3 ms·

Why are we talking about the rules of how the economy operates in the US? That is not and should not be governed by meritocracy, it should (and is) governed by

Why are we talking about the rules of how the economy operates in the US? That is not and should not be governed by meritocracy, it should (and is) governed by laws, which are decided democratically. Jeff Bezos cannot (or should not) unilaterally decide how corporate law works. He has a vote in who governs, legislates, and judicates, just like you have a vote in who governs, legislates, and judicates, and that's it. This is what I mean when I say "you're getting stuck on the word 'merit'". I believe it's okay that not everyone gets a say in how Amazon is run. Everyone does get a say in the things Amazon is allowed to do in the US economy. Those are different things, though it seems you're conflating them.

mahogany 5y ago
First, the two are inextricably linked and always have been. It has been demonstrated time and time again that capital begets political power, so these people are dictating the rules as well. Plus it's naive to think that those that simply "run the economy" (your language) are not affecting everyone else's lives in our society. But even ignoring this point and going back to an idealized world, maybe I'm misunderstanding you -- can you spell out what you mean by "guide the economy" or making decisions about the economy?
- TameAntelope 5y ago
  Simply the 10% who own 89% of stocks influence the economy by exerting influence over those organizations they proportionately own. A company's shareholders don't get explicit control over the entire economy or anything so absolute, they simply speak with whatever control they have over the private organizations that then, themselves, indirectly influence the economy. I don't think 10% of America should literally have extra voting power in elections, and despite your allusion, they do not. No matter how much you decry "money has influence in elections" people are free, in a democracy (as implemented by the US), to vote how they want. Any argument around, "People get manipulated" is a non-starter; as long as nobody is literally casting their ballots for them, they are free to choose to harm themselves. It's stupid of them[1], but that's democracy for you. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlo_M._Cipolla#/media/File:Cipolla-matrix.png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlo_M._Cipolla#/media/File:C...

mahogany 5y ago

First, the two are inextricably linked and always have been. It has been demonstrated time and time again that capital begets political power, so these people are dictating the rules as well. Plus it's naive to think that those that simply "run the economy" (your language) are not affecting everyone else's lives in our society. But even ignoring this point and going back to an idealized world, maybe I'm misunderstanding you -- can you spell out what you mean by "guide the economy" or making decisions about the economy?

TameAntelope 5y ago
Simply the 10% who own 89% of stocks influence the economy by exerting influence over those organizations they proportionately own. A company's shareholders don't get explicit control over the entire economy or anything so absolute, they simply speak with whatever control they have over the private organizations that then, themselves, indirectly influence the economy. I don't think 10% of America should literally have extra voting power in elections, and despite your allusion, they do not. No matter how much you decry "money has influence in elections" people are free, in a democracy (as implemented by the US), to vote how they want. Any argument around, "People get manipulated" is a non-starter; as long as nobody is literally casting their ballots for them, they are free to choose to harm themselves. It's stupid of them[1], but that's democracy for you. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlo_M._Cipolla#/media/File:Cipolla-matrix.png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlo_M._Cipolla#/media/File:C...