• Ashwin Poonawala
    54
    The United States of America was founded on the basis of diffusion of state’s power, curtailing the power’s potential for injustice. The dazzling success of the system has made the concepts of democracy and capitalism popular around the world. The existing form of capitalism worked very well for a while, because then, wealth making power could not converge easily into a few hands. Industrialization has changed that. Now a few rich have undesirably high power to manipulate wealth distribution and politics, and to influence social values. In the US the richest 1% own more than 35%, and the top 3% own more than 50% of the total wealth, while the bottom 50% share 4%. The world statistics is even more appalling, the top 1% own 50% of the total wealth, while the bottom 68% share 3%. Extreme greed for wealth has a degrading effect, the same as that for power, on community.

    Sward used to be greed’s tool to acquire wealth and power. Democracy detached sward from greed. But with unrestrained capitalism, greed uses money as its weapon. Too much concentration of greedy power of wealth in a few hands causes poverty and associated fears for masses. Poverty is the worst form of torture. All fears are detrimental to happiness. Societies, with just distribution of wealth, have been very content and creative, throughout the history.

    Man is a social animal. In a community, attitudes of the perceived leaders set trends, and the followers reinforce each other’s thinking accordingly, creating euphoria over time. This is how ordinary people gear up for heroic efforts in times of community crisis, like wars. Now big money makers have become roll-models, and have too high an influence on community’s thinking. As a result, now ruthless greed generated by reckless enterprise has become popular world over. This trend tends to degrade contentment and suppresses creativity of community. When a community starts measuring happiness exclusively by wealth and the associated worldly successes, virus of high level greed-fear combination destroys contentment, which destroys family values. And seeking and pursuing quick money-making schemes makes one abhor hard work. Being valuable to society by honest work has gone out of fashion. The rich and the ones craving to become rich have disdain for honest work, while the poor/nearly poor have lost their pride of performance. The number of people who are satisfied with their financial status is small, and is shrinking. The resulting loss of emotional fulfillment leads individuals to flagrant ways of pleasure.

    Greed is nothing but fear of future. Greed inevitably leads to trickery, which is a desire to acquire more without due effort or merit, a desire to shortchange one’s fate by avoiding due payment. It grows out of the feeling of entitlement, which is based on pride. This pride is not the same as self esteem, which grows from serving causes higher than the self. Greed is like an uncontrolled forest fire; it keeps growing larger. A hole in the ground cannot be filled by digging deeper and deeper into it.

    Simply defined, morality is: ‘Do unto others as you would have done unto you’. The existing degenerate environment of greed forces new entrepreneurs to compromise their moral convictions and adopt cunning ways, first for their businesses to survive against the unscrupulous competition, and later, after testing the fruits of corrupt methods, to prosper. The first offense of a kind against one’s own self is the most painful. Each subsequent one is easier than the preceding one. Look at how snacks are made unhealthy with harmful preservatives and cheap ingredients, the quality of food in chain restaurants has degraded over the years, farm produce is made unhealthy by high-breeding, and the quality of dairy products by rampant use of hormones and antibiotics.

    The U.S. seems to be leading the way. All this makes the US fat and unhealthy, requiring more medical attention. On the other side, medical drugs/treatments are marketed at exorbitant prices, and once they are in circulation, our medical drug industry shows instances of suppressing and discouraging immerging cheaper/better remedies, and of suppressing discoveries of dangerous side effects. The common man is getting squeezed from every side. Our automobile industry ignored, or bought and shelved technical innovations, to avoid immediate expensive modifications to production processes, loosing against foreign completion in the end, retarding the country’s progress.

    Living beings have two basic concerns, security and comfort. Relative global border security created by the conviction recently crystallized in the mind of mankind, that conquering others is a losing proposition in the long run, has made nations feel more secure within their borders. The broad coalition formed against Iraq in the Desert Storm war portrayed this conviction. This has allowed nations to shift more energy towards material gains, intensifying their productions. To achieve high values for the participants, international division of labor is inevitable, which cannot flourish without massive international trade. As a result, and supported by the fast and massive communication and transportation facilities, the tide of international trade is rising. Thus, progression of economic globalization is an undefeatable factor of today’s life. During this early phase of globalization, some national authorities are trying to keep the tide out. But these efforts are doomed to fail, like the Jackson era attempt of killing the then budding banking industry failed. In a handful number of generations the international trade of material, labor and services will become quite cohesive and will resemble, to a degree, to our interstate commerce.

