Forum Post: Utilitarian Capitalism: An Appeal To Rationalism
Posted 12 years ago on Oct. 21, 2011, 9:01 a.m. EST by Zteacher
(30)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
The Occupy Wall Street movement is essentially a warning to those who want to concentrate world economic power in the hands of a few. This movement is rising from the mounting frustrations and fear that an increasing percentage of people have what appears to be a bleak future, having an ever decreasing ability to control their destiny. Discontent of this nature leads to movements such as this, and if not remedied by political leadership, will result in escalating civil unrest and distrust in the establishment by the masses. What has become increasingly evident is that the existing economic system is broken. What needs to occur is a development of a new and improved economic system that will create jobs, continue to support businesses, and more equitably distribute prosperity to more than just the wealthiest one percent of the population. One important aspect of this movement is to present new solutions to the current economic situation and jobs crisis. In order to address these issues, there is going to have to be a significant shift in economic thought. Ideas about what are fair and what is just is going to have to be revaluated. My proposal is for a new financial system in which businesses and banks alike will not be valued by their profit alone, but also by their inherent responsibility to support the social well being of our country. The plan is a government backed multilayered incentive directed at corporate leaders that will force them to weigh profits equally with job retention, job creation, and other social initiatives. I have titled this new plan, Utilitarian Capitalism. If you are interested in knowing more, click the following link. https://viewer.zoho.com/docs/bdbPRg
You need to take a closer look at this plan. This system will ultimately limit the power of major corporations. Here is another component of my paper. Another argument may be that this system will limit the growth of major corporations. Even if a corporation uses it resources to create as many jobs as possible, it will eventually reach a saturation point in which its growth potential will become very limited. Is this a bad thing? Within the United States, it’s been generally agreed upon that its’ not in the country’s best interest for government to get too big. This is essentially a correct statement. Even though government within a democratic system should be answerable to the people, often times the bureaucracy is typically overwhelming and too restrictive. Take for example Greece. It has a big government that has failed due to overspending. When applying the same principle to big corporations, the consumer should share the power since they choose the products and services to buy. However, this is not the case when you consider that some of these companies have become virtual monopolies. In even more cases, a limited number of corporations form an oligopoly, holding all the power within certain important industries. It’s not in the consumer’s best interest to have a few dominant corporations that in effect establish price controls. The Utilitarian Capitalist system essentially downsizes the federal government by delegating some of its traditional services to the private sector while government regulations will prevent a single or a small group of corporations from gaining too much power in one industry. This is essentially a Ying vs. Yang equilibrium that will greatly benefit society.
The plan is a government backed multilayered incentive directed at corporate leaders that will force them to weigh profits equally with job retention, job creation, and other social initiatives. The first segment of this new plan would be an employment bonus for all small, medium and large businesses that will be allocated depending on how many domestic jobs are created and maintained by that business. Since it is also important that these jobs provide a living wage for employees, it would be advisable to tie salaries to something similar to the federal wage rates for specific job classifications. This would help to ensure that employers would not undercut salaries as a means to inflate the number of employees by hiring larger numbers of employees at lower salary rates. The system that I have derived, takes this factor into account. The system will be based upon point values. Each job title will have a point value allocated to it depending on the jobs value to the company and its pay scale. An example, though certainly not set in stone, is as follows. Unskilled and skilled workers will be worth one to four points within the system, based on seniority and their skill set. Pilots and information technology specialist will be worth four to six points. Financial analysts and bankers will be worth 5 to 7 points. Doctors, scientists, and engineers will be worth seven to ten points. Of course, not all job titles are represented within this example. Examples regarding how employment bonuses can be distributed are as follows. A small business having a total employee point value of 20 will result in a small business earning an extra $14,000 per month. A total point value of 1,200 will earn a small medium sized business $378,000 per month, 28,000 points will earn a company $778,000 thousand per month, 358,000 points will earn a company about $50 million per month. A key factor for such a plan is how to pay for and sustain these financial incentives. Government regulations would be required to address the remaining elements of the plan.
The second part of the plan would be to incorporate federal regulations that would determine how much profit a business must achieve in order to qualify for the employment bonus. This profit target will vary from 50% of the employment bonus to 100% of the bonus value. For example, if a small business has an employee value of 20 points, they would qualify for a $14,000 per month employment bonus. A small business of that scale would have to at least make 50% of the bonus’s total worth in order to attain it. Therefore that business would have to make at least $7,000 per month to qualify for the whole bonus, or there would be a deduction to the bonus. Small businesses would have target goals from 50% to 60% of the bonus. Medium sized businesses to relatively large businesses will have goals from 70% to 90%. Of course, the major banks and corporations will have to make 100% of the bonus’s value. This type of system will be very helpful for start up businesses, since these kinds of bonuses could dramatically increase their profits and growth potential.
