If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Re-modelling the economy...
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
Is there any reason why all private companies couldn't theoretically be brought under government ownership yet continue to run themselves as they do now, except with profits being channelled by the government to the rest of society?? For example, half of a multinational's net profit being re-distributed into public services and the general public's pocket. Not only would this rid us of poverty and create an extremely affluent society, but profits would increase too.
Personally, I think it sounds good in theory - although I concede there could be a problem with capital flight.
Personally, I think it sounds good in theory - although I concede there could be a problem with capital flight.
0
Comments
What i've been thinking goes beyond tax - it's a kind of socialist capitalism. Such high tax would cause capital flight, so business would require to be brough under direct control of government. I've wondered if complete withdrawal from the global economy would be a good idea - if government controlled business and directed what it produced according to the needs of an effectively self-efficient society, then the value of money could surely be increased, say, five-fold?
scary.
your premmusing that people in government have some kind of knowledge or talent that i have never seen in my lifetime.
when it comes to american politics only people with money or cennections get to be in charge ...that seems to be the only qualification needed.
here in the uk we do fair a little better but ...so many buts.
i have recently put money into a big bizz afair and i would seriously hate the government to have eeven more control over my life than they already have.
government for me can mostly ...piss off.
And theyll do it as much as they like until forcibly dragged out and removed from power.
I'm talking about semi-independent business creating profits which are then fully redistributed by government, and fixed prices allowing a high fixed value for currency. Not government-controls-all.
a valid point.
IMHO if all society were to be placed under direct governmental control, the resulting situation would be akin to that of orwell's vision of the future in 1984, with the population kept in line with a perpetual state of marshal law
We would expect this post from someone who loves the USA.
Then again, a Capitalist society will also stagnate and collapse. As far as I can see, we seem stuck in a cycle between three systems, each taking over when the other one inevitably falls in upon itself through ignorance. We need a blance between all three, but neither is willing to admit they are wrong.
Apart from it meaning that a few currently powerful people would have to take BIG pay cuts, that is.
And those are the people who have the power to change things. So, nothing happens.
you mean communist state? :yeees:
I mean no state. I don't think following fiction is a good way for anyone to behave.
A commuist state, like all states is centrist in it's approach and operation. I suggest taking the profits of the "nation" and dividing the total up evenly amongst the shareholders.
Bye bye national debt, bye bye mortgages and loans, bye bye taxation, bye bye money, in fact, for the most part.
the whole "treat everybody equally" position is a very romantic notion but IMO it's never going to be possible, there's always going to be someone who gets ideas above their station and those who will find away to get more then their fair share and cause friction within the population
I agree. We are also never going to beat all disease. So let's just roll over, putour coats over our heads and pray for death then.
Which is why, if you know this, you realise that everyone at "the top" must be sub-human scum in order to be there in the first place.
Law of requisite variety means that if you have one more behaviour than I do (murder, fraud, whatever) than you will control the system given enough time.
Therefore, over time the people at the top must be the ones with the most behavioural opions i.e. sociopaths. The less morality you have, the further you go.
Capitalism is not the only solution in a social arena; it causes waste, surplus goods, oppressive forces like the police and military, crime and war. It is designed to benefit the few with enough money to pay the highest price. The Marxist theory discusses a world without money where everyone has the dignity of food, water, shelter and occupation.
There is intelligent support for a world where material is produced for sustainable consumption and not market forces. Forces like NAFTA and the WTO that push goods onto a market that can barely support the sale of these goods that are created by the country where the market is based.
For example, I am no economist, but from what I have researched if Mexicans want to work in/with America, then America insists that Mexico buys produce that it has plenty of.
There was a time when I think America had a glut of watermelons. So, thanks to NAFTA Mexico was forced to buy them. This then ruined prices for the Mexican farmers who could not sell their produce and therefore could not pay back loans or mortgages and so lost their homes and livelihood.
Everything is connected. We should begin to look away from the microcosm of nationality and patriotism, and engineer the issues of society as a world, not one country at a time.
Everybody is human until we are divided into people, divide and rule is driving the capitalist agenda. Hierarchical leadership patterns are void and failing, and cronyism is surfacing in the political schedule.
Sorry for rambling but it got me thinking :chin:
Sort of like a nationalisation-privatisation, everyone has one share in BT, their electricity company, gas company, water company, schools, NHS etc. Nothing could happen without the majority consent of the people who actually use the service. Profits are divided equally between the general public and workforce in the above proportions - the workforce maintains a profit incentive and society benefits from these profits. Consumers can also benefit through competition between companies, certainly for the utilities, as they do now if you let consumers switch from one electricity company to another but the profits are still shared out amongst the public. Efficiency would be encouraged as consumers would act as shareholders and force firms to be efficient.