    As globalization advances, the economic gap between the developed and underdeveloped economies of the world keeps shrinking. This is eating away the advantage the rich countries enjoyed. The resulting tightening profit conditions within the rich countries make their big businesses, having had tested blood of easily rising wealth during the post world-wars era, tend to exploit domestic consumers and to shortchange employees more and more. This keeps lowering the standard of living of the masses. In the game of greed all involved loose.

    In the U.S. there are many indirect effects of this excessively concentrated greedy power of wealth: the high cost of education and health care favoring the rich, the lobbying against raising the minimum wage to sustenance level, and securing the cheaper labor of illegal immigrants by lobbying against curtailment of illegal immigration. The resulting economic pain of the masses in turn adds to social vices like crime and substance abuse, taxing the strained resources of the community further.

    A revolution almost always has wide spread economic hardship at its base. Too much wealth in the hands of a few robs democracy of its effectiveness. The present worldwide wave of expression of dissatisfaction for the existing political establishments, which is more visible in the well developed economies, is only the beginning. Man’s pursuit of happiness is ever existing formidable force. History is nothing but a story of mankind’s pursuit of happiness. Only means and methods keep evolving. This force initiates new currents in accordance with the perceived changes in the reality. Each new generation brings forth clearer perspective of the prevailing reality. The majority of world population feeling safer than before has shifted its focus to achieving comfort. The biggest obstacle to comfortable living, the common man sees now, is the unjust distribution of wealth. As a result demand for more profound socialism is forming in the mind of the world masses. Often, at beginning, revolting masses are acutely aware of their pain but not clear about remedy. We are in the early phase of Karl Marx’s ‘Class War’.
    But we can use a less fierce and very effective remedy than the one Marx recommended. Unless the real underlying decease is addressed, treating the symptoms only with political adjustments will not quell the masses. Fortunately, since in democracies law is not in direct cahoots with tyranny, the revolution is liable to be less violent. But the descent is growing in size for sure. It seems like the next lesson on humanity’s curriculum is that, ‘unchecked commercial greed is detrimental to community’s happiness’.

    A community cannot function without some socialism. By definition, socialism is nothing but taking away some individual freedom for the good of whole community. Even law of land is socialism. But in-here we are addressing financial socialism. Countries around the world try it in varying degrees and by different combinations. But so far most of the experiments have tried to shift the control from money to authority. USSR was an extreme example of this. This cannot work for long, because human greed has a high tendency to take over the process. The axiom, ‘the rule that rules the least is the best’ applies to any power, whether it stems from force of authority or that of wealth. A community left virtually to its own devices has the highest potential of prosperity, only proportional to its level of ideological social justice. Additionally, relatively free and prosperous atmosphere allows voices of wisdom to be heard louder, thereby enhancing positive social values.

    What we need is a way to defuse power of money on economic decision-making without blocking individual’s ability to acquire wealth, which motivates economic production. It is best to achieve this economic power diffusion with least interference from other entities, like continued manipulation by government.

    This can be achieved by limiting the number of persons any business can employ. In conjunction with this there has to be a limit to how much interest an individual can own in how many businesses.

    Let us use a hypothetical model:
    1) No business can employ more than one thousand persons.
    (Underdeveloped economies may start out with smaller numbers. The initial retardation of progress, very probable in their cases, caused by such a system, will be easily taken over soon, since much more mental resources would be applied to progress.)

    2) An individual can:
    Own one business totally (100%),
    Own the next business up to 40%,
    And then invest no more than 8% each in any number of other businesses.
    3) Non-personnel entities (businesses, organizations, governments, etc.) can invest no more than 8% in other business. A pension fund tied to one business can invest fully in its mother business, and can invest no more than 8% in any other business.

    Thus, no individual can control financial destiny of more than 2 thousand employees. The 40% control over the second business can ensure crucial immediate needs for the main business. For the rest, even if seven or more individuals/investment pools form a group to control many businesses, the high number of members required will make it unrealistic for the group to function harmoniously for long, especially beyond a generation, since pride, greed or fear in the participants will raise its head along the line.