The final segment of the plan is designed to force leaders of major banks and corporations to weigh profit equally with social initiatives. Small and medium sized businesses would be exempt from this profit regulation, the concern being growth rather then social initiative. In this plan, a major corporation cannot keep earned profit that goes beyond the employment bonus by a multiple of three or six, depending on size of the business. Keep in mind that this taxed profit will only be implemented after the corporation’s expenses have been calculated. As an example, if a major corporation has an employment point value of 358,000, their bonus would equal approximately $50.6 million per month (see table). A business of this size could keep a profit equal to three times its employee bonus which would equate to over a $150 million. When added to the employee bonus, they make over $200 million in total monthly profit. So if a business is now making a billion per month, it would essentially be taxed $800 million of its profit. If this plan was adopted globally, corporate executives could still increase profits through this system, keeping investors interested in supporting such companies. In the last example, the company had a point value of 358,000. The only way that the company could raise profits would be to find a way to employ more people. The more people they employ, the more profits they can keep. A corporate executive will look at their monthly profits and determine how much profit they will loose through the tax regulations. They will have two options. They can either use the excess profit to create jobs which will result in more profit or they can allow the government to take the entire amount.
sounds good. i will hard block ANY form of oligarchy and that includes capitalism. we need real democracy. so the title makes me hard block. but the general idea sounds like some ideas on how to have a free market system inside of DEMOCRACY. I think you'd get a lot more traction from me and others if you would relabel this "free market democracy." Capitalism is just another form of oligarchy.
Lol. Well, I understand. Right now I’m not too concerned with the title, though I’ve been getting a lot of comments regarding my choice. However, I have to say that Capitalism doesn’t have to be such a bad word. There is nothing wrong with someone getting rich, as long as their efforts bring the rest of society a long for the ride. Right now Capitalism is like an expensive roller coaster. Only 1 kid can afford it, leaving 99 discontented children grumbling about how unfair the situation is, leading to a terrible dislike for the ride. If we can make the system more inclusive, everyone can enjoy that ride.
by definition, capitalism is oligarchy. oligarchy and democracy are mutually exclusive. So it is a "bad" word.
Don’t take this the wrong way. But I’m curious how far you think you are going to get with most Americans if you say that Capitalism is a bad word? I can understand why you have come to dislike the word, but in order to win over the general public, you cant go around saying Capitalism is a bad word. You may believe that to be the truth, and desperately want the world to understand the truth from your perspective, but that’s just not the way people are going to see it. Change comes in small increments, not with broad swipes.
i don't agree, i think its time for the american public to grow up and quit being ignorany opinionated asshats and bother to learn the truth. either this is an information revolution centered in truth or it will fail in any case. I am simply reporting the simple FACTS of political science. Capitalism is a form of oligarchy, and a form of oligarchy which is entirely theoretical- it has never existed. Thats quite a mindblower for most people- but that is not my problem.
people are going to see it from my perspective sooner or later, lets hope sooner because otherwise civilization will collapse and pretty much everyone will die.
Prostitution is a great example of utilitarianism.
Did you read the paper, or are you just dishing out meaningless nonsense?
I'm talking about utilitarianism in general. Your specific use of the word could mean something different, but then, why would you use that word.
To answer your question, no, I didn't read your paper.
Originally I had titled the new system Progressive Capitalism, but there are many ideas that have that label. Now, Utilitarianism is a very broad philosophy, and I don’t agree with everything within it. However, one of its guiding principles is to make decisions that spread as much prosperity as possible as extensively as possible. The system that I came up with has this goal in mind, therefore I chose that label. However, it’s not as if I have an attachment to the name. You may find some of the ideas within it different from what you would expect, given its title.
I'm reading through your paper as I write this, so would you mind reading through my 1-page Strategically Weighted Policies, Organizational Operating Structures, & Tactical Investment Procedures at http://getsatisfaction.com/americanselect/topics/on_strategically_weighted_policies_organizational_operating_structures_tactical_investment_procedures-448eo as it might applied under Utilitarian Capitalism. I lead a Group of 19 Members at http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/StrategicInternationalSystems/ committed to implementing this plan so I thought we might be able to join forces, agreed?
Right now I'm living in Vietnam, and it's really late right now. But I will read all of your material as soon as I'm finished with my work in the morning. But I'm always interested in the exchange of ideas, so the answer will probably be yes. Talk to you soon.
Thanks, after having read through paper, I think we can apply your "scoring system" to how people democratically agree-upon their Levels of Occupational & Generational Experience in their 48 Business Investment Groups as cited in Steps 3 & 4 of our group's plan.
I am highly sympathetic to this idea. One of my biggest complaints about the wealth gap in America is that it is a poor structure to maximize utility. In fact the rich gain almost no happiness from amassed wealth beyond a certain point, but continue to accumulate it and hoard it, which actually allows for substantial unhappiness for poorer Americans. This seemingly irrational behavior is perpetuated, in large part because the (now debunked) assumption that maximizing wealth will increase utility ad infinitum, is never challenged.
