Quote:
Originally Posted by Skybird
I always thought it to be a good idea to have some kind of a legally fixed relation between the lowest income of a worker at the top, and the most senior and responsible leader at the top of a company. Let there be a span of - just as an example - a factor of 25. the man on top earns 20 times as much, at maximum!...
...If this balance would be acchieved, what else could there be to wish for? This is the most dominant priority for any responsible management there could be - not this megalomaniac craving for more and more profits for those at the top.
|
And how exactly to you propose to enforce this?
Quote:
|
Say, in how many palaces can walk around at the same time? How many private jets are the one jet too much? how many Ferraris can you drive simultaneously?
|
How many big brothers does it take to make that decision?
Quote:
|
I see it excactly the opposite way, as I have repeatedly pointed out in discussions with Lance. a capitalistic market theory and a truly democratic democracy can only work as intended within relativel small community sizes. The bigger the community, the more complex it becomes, the more "unüberschaubar" (unmanagable, uncheckable, nonfunctional) it becomes, and the more corruption pushes back the original intention behodn the idea. Beyond a critical community size democracy gets turned into right it's own opposite, and free capitalistic market becomes an unfree market driven by monopolies and cartels.
|
But that is also true of governments.
Quote:
|
the corruption and degeneration of western democracies and economies for me is directly linked to gian society constructions we have formed. And that leads me to thinking that a truly dmeoicratic global society and globalised economy driven by free market ideas and constuctive capitalistic ideas, is an illusion that is impossible to work. The scaling simply is FUBAR.
|
Again, that is true of every facet of society, not just the economy. How do you propose to change it?