    Such a scheme would spread usage of money to many hands, without blocking any individual from accumulating wealth.

    Such a scheme will need to be implemented gradually; say for the first five years a business above the limit can hire one employee to replace every two lost, then over the next five years one for three and so on, until at the end of a set duration (say 30 years – by which time a business would have recycled almost all of its work force) or until the limit is reached, whichever comes first. After the grace period the limit would be rigidly enforced for all business. This will allow large enterprises to down-structure gradually, and to keep disposing off excess equipment by retiring and by liquidation, with least amount of disruption to individual enterprises and to overall economy. The capital beyond the limits would seek out other promising businesses during the grace period. From the day of the deadline the investment limits would be operative.
    During the grace period the beyond limits capital will have ample time to shift gradually and methodically, since the down structuring large businesses would tend to achieve high profit potential through increased vigilance, and since other promising avenues of investment would keep opening up. The general atmosphere will be that of high hope rather than panic.

    American political philosophy has vehement opposition to socialism, because it only visualizes socialism operated by government, fearing abuse of society’s resources due to any of the combinations of inefficiency, unjust system, and unscrupulous implementation. But such a scheme, as proposed, transfers operational control to society, negating state’s potential for abuse.

    The following should be some of the results of such a scheme:

    For the community:
    • Larger portion of population would become economically comfortable, thereby enhancing creativity, resulting in higher level of overall contentment.
    • Higher appreciation for individual skills, to make businesses competitive, will become the norm. Demand will rise for exceptional skills/unique abilities, bringing wages more in line with individual employee’s value to the business. (A high value employee within a tier can make 2-10 times higher wages than an average coworker.)
    • This will reduce wastage of our most precious resource; human potential.
    • The benefits of wider spread of money will raise the standard of living of masses and reduce the number of poor.
    • Services like education and health care will be made more affordable by wider community focus and competition.
    • Government regulations and interference would decrease, raising economic efficiency.

    For individuals:
    • When there are only a handful of entities to compete with, competitors think in terms of rank, but when there are thousands of entities to compete with for a few different levels, class/status becomes the aim. After reaching a comfortable level, when it is perceived that his/her potential financial plateau has been reached, the focus of the person shifts to family and friends, and to self expression in noble aspects of life; arts, music, literature, science, social work, sports, etc.
    • The social atmosphere of a community with short status pyramid, with each stratum containing no less than a few thousand individuals, remains relatively humble and cohesive. The ultra status concept does not develop, avoiding superiority-inferiority spectrum.
    • Pride of performance will become popular, thereby increasing work satisfaction and in turn creativity and productivity.
    • Dedication to their causes on the part of individuals will rise, resulting in higher loyalty to larger collective causes, like charity efforts and the good of country.

    For the government:
    • Increased affluence would enlarge the tax base, providing more for safety, security and comfort of the nation.
    • Defused special interest lobbying would lighten its grip on legislation, thereby making the government more honest.
    • Character would receive higher focus in elections, as the impact of special interest contributions declines.
    • Reduced economic oversight would make the government that much smaller, providing room for higher efficiency.

    For the economy:
    • The number of businesses will multiply many fold, making competition broader, thereby adding quality and values, and making market-cornering much more difficult.
    The number of small/local businesses would increase many fold. The combined effect would enhance opportunities for creative energies of community, thereby increasing its total wealth.
    • Large projects would employ pyramids of businesses. Manufacturing and service businesses will be employee oriented, while suppliers and heavy equipment renters will be capital oriented.
    • The number of foreign and domestic trade businesses will grow.
    • Watch-dog companies in each category (management, labor, material supply, engineering, etc. – just like existing credit bureaus), would crop up, encouraging higher efficiencies.
    • Investment firms to accommodate the maximum 8% investment mode will flourish.
    • Companies providing special services like research and product development will become more numerous.
    • Economic swings caused by recycling of obsolete business concepts, which is an inherent character of free enterprise, would occur more continuously in smaller doses, thereby making economic swings shallow, affording stability to economy, making inflations and deflations shallow.