I completely understand your frustration in this matter. The fact that there are so many underprivileged Americans within a system that has such extensive financial resources clearly demonstrates the failures of capitalism within its current form. Utilitarian Capitalism doesn’t seek to prevent upward mobility, it seeks to make sure that prosperity is spread as extensively as possible within reason.
Bumping pertinent discussion. Dialog about solutions is constructive, especially when we don't all agree.
New ideas will pave the way to new solutions. The ideas and concepts of the past no longer work within the context of this ever changing global environment.
Democracy, not corporatocracy. Let's consider building a common voice through consensus on these concepts by establishing a grass roots, purple finger vote within Occupy.
Read the entire paper before passing this as a type of Corporatist system.
The plan is a government backed multilayered incentive directed at corporate leaders that will force them to weigh profits equally with job retention, job creation, and other social initiatives. The first segment of this new plan would be an employment bonus for all small, medium and large businesses that will be allocated depending on how many domestic jobs are created and maintained by that business. Since it is also important that these jobs provide a living wage for employees, it would be advisable to tie salaries to something similar to the federal wage rates for specific job classifications. This would help to ensure that employers would not undercut salaries as a means to inflate the number of employees by hiring larger numbers of employees at lower salary rates. The system that I have derived, takes this factor into account. The system will be based upon point values. Each job title will have a point value allocated to it depending on the jobs value to the company and its pay scale. An example, though certainly not set in stone, is as follows. Unskilled and skilled workers will be worth one to four points within the system, based on seniority and their skill set. Pilots and information technology specialist will be worth four to six points. Financial analysts and bankers will be worth 5 to 7 points. Doctors, scientists, and engineers will be worth seven to ten points. Of course, not all job titles are represented within this example. Examples regarding how employment bonuses can be distributed are as follows. A small business having a total employee point value of 20 will result in a small business earning an extra $14,000 per month. A total point value of 1,200 will earn a small medium sized business $378,000 per month, 28,000 points will earn a company $778,000 thousand per month, 358,000 points will earn a company about $50 million per month. A key factor for such a plan is how to pay for and sustain these financial incentives. Government regulations would be required to address the remaining elements of the plan.
The second part of the plan would be to incorporate federal regulations that would determine how much profit a business must achieve in order to qualify for the employment bonus. This profit target will vary from 50% of the employment bonus to 100% of the bonus value. For example, if a small business has an employee value of 20 points, they would qualify for a $14,000 per month employment bonus. A small business of that scale would have to at least make 50% of the bonus’s total worth in order to attain it. Therefore that business would have to make at least $7,000 per month to qualify for the whole bonus, or there would be a deduction to the bonus. Small businesses would have target goals from 50% to 60% of the bonus. Medium sized businesses to relatively large businesses will have goals from 70% to 90%. Of course, the major banks and corporations will have to make 100% of the bonus’s value. This type of system will be very helpful for start up businesses, since these kinds of bonuses could dramatically increase their profits and growth potential.
The final segment of the plan is designed to force leaders of major banks and corporations to weigh profit equally with social initiatives. Small and medium sized businesses would be exempt from this profit regulation, the concern being growth rather then social initiative. In this plan, a major corporation cannot keep earned profit that goes beyond the employment bonus by a multiple of three or six, depending on size of the business. Keep in mind that this taxed profit will only be implemented after the corporation’s expenses have been calculated. As an example, if a major corporation has an employment point value of 358,000, their bonus would equal approximately $50.6 million per month (see table). A business of this size could keep a profit equal to three times its employee bonus which would equate to over a $150 million. When added to the employee bonus, they make over $200 million in total monthly profit. So if a business is now making a billion per month, it would essentially be taxed $800 million of its profit. If this plan was adopted globally, corporate executives could still increase profits through this system, keeping investors interested in supporting such companies. In the last example, the company had a point value of 358,000. The only way that the company could raise profits would be to find a way to employ more people. The more people they employ, the more profits they can keep. A corporate executive will look at their monthly profits and determine how much profit they will loose through the tax regulations. They will have two options. They can either use the excess profit to create jobs which will result in more profit or they can allow the government to take the entire amount.
For more information, click the link. https://viewer.zoho.com/docs/bdbPRg
Well, I suppose I can't blame you for that. But if you are interested in knowing what it's all about, you don’t necessarily need to click the link. Just Google it instead, or visit Zoho directly. Even in it's condensed form, the plan was a bit too long to post it on this forum.
Sounds great but I won't click any links posted here.
Well, I suppose I can't blame you for that. But if you are interested in knowing what it's all about, you don’t necessarily need to click the link. Just Google it instead, or visit Zoho directly. Even in it's condensed form, the plan was a bit too long to post it on this forum.