of actual people”
Chris Rodgers
I have explained the use of a pseudonnym many times – my employer and its customers would not welcome me taking political positions publicly and I respect their wish. Did you post your political views openly in your name when employed?
Perhaps you might wish to ask Mr Goss what name he posted under before he started drawing his pension.
Macky
Those are just aspirations – what economic system would you employ to achieve them? Stop dodging the question.
@RD,
Employed or not I’ve always spoken my mind, same as when in employment I’m first to join a trades union, or organise union membership if one exists. As such, and despite living in a ‘state’ with no real functioning democracy, I’m impressed by those who struggle for rights we take for granted in the West. Rights I may add that have been systematically watered down.
Thus, and unless you are a ‘civil servant’, it’s a sad reflection on the state of democracy and liberty in the UK when persons – economically speaking – are fearful of speaking out, or indeed standing up for what little rights we still have.
But that’s capitalism for you, which instils fear, fear of losing one’s job, fear of losing ones pension and fear of losing a roof over your head.
And yet you lambast those who wish to remove such fears – strange that is!
Resident Dissident; “Those are just aspirations – what economic system would you employ to achieve them? Stop dodging the question.”
No, rather they are the essential prerequisites for the required fundamental orientational paradigm shift in how societal values & structures have be deliberately imposed over time by the few for their benefit at the expense of everybody, including Mother Earth herself. A better economic system based on these fundamental concepts & changes, will be inherent in the actual changing of the present focus & set of values in itself.
It’s not me dodging the question, it’s your pedestrian mind letting you down, again.
“The difference between Mr. John Goss and you, is unlike you, at least John has the moral conviction to actually utilise his real name and identity to post, whilst you pontificate behind a shadow, a moral coward too ashamed to reveal itself – what is their to fear?”
I thought this blog supported the right to be anonymous. I thought we supported Wikileaks and Julian Assange. I thought we supported the Anonymous movement. I thought we believed people should be able to talk freely without fear of persecution.
Why do you keep trying to find out who we are anyway? What’s it to you?
Fred; “Why do you keep trying to find out who we are anyway? What’s it to you?”
How revealing that you chose to ask a newcomer this question, whereas two very long timers here, namely the Habbu-Clown & a certain former Mod, have both continuously, overtly, persistently, even agressively at times, tried to find out personal details of other Posters here !
A bit of a slip-up there Freddy boy ! 😀
Fred,
How can you speak of liberty, correcting wrongs and hold government to accountability when people fear exposing themselves, standing in solidarity together and struggling for a better world for all.
One is not opposed to those masking their true identity, but find it discouraging so many are fearful for speaking out under their real identity.
Essentially you are self-censoring yourself and doing the bidding of a police state.
And, lets be blunt, if you believe for an instance you are anonymous, then you need your head examining given the spying abilities our governments and corporations have.
So, I don’t play the game, I’m happy to identify myself and make my case as I deem fit – I will not live in fear, for fear is actually disabling us and allowing our so called ‘betters’ to engage in numerous activities that are harmful to the commons.
“How can you speak of liberty, correcting wrongs and hold government to accountability when people fear exposing themselves, standing in solidarity together and struggling for a better world for all.”
So you believe Craig and Julian Assange are wrong to support anonymity online then?
“Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.”
My opinion is we have a duty to speak out, the more the better, and when I do so I do it under my own name, despite acknowledging that my own views freely aired can have a detrimental impact on any employment I may seek, or place me in the cross-airs of our masters.
I support those, who utilise subterfuge to highlight government abuse penetrated against the commons and common good – they are hero’s and treated as such by me.
However, many who post here are hardly revolutionaries, never mind a threat to the state, and yet they fear. And who can blame them given the precarious economic conditions most toil under.
In a nutshell, I don’t like being controlled, I don’t like the fact people live in fear of revealing their true identities for the impact it may have on their lives.
But this bugger at least will not conform and will not live in fear, for if I did it would mean the buggers who control us have won. And I say bugger them!!!!!!
Chris Rogers; “if you believe for an instance you are anonymous, then you need your head examining given the spying abilities our governments and corporations have.”
Too true Chris, but my main reason is to protect myself from the dangerous nutters out there, best exemplified by people behind this website;
http://www.stoptheism.com/content/index.php?pid=127&cid=127
They have a section, now hidden until you can gain their trust , of photos & personal details, names & addresses, workplaces, etc, of just ordinary people who may have taken part in a Pro-Palestinan activities, or said something critical of Israel, and believe it or not, but the nutters behind this Site are actually offering money rewards to anybody who would harm, yes even murder these people !!
Even on this very Blog, because John Goss uses his real name, both Resident Dissident & the Habbu-Clown have threaten him with real life reprocussions for his views here; Resident Dissident stated that he was “reporting” John to Left Unity (which John has stated he belong to), and the Habbu-Clown threaten to use his Polish “High Level contacts”, to ensure that John would be barred from ever visiting Poland again.
So yes I understand that my identity can easily be determined by those with even minimal expertise, but to at least protect myself from the neanderthal minded nutters out there, I prefer to remain anonymous as much as possible, not just for my sake, as I have a young family to think about also.
“In a nutshell, I don’t like being controlled, I don’t like the fact people live in fear of revealing their true identities for the impact it may have on their lives.”
It doesn’t bother me what you do.
