@wutti Seit dem Siegeszug von #shareholdercapitalism haben wir keine Unternehmer mehr in den Führungsetagen, nur noch Statthalter institutionalisierter Habgier. Das Unternehmen an sich hat nur noch einen Wert, insofern man es verhökern kann. Mitarbeitende sind nur noch Kosten auf zwei Beinen. Hör dir unseren BlackRock-Kanzler doch an.

Wir brauchen wieder Unternehmer und Führungskräfte, die diesen Namen auch verdienen. Dann würde einiges besser laufen in diesem Land.

I saw a meme post on Facebook suggesting that no one earns a billion dollars except by wage theft, that no one works a billion times harder than other hardworking people who make ordinary wages. That seems a fair claim. I wrote this next paragraph in response, kind of as a spur of the moment thought, but it's something I want to spend more time thinking about:

I used to think that one solution to this was the practice of asking CEOs to not make more than some fixed multiple of their lowest-paid employee. But now I see the goal is to not employ anyone either. A lot of the benefits for corporations are justified on the idea that they employ people, so helping them helps people. Now that this assumption is on a path to being increasingly violated, we need to reconsider our special treatment of corporations as well.

#ai #corporations #billionaires #NoBilliionaires #LateStageCapitalism #ShareholderCapitalism #RegulatoryCapture #society #ethics #unemployment #automation #law #CapitalGains #CapitalGainsTax #WealthTax #inequality #fascism #feudalism #oligarchy

Revised Commercial Law aims to align shareholder and company interests, facing opposition from business community amid changing perceptions of corporate ownership and shareholder capitalism
#YonhapInfomax #RevisedCommercialLaw #ShareholderCapitalism #CorporateGovernance #BusinessOpposition #DemocraticTransition #Economics #FinancialMarkets #Banking #Securities #Bonds #StockMarket
https://en.infomaxai.com/news/articleView.html?idxno=56939
[Nam Seung-pyo's Sophistry] Why the Revised Commercial Law Reminds Me of 30 Years Ago

Revised Commercial Law aims to align shareholder and company interests, facing opposition from business community amid changing perceptions of corporate ownership and shareholder capitalism

Yonhap Infomax

#Economics

A fitting and compelling swansong for #ShareholderCapitalism, as well as a dismantling of #StakeholderCapitalism by #CoryDoctorow (@pluralistic .)

👉 I strongly recommend using the essay formatted, long version in сonnection with a #ScreenReader.👈

https://mamot.fr/@pluralistic/113158693528976262

Cory Doctorow (@[email protected])

Attached: 1 image Today's threads (a thread) Inside: There's no such thing as "shareholder supremacy"; and more! Archived at: https://pluralistic.net/2024/09/18/falsifiability/ #Pluralistic 1/

La Quadrature du Net - Mastodon - Media Fédéré

@kentpitman #ShareholderCapitalism is a problem, but stakeholder #capitalism isn't the answer. One problem is that the stakeholder theory violates democratic principles. The democratic principle is that the people governed in or by an organization should have positive decision-making control rights over the organization. The workers are the ones that are governed by management not all stakeholders. Stakeholder control is a power grab for management. See: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3584245

@bicmay

@bicmay

Our capitalist plutocrats accord myopic attention to the current day's stock price and the coming quarterly bottom line. The long term doesn't interest them because companies owe their full and directed allegiance to shareholders, even though those shareholders might cash out at any moment. So the cost of bad decisions is, you might say, an internal externality, or perhaps a temporal externality, thrust upon tomorrow's stockholders by today's, who try to cash out before prices dive.

This article is an example of that, but hardly an isolated one.

Capitalists see robustness, safety, redundancy, stability, jobs, work/life balance, equitable pay, sustainability, public health, the environment, and even human rights as superfluous concerns, mere sources of economic inefficiency to be hammered out if they seem to impinge on profit, their sole concern. Much of the conservative agenda is about this kind of sociopathy.

Switching to stakeholder capitalism instead of shareholder capitalism would help. It would bring more voices into the discussion. Representation matters.

#capitalism #CashingOut #externalites #ShareholderCapitalism #StakeholderCapitalism #priorities #power #electricity #LateStageCapitilism #sustainability

Fiduciary Duty vs the Three Laws of Robotics
(why coporations are "legal sociopaths")
https://netsettlement.blogspot.com/2009/02/fiduciary-duty-vs-three-laws-of-robotics.html

Losing the War in a Quiet Room
(overview of shareholder vs stakeholder theory)
https://netsettlement.blogspot.com/2012/01/losing-war-in-quiet-room.html

Fiduciary Duty vs. The Three Laws of Robotics

An essay on how rules of Shareholder Capitalism veritably require that corporations, so-called "legal people", behave like "legal sociopaths".

@twrling

Economics is a system for distributed management of societal priorities. If the economics do not favor a system that coordinates essential information about an existential threat to humanity, it's worth considering whether the priority management system itself is doing its job of helping to properly prioritize what society needs.

Seeing societies be told that we must prioritize personal enrichment of the rich, rather than survival of the species "because the budget demands it", is very troubling.

Budgets are tools. Our monetary system is a tool. It is critical to regularly ask whether tools are functioning on our behalf as a society, or whether, for example, tuning is required.

Taxes are one way we tune things. When people disapprove of taxation per se, without acknowledging that varying taxation has differential effects on the way power is distributed in our society, favoring some groups over others, they may just saying that they favor the power structure status quo, or they like the way lower taxes favors their own group.

Right now, society's power structures are favoring those who are killing the planet. Perhaps some reshaping is in order. Listening to the whining of those who are leading the charge toward the climate cliff, hearing about their fears of being disempowered, may not be our best choice.