    A large business can produce cheaply, when in tough competition, than a cluster of small businesses. But in unrestricted free enterprise, giant businesses tend to quell down competition by mergers and absorptions. Then in complacent times wasteful lethargy and inefficiency seeps in easily. On the other hand a small business tends to remain vigilant due to closer watch of its stake holders, afforded by shorter pyramid of the organization. In some commodities the system may put us at a disadvantage for a time against giant foreign businesses. But higher creativity and innovations generated by broader participation of collective mind will override the disadvantage soon enough by improving the products, finding cheaper substitutes, moving to higher technology items, etc. The desire for profit would shift its focus from squeezing consumer to creatively adding values. Euphoric motivation growing from the new hope would make the system start bearing fruits quickly, and the pace would keep accelerating until the process is close to saturation. In less than two generations from the time the system is adopted, the transformation of the community should be awesome.

    Since autocracy can act more swiftly, man used to think that democracy has no chance of survival against it. What he forgot to consider is that governance of democracy is more in tune with the well being of all its citizens, and so it receives highly motivated support of its population, and can sustain itself against all kinds of foreign tyrannies. The results of the conflicts over the last hundred year period prove this: monarchy and dictatorship are all but dead, and communism is dying, but democracy is alive and spreading. Similarly, diffused economical power will prevail against all attacks from large foreign corporations due to massive, highly motivated, creative participation. Comparatively insignificant American colonies of merely three million people won against the then mighty British Empire, because of self respecting and fiercely independent minded citizens. Top leaders like Washington were supported by hundreds of courageous and dedicated second and third category leaders. Such a system of restrained capitalism, as addressed in here, will create a society full of upright citizens, interspersed with tens of thousands of bold and independent minded economic leaders.

    Prior to the industrial age, cultural influences used to migrate, almost exclusively by human contact, on coattails of trade, as trade requires two way trips to other lands. The story of the Venetian merchant, Marco Polo, provides a vivid example of this. Because of the much slower pace of international exchange of the period, it took more than a century for a substantial number of nations to subscribe to democracy, making it a prominent factor in the world. Today’s fast and massive commodity/information exchange all over the world is merging cultures of the world at an accelerating pace. Once the applied economic system proves its value, by rapid enhancement of prosperity and of well being of the nation, the concept would spread in the world within a generation, making the remaining disadvantage, if any, against large foreign businesses, fade into insignificance.

    Entrenched big business will resist the proposed scheme fiercely, dragging the struggle for a generation or two, until overwhelming popular consensus is achieved. It is human nature to resist change. No entity associated with life, be it a living being, a business, a system, or an idea, ever wants to compromise its existence. Two hundred plus years of unrestrained enterprise has made us affluent and a super power. But now the existing system of capitalism is getting in the way of society’s well being. Past cultures provide vivid examples of outmoded systems resisting modifications; India’s cast system, China’s Confucius inspired submissive social culture, glory aimed brutality of Rome, Sparta’s extreme militancy, and many others. The world, including the West, mesmerized by the prosperity and the conquests of the West of the last few centuries, wants to follow the western models without much doubt. Most of us change by soul-searching caused by pain. Longer the time a system has been successful, the harder it tends to resist modification. Wide spread, deep social pains of long durations result in revolts and revolutions. Higher level of objectivity takes smaller pains to change. It took two agonizing world wars for the historically belligerent nations to learn the lesson of cooperative coexistence. Let us do it with smaller amount of pain this time. Historically, effective leaders with vision have diagnosed and remedied ailments early, avoiding devastating upheavals.

    None of us has a complete understanding of prevailing realities; the system we choose to apply will require initial adjustments. And no system serves forever. As the collective human mind evolves, systems have to change. Therefore, the applied system will require periodic modifications.
  • BC
    13.6k
    Your long post covers a lot of territory; it would be a good idea to break-up your piece into several posts, maybe in two or three separate new discussions. Very long, multi-topic posts tend to attract very little response, because it hard to find the core idea.

    Capitalism is behaving the way it will behave when government's regulating role is weak. In what is called "the Gilded age" (1870s-1900, roughly) capitalists were able to operate with little regulation in a rapidly expanding economy. Many huge fortunes were made. The Gilded Age was followed by the Progressive Era, when governmental regulation on business was greatly strengthened. The Progressive Era was followed by the Great Depression (world wide) and then World War II. A boom followed WWII, and eventually (in the 1980s) regulation on business activity was loosened again.

