Bypassing the RW Agenda

[ck4829]

I'm making a document listing the ways we can look at the RW Agenda, say "Forget this!", and do stuff the way WE want.

My document lists some rather unorthodox ways to do this, but here are some of the things that I'm working on right now.

How to create an area where Socialism flourished
How to have a Gay marriage
How to bypass Bush and the Environment haters
How to use Birth Control (if it becomes banned)

If you know anything please add it, I'll be adding this document in the forums and in the Demopedia.

[givemebackmycountry]

1. How to negate "Diebold style voting" (critical) n/t

[ck4829]

2. OK, I'll look it up. Thanks.

[David Briggs]

3. Owning and voting corporate stock.

Profit should be the FOURTH Priority of American Big Business.

(Priority number ONE - produce goods and services*)

(Priority number TWO - employ people**)

(Priority number THREE - cover your costs***)

(Priority number FOUR - make a profit****)

*with the greatest conservation of natural resources and least introduction of pollutants possible...

**in particular, American people, with stable or increasing wages and personal financial security...

***of accomplishing priorities One and Two...

****to be returned to the owners in the form of dividends, or to expand the business and to start new enterprises NOT to acquire the competition.

[adwon]

4. This makes no sense

Making a profit is priority one because it's the foundation your other priorities (which aren't priorities at all) sit atop. Why else do millions go into business? Altruism?

[David Briggs]

5. Changing the mindset.

If you mistakenly hold profit as though it should be the number one priority, then you:

gobble up resources because it requires less effort than conserving and replenishing them...

pollute because it is cheaper than limiting or treating your effluents...

outsource and eliminate jobs because workers are expensive to support...

acquire the competition in order to impose higher prices.

The millions who start a business (the vast majority being small businesses) are working entrepreneurs who are pursuing Priority Two upon some belief that they can meet the most rudimentary requirements of Priority One, and whose main complaint in life are the requirements of Priority Three.

[adwon]

6. Uh, no

I'll start with your statement that 'the millions who start a business...are working entrepreneurs who are pursuing Priority Two upon some belief that they can meet the most rudimentary requirements of Priority One."

Do you know anyone who goes into business as a jobs program? Seriously, that's what you claim the majority of people who start businesses are doing. This is absurd on its face.

As for your commentary on why profit shouldn't be the primary concern of running of business...it's misguided. You misunderstand the purpose of starting and running a business. Expecting the owners to self-regulate to some ideal is silly. After all, "if men were angels, then there would be no need of government."

No offense, but I really don't think you understand this subject.

[David Briggs]

7. A splendid debate!

Self regulating to an ideal is exactly the point. Business is unable to motivate itself in this regard when profit is mistakenly held to be the number one priority. Either the government must step in to regulate, or enlightened shareholders who hold Profit as Priority Four must. Everyone should agree that the latter is preferable.

And yes, my experience with business startups is overwhelmingly that someone thinks they can produce a good or perform a service and earn a personal living at it . The more successful of these startups evolve to a point where the entrepreneur is able to derive passive income from the business while their employees perform the actual work. The most successful examples are those in which the entreprenuer is able to forego the acceptance of any further passive income and merely holds a controlling equity position.

[adwon]

8. You proved my point

"And yes, my experience with business startups is overwhelmingly that someone thinks they can produce a good or perform a service and earn a personal living at it."

While self-regulation may be the ideal for some, some, like myself, aren't terribly concerned whether owners AND managers are virtuous. I'm perfectly content to let them do what they like, within the law, and tax them for the privilege of doing business. I'd prefer they concentrate on making money so that they can pay their tax bills and contribute to society. With apologies to Justice Holmes, taxes are the price of civilization.

[David Briggs]

9. In keeping with the original theme of the thread, though:

You wouldn't object to the acquisition of stock of publicly traded companies by folks who prefer that profit NOT be the number one priority of American Big Business, and who VOTE their stock to promote corporate behavior which ensures that it isn't?

This seems to me to be an idea to bypass the RW agenda in a very profound way. Perhaps the most significant way of all.

[adwon]

10. Not at all

Why should I? It's not my money.

Would it work?

Unlikely. People buy stock to make money, not to be altruistic.

[ck4829]

11. Update at:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=5143088&mesg_id=5143088