Moving to stakeholder capitalism from shareholder capitalism is another approach.

I am not here advocating any specific action, just review of cause and effect. Something needs to be done, and that something is not passive inaction and acquiesce to negative societal outcomes for the sake of ever more decadent profit flowing to the already lavishly rich.

Further enriching the rich is sometimes tenuously justified on a theory that their wealth is proof that they have done well by society and so these people specifically should be trusted to do more. But is that in fact what's in play here?

- - - - -

Further reading:

Tax Policy and the Dewey Decimal System
https://netsettlement.blogspot.com/2009/02/tax-policy-and-dewey-decimal-system.html

Losing the War in a Quiet Room (on shareholder vs stakeholder capitalism)
https://netsettlement.blogspot.com/2012/01/losing-war-in-quiet-room.html

#economics #taxation #capitalism #LateStageCapitalism #priorities #society #StakeholderCapitalism #ShareholderCapitalism #climate #collapse

Tax Policy and the Dewey Decimal System

A look at how to structure tax policy through an unusual lens: how the Dewey Decimal System used by libraries is arranged.

@RichardAshwell @LordCaramac @MattMastodon @breadandcircuses

I doubt there can be a "properly modeled" sense of human psychology in the face of mass famine in parts of the world unused to that.

I have to believe this will follow lines like climate science did where researchers/modelers are of the opinion that "conservative" means you don't model anything you just have a hunch about and you only include effects you can prove.

Consistently for climate scientists this kind of conservatism has favored preserving individual careers at the expense of saying just how badly these things can go, and I expect the same in these other fields.

So pardon me if I don't rely on proper modeling and rely instead on my own sense of how ugly things can quickly get with the wrong set of circumstances, as is happening with the fall of democracy. What we imagine to be stable systems have fewer safeguards than we imagine and perform very badly when ideal conditions are not met.

This is partly a direct consequence of the fact that capitalism cannot see beyond the end of its nose. I have many times observed in recent years that many celebrated gains use simplistic metrics to trade away safety, robustness, redundancy, environment/ecology, and social justice on a theory that price optimization is the only goal.

In effect, the system rewards fragility and cruelty and other ills if it yields short term gains because it assumes one can always cash out and move on to other things if that strategy fails, and there is no accountability for system-wide fragility such as we saw in covid, where masks, lysol, toilet paper, vaccines, etc. were in short supply when capitalism promises to do so much better than socialism by closing its eyes to obvious issues and assuming profit will win out.

Capitalism not only doesn't value safety and robustness, seeing any robustness against issues that haven't occurred recently as economic inefficiencies to remove, but it also does not value completeness. Profit is maximized by figuring out who it's economical to serve and knowing who is too expensive to serve.

I expect this will be a bad model for food shortage during famine. I see us shrugging off such issues from a government planning point if view, preferring to "leave it to markets". And I don't see how markets will do more than focus on price gouging, shich will lead to civil unrest if the missing item is an essential like food or water.

Once the public realizes that capitalism has no plan for regular people, a tipping point is reached where panic sets in and all processes start to be chaotic. Even small perturbations in normal will upset supply chains, which are ridiculously full of single point of failure and reliance on supplies from distant locations as if transport was free and nations don't ever shut borders out if either paranoia or spite or trade imbalance leverage or other factors.

When something like wheat fails, will meager yields be merrily shipped to foreign lands or held for domestic use? Will multinats be able to continue to assert dominance or remote ownership across national borders? Will militaries be invoked? By whom against whom? How does one "model" these questions?

I didn't read the reports you cite but unless you tell me what is modeled is a very stark and honest view of what capitalism, selfishness, and nationalism really does from a qualitative modeling standpoint, not from an extrapolation of past effects in questionably similar situations, I don't see how to trust it. I expect someone would lose their job or peer review respect if they modeled these things as likely or even possible. Better to rely on things for which there is data. But that will not model "black swan" events.

I've also not fully read all of Taleb's efforts in the antifragile space, but my impression is he says don't bother modeling rare events you don't know the probability of, and instead build structures robust against chaos. We've not done that.

We're entering a new space we have not experienced where externalities aren't being tracked but do finally matter in ways i personally doubt any formal modeling will get right. They'll expect "getting it right" to be a conversation that can gradually converge over time in academic timescales we no longer have.

It matters to see potential severity more than it matters to be right on detail, like you'd model a war. Capitalism hates such planning because they think it overspends and cuts into quarterly profit.

https://netsettlement.blogspot.com/2019/09/losing-ground-in-environment.html

#capitalism #climate #collapse #modeling #society #ShareholderCapitalism #ShareholderCapitalism

Losing Ground in the Environment

Essay on how we can't still see the world as an infinite resource. Things are interconnected and finite, so we need a fresh mindset when planning.

The wretched state of Thames Water is one of the best arguments for public ownership we have

Water privatisation in England and Wales has achieved just one thing: the enrichment of executives and overseas shareholders, says Mathew Lawrence of the thinktank Common Wealth

The Guardian

“Ultimately every quarter the executives at Google meet the board and they need to be reporting up into the right projections on growth and revenue.

Those are the key objectives of shareholder capitalism.

If Sundar [Pichai, Google CEO] went to the board and said:

“Morally we need to leave $10bn on the table. Let Microsoft have this contract,” he’d be fired in an instant.”

- Meredith Whittaker, @signalapp CEO

https://amp-theguardian-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/amp.theguardian.com/technology/2023/jun/11/signals-meredith-whittaker-these-are-the-people-who-could-actually-pause-ai-if-they-wanted-to

#moralism #shareholdercapitalism #shareholderprimacy

Signal’s Meredith Whittaker: ‘These are the people who could actually pause AI if they wanted to’

The Guardian