    The most anyone can hope for (in the present circumstances) is that the operation of capitalist economies will be regulated and restrained somewhat. Capitalists generally have a strong hand, and presently they have the upper hand--which is why limited regulation is the most we can expect.

    The behavior of capitalists in the late 19th century is similar to the way Silicon Valley corporations are behaving. Whatever capitalists say -- whether it be John D. Rockefeller, Sr. (Standard Oil) in the 19th century or Garrett Camp (Uber) in 2016 -- they are in business to exploit people for their own gain. They are NEVER out performing a public service.

    The 19th century giants--Carnegie Steel, the railroads like Pennsylvania, New York Central, Illinois Central, Southern Pacific, Santa Fe, and so forth were sometimes profitable, were generally very wasteful of resources, and screwed the public in as many ways as possible.

    Walmart, Uber, Airbnb, Google, Apple, Tesla, et al "disrupt existing business models". What this amounts to is attempting to destroy previously existing businesses, replace them with their own operations, and reduce labor costs--all for the maximization of profit which flows to an already wealthy group of stockholders. In other words, screwing the public in as many ways as possible, as per usual.
  • Thorongil
    3.2k
    Holy wall of text, Batman!
  • Ashwin Poonawala
    54
    You seem to have a wide perspective on the issue of capitalistic behavior, and the effects of Govt. controls.

    I have lived in more than one economy, and even in the USA I have witnessed the degradation process caused by commercial greed. It is painful to watch. My idea of the remedy has developed in my mind over years.

    I have been adding to my write up all related issues over months. My original write up was 3 pages long, not 8. I believe, I have now included all my understanding.

    I have no experience in presentation or in lobbying. I only want to get the social evil removed to ease the pain in my heart watching conditions around me.

    It pleases me to receive comments and suggestions from informed people. Thank you. Let us a find viable solution together, and then talk to more people. I don't care whose idea does the trick.

    I firmly believe that controls on social affairs by entities other than the society itself, have ways of losing effectiveness over time, due to loosening focus, greed, or influences by outside interests. Also governments are not omniscience. They cannot understand and fix every ones else's problems. Our government produces the value of 50 cents out of each dollar it spends; and there governments in the world that produce only 10 cents worth. Governments should confine their efforts mainly to security, law and order, safety net and the top tier management of the country. Its attempts to micro manage social affairs always creates a mess. Remember, USSR tried that intensely.
  • BC
    13.6k
    Governments should confine their efforts mainly to security, law and order, safety net and the top tier management of the country. Its attempts to micro manage social affairs always creates a mess.Ashwin Poonawala

    This is a standard Libertarian view. Perhaps you are a "left-libertarian", since you are in favor of a quite limited government and interested in eliminating the baleful aspects of 'commercial greed' by which I suppose you mean 'capitalism'.

    I'm a non-authoritarian socialist. I would be quite happy to see capitalism abolished in favor of a workers' democracy. Fat chance, but I think it would be a good idea.

    I don't think the American government is quite as ineffective as you think it is. If you count all levels of government (township on up to federal) governments express much of the will of the people. For instance, the people want properly maintained water works, sewers, streets, schools, and parks. Local governments mostly pay for these, and local residents pay for the services through local taxes.
  • Ashwin Poonawala
    54
    Capitalism is essential for production. But commercialism is based on greed. Too much economic control in the hands of greed makes the society unhappy. Greed needs to be channeled, to make it work for the society, and not against it.

    Authoritarian governance is bad business. It allows the state to crush our wellbeing. More the responsible a government is to its population, more benevolent it is. Democracy is the only way to live
    Having no government will make the law of jungle rule the society, and will open the nation to foreign invasions. But a huge entity like a government should not be assigned the routine affairs of other entities. Again, USSR did that. Economic controls by all governments has made a mess. We should let the society itself apply its vitality and creativity in solving its problems, up to the practical limits. Just one law restricting the sizes of businesses can make the society run its own affairs much more effectively.