It’s you thinking you have the right to tell everybody else what they should do that bothers me.
If you want to post under your own name and risk coming home to find 20 ton of sand dumped in your driveway that’s just up to you, I don’t mind it’s a free world. It is a free world isn’t it?
@Fred,
Usually I’m more concerned about the amount of ‘junk mail’ I get, which is now standing at about 1,000 per week, rather than having shit dumped on our garden, but wish the shit dumpers all the luck in the world if they can journey 6,000 miles to do so!
“Usually I’m more concerned about the amount of ‘junk mail’ I get, which is now standing at about 1,000 per week, rather than having shit dumped on our garden, but wish the shit dumpers all the luck in the world if they can journey 6,000 miles to do so!”
Hell no, they just find out where you live and ring the nearest builders merchant, “Mr Rogers here, I’ll be out just leave it in the drive, send me the bill” that’s how easy it is.
No, rather they are the essential prerequisites for the required fundamental orientational paradigm shift in how societal values & structures have be deliberately imposed over time by the few for their benefit at the expense of everybody, including Mother Earth herself. A better economic system based on these fundamental concepts & changes, will be inherent in the actual changing of the present focus & set of values in itself.
What you seem to be saying is, “first change the system, and the new economic model will follow”
Since the present system is inextricable from the current economic model – if you can dignify naked greed and corruption with the term – and people generally need (economic)incentives to change their way of working/living – I’d suggest that before you change the (economic) system you need some concrete ideas of what (economic) system you are going to put in its place. Otherwise. RD is right; it’s just aspiration.
‘Fundamental orientational paradigm shift’ may mean (my grasp of management bollocks is notoriously uncertain) something like ‘change the way people think.’
What I ask myself when someone’s offering me a ‘fundamental orientational paradigm shift’
is:
1. Does the claimed advantage look better than what I’m getting now?
2. Who’s paying for all this? (and which PR outfit will be spinning it?)
3. Are we talking violence?
4. What guarantees do we have that the old ways (based as they are on fundamental primate instincts) will not return?
Chris Rogers, to decrease junk mail, go here:
MPS: Mail Preference Service
http://www.mpsonline.org.uk/mpsr/
Chris Rogers, oh sorry, I forgot you’re not in the UK. There might be a similar scheme where you are.
@Fred,
Well as you state, that maybe in the UK, here in many Asian countries we actually have ID Card, together with Credit Cards, so unless you give some valid details you don’t get anything delivered period. Indeed, HK is very much a cash-based society and to get things done its cash up front or forget it. Although, I understand identity theft and identity fraud is rife in the UK.
Macky, 10:29 am
Dunno about Habba, but Macky e-mailed me and I Googled her e-mail address, wondering what sort of a person would be such a manipulative liar and a promoter of the Kremlin’s agenda. She’d be really pissed off and deny it if I told you what her own publicity material says. I don’t really know why someone would be so ashamed of, well, who they are. There’s nothing much there to be embarrassed about as far as I can tell.
“Well as you state, that maybe in the UK, here in many Asian countries we actually have ID Card, together with Credit Cards, so unless you give some valid details you don’t get anything delivered period. Indeed, HK is very much a cash-based society and to get things done its cash up front or forget it. Although, I understand identity theft and identity fraud is rife in the UK.”
But RD doesn’t live in Hong Kong so maybe you shouldn’t be preaching to him about posting anonymously.
Tips:
* Never publish your e-mail address or ‘phone numbers as text or they’ll be harvested by bots and used for spamming you. Publish it as an image instead, like I do on my contact page, linked from my screen name.
* Never answer the “security question” for your on-line accounts honestly or even with recognisable words. Something like this is much better, but be sure to keep a copy in case you ever need to answer the question:
Q: Mother’s maiden name?
A: ku8y453bd3hgw8ac9
@Clark, I told you that I don’t want to engage with you, but that certain lies would be replied to, this is one “but Macky e-mailed me”, techincally true but intentionaly & dishonestly gives the wrong impression, as the truth is that you bullied me non-stop for several days in order for me to give you my email address;
https://squonk.tk/blog/2015/03/15/the-general-discussion-thread/comment-page-9/#comment-4836
That you freely acknowledge that you use that private information to search the Internet to find personal details about me, serves to reveal what sort of person you are, and serves as a warning to others not to trust you.
Maybe Macky thinks the Western authorities are like her favourites and will come and kill her for publishing stuff they don’t like. I think Craig would be a higher priority. The Uzbek or Russian authorities really did try to kill him when they couldn’t entice him into paedophilia; it’s in Murder in Samarkand.
Macky, 12:08 pm:
Then don’t publish lies about me, like you did at 10:29 am 😀
For the record, yes. Macky was berating Craig and this site’s moderation, as she’s done continually since she arrived. Ever the naive optimist I thought that a private chat could help, to discuss some of the difficulties of moderation, so I asked her to e-mail me.
@Clark, you really do have a most extreme case cognitive dissonance if you really think I’m lying, it’s there in black & white if anybody is interested to look into it, which I doubt as you present conduct tells them all they need to now.
society’s most pressing problem, which is massive inequality of wealth
Really? That’s the number 1?
Macky, I think you comment at this site so much because you perform public diplomacy for the Kremlin. That’s why you lie about, bully, and smear as racist anyone who criticises Russian government policy. I suspect that your link to Russia is through the Greek Orthodox Church 😀