tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2395090220691101609.post5700402800257469880..comments2023-06-08T01:26:04.133-07:00Comments on A Fiercer Delight and a Fiercer Discontent: A Manifesto of Personal Financestanfordhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07591716618038804118noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2395090220691101609.post-80677485822600783042009-03-12T10:48:00.000-07:002009-03-12T10:48:00.000-07:00The idea of organized ownership (that a group of s...The idea of organized ownership (that a group of stock owners would get together and talk about what they wanted for the company direction) is interesting. I'm not sure how it would work with the way corporations are structured now (I could be wrong, but I think primarily the stock holder responsibility is to vote for a board of directors who then go on to make the decisions. It would be interesting to see how those elections would change, and also to see if individuals could organize enough to compete with larger firms that do most of the buying and selling). I think the problem is that somewhere (and I think that the rise of the LBO could be a part of this) corporations and their board of directors started to become more "psychopathic" when they seemingly abandoned concepts that were part of the "social contract". Things like "A rising tide lifts all boats" and "take care of the people who take care of you". Granted, there are still companies that do that, who pay living wages and have genuine concern for their workforce. Kinkos (where I used to work) used to be one of those places, but once we started to make the move from privately held to publicly, there were a lot of changes big and small that seemed to send the message that you were but a cog in a wheel. It would be interesting to see how many of the "Top 100 companies to work for" are privately held vs public. It seems like publicly traded stock allows for people to see companies, and the people who work for them as commodities, which makes them less likely to support measures that ensure worker happiness and health. As for what to do with the situation we are in now...I feel like stronger unions and more regulation around worker standards (pay, health care, ect) is the most realistic way to address it, although your idea of ownership unions is intriguing.<BR/><BR/>I also reccomend going to This American Life to listen to their three shows about the economy (although not so much about this issue as explaining why we are in the situation we are in).Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12041996881173501507noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2395090220691101609.post-65964080062531099952009-03-10T08:19:00.000-07:002009-03-10T08:19:00.000-07:00Yeah, a buddy of mine watched that film and pitche...Yeah, a buddy of mine watched that film and pitched the premise to me. Here’s the thing, though. If a corporation is a person, his/her psychology is influenced by one important detail…S/he is a slave. S/he is OWNED. This ‘person’ is supposed to (by law) have one driving purpose, to perform the wishes of her/his owners. So while most boards of directors are inbred and are not even making decisions in their share holder’s interests, a publicly traded company, even working the way it is supposed to work, will pillage the environment and oppress workers to turn bigger profits to its owners…which is US. They are not supposed to think about their larger effect IF their owners’ primary interest is prophet. If corporations are deprave (and I think they are) it is simply because they reflect our collective will. The general white collar, 401k holding public tries to off load responsibility by vesting the corporations with guilt, but they are (or at least should be) simply reflections of OUR values. <BR/><BR/>So the traditional ways of combating the maniacal corporate interest in making us money are either legislation or organizing labor (unions), as you mentioned. I support both of these things, but I am arguing that we think about the problem backwards. In addition to organizing labor, we should organize ownership and exert our will (that the corporations we own take some thought for the world around them). The corporation is only anti-social psychopath because that is what we ask of it…I would like us to think of what the world would be like if we had the ownership power to ask something else of them. By consolidating ownership in ‘advocacy instruments’ we amplify the voice for environmental and labor sanity.stanfordhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07591716618038804118noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2395090220691101609.post-74196992200752425472009-03-06T00:00:00.000-08:002009-03-06T00:00:00.000-08:00I would recommend the documentary "The Corporation...I would recommend the documentary "The Corporation". The problem I have with big business is that the mindset has changed in the corporate world, and people who make the decisions don't seem to be concerned with the effect their decisions make on the larger world. Some places are better than others, but the point that the makers of the documentary make is that if a corporation is a person (which is how it is seen by law) then it is one with a antisocial personality disorder, because they act with no regard for those around them to a disturbing degree. That's part of why I am pro-union.<BR/><BR/>I think your perspective on investment as a whole is a good one. Bubble chasing never seemed like a good idea.<BR/><BR/>maybe more thoughts when I'm more awake.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12041996881173501507noreply@blogger.com