    I am not a libertarian or a conservative; I do not worry about labels. To me, what makes the society happy is the right way. Some one may come up with a better idea than mine. But the government should not have its fingers in all pies deeply. Can you imagine what would happen, if government starts deciding what medical procedures will work on which sicknesses, or how engineers should design machines and structures?

    All nations have some socialism. A society is made up many people. The voice of people should be heard loudly. Each of us have different opinions. The rules of socialism needs to be formatted with care and thought, A loose socialism would make for social injustices. But the society itself would be much more effective in running its affairs, and keep adjusting its affairs, once the base rules are formulated.
  • BC
    13.6k
    Capitalism is essential for production.Ashwin Poonawala

    Capitalism is one way to organize production and, as it happens, it is quite good at it. However, capitalism tends to externalize it's costs. When a power plant burns coal, the smoke goes up the chimney and spreads out as far as the winds carry it. That's externalizing costs. The Environmental Protection Agency was created to impose some limitations on corporations externalizing costs by dumping all their crap in the air, water, and land.

    The Soviet government -- essentially a form of state-capitalism, was even worse at externalizing costs. Just gawd awful!

    Capitalism is predicated on exploiting its workers as much as possible. Everybody gets exploited so that a few people can get rich. (You can read a summary of this in the short book, Value, Price, and Profit by Marx.) In a nut shell: Apple workers make iPhones and receive $1.50 per hour. Each worker takes 10 hours to make a phone--$15. The phones they make, however, are worth $600. Apple pays each worker $15 and sells the phone for $600 and keeps the $585 that is left over. (This is very simplified, obviously.) That's why the Chinese laborers are poor, even though they are working full time, and why Apple Corporation is sitting on something like 100 billion dollars worth of cash.

    There are other methods of arranging production. You said that every society has some socialism. I'd like a lot of socialism, such that the stockholders of companies and their stakes in the companies are dismissed, and the workers take over the corporations. (What would happen to the once rich stockholders who were now poor? They'd have to go out and look for work -- a refreshing change of pace for them, I would think.)
  • BC
    13.6k
    But commercialism is based on greed. Too much economic control in the hands of greed makes the society unhappy. Greed needs to be channeled, to make it work for the society, and not against it.Ashwin Poonawala

    I think greed is one of the basic problems that all people deal with, sooner or later. It long proceeded capitalism, and it will be around long afterward. Greed (one of the 7 deadly sins) maybe can be channeled, but I doubt it. We can try to suppress it as much as we can (not totally, for sure).

    Dorothy Day (The Catholic Worker) said that we need to make a world where it is easier to be good. We tend to make the world such that many people are forced to act like greedy rats to survive.
  • BC
    13.6k
    Authoritarian governance is badAshwin Poonawala

    I totally agree. Very bad.

    I am not a libertarian or a conservative; I do not worry about labels. To me, what makes the society happy is the right way.Ashwin Poonawala

    Fine by me, but I like labels. You still look like a libertarian to me (being libertarian is not a bad thing in itself).

    But the government should not have its fingers in all pies deeply.Ashwin Poonawala

    I insist that they wash their fingers very thoroughly before sticking them into my pie.

    Can you imagine what would happen, if government starts deciding what medical procedures will work on which sicknesses, or how engineers should design machines and structures?Ashwin Poonawala

    Well... To some extent we want the government (like the Centers for Disease Control or the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases) to be involved in the regulation of medical procedures. Somebody needs to tell doctors to stop handing out antibiotics like candy to people with head and chest colds caused by viruses. Chicken soup actually will do more for them then tetracycline or amoxicillin. (The doctor needs to say, "I don't care how much you whine, moan, and groan. You're not getting any, so get your virus-infested face out of my office. And don't come back unless you break a leg or green pus is running out of your ears." It's part of TrumpCare.)

    As a matter of fact, there are official, government standards for structures. Countries where people aren't paying attention to official structural standards have buildings fall down unexpectedly. People hate it when that happens, especially if they were in the building at the time.
  • BC
    13.6k
    The voice of people should be heard loudlyAshwin Poonawala

    Definitely, because... Vox populi, vox Deus. The voice of the people is the voice of God.

    Each of us has different opinions.Ashwin Poonawala

    They're working on that problem. Stay tuned.
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.