Display:
Bah. The question is always posed too narrowly: most of the left are quite happy with a scheme that concentrates the wealth in the hands of a small proportion of the worlds population just as long as they're in that billion people.

Plans for Capitalism?

  1. Global minimum living allowance, set at 75% of the maximum of the local (state-level) median income and the global median income.

  2. Global tax system to pay for it, with attendent global governance.

  3. Global free movement of people. Suddenly a whole host of problems the rich billion more or less ignore will become very important.

  4. Strong media controls to prevent out-and-out manipulation of the body politic.

What, living standards for the rich might have to drop? Since when was that a problem? Why should we have any sympathy for them?

Of course, working out how to stop that utopia being subverted and corrupted is left as an exercise for the reader. That's the nature of utopias.

by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Thu Feb 4th, 2010 at 05:07:07 AM EST
Ah, that was a nice singalong.

I was thinking of titling the post du passé faisons table rase.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Thu Feb 4th, 2010 at 05:15:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Colman:
with attendent global governance

= global government?

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Thu Feb 4th, 2010 at 05:16:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Not necessarily. I'll let the political scientists fight about that.
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Thu Feb 4th, 2010 at 05:19:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Well, as an example of a supra-national structure that can't be called a government, the EU hasn't got over member states' objections to a supra-national tax yet, and doesn't look likely to do so in the foreseeable future.
by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Thu Feb 4th, 2010 at 05:30:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Colman: Strong media controls to prevent out-and-out manipulation of the body politic.

What do you have in mind?  I know this is not what you meant, but for me "strong media controls" evokes the Chinese Communist Party, the Iranian government and, on the extreme end, North Korea.  How do you prevent whatever you envision for "strong media controls" from devolving into the likes of those?

The march of civilizations is a series of defenses that man has put up against the dread of pure existence.

by marco (cowannar at gmail punkt com) on Thu Feb 4th, 2010 at 08:18:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Attack ownership concentration and advertising.

For instance, it should not be legal to own in whole or part media that are present both in print and television. And advertisement should be prohibited on television. Among other things.

- Jake

If you only spend 20 minutes of the rest of your life on economics, go spend them here.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Thu Feb 4th, 2010 at 08:43:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Further along those lines, encourage the radical de-centralization of all production and distribution.  Break up national networks entirely.  Produce everything locally or regionally, news and entertainment and education.  People employed in creative media enterprises is a net good, heck with redundancy or efficiency.

A while ago, I posted a diary on how to fund media while prohibiting advertising - keep the ratings system, but have it direct money from a public fund to the popular media entities directly.

Ownership controls - media cannot be owned by conglomerates, and media organs cannot own each other or have any ownership stakes in each other.  Maybe even prohibit entirely the public ownership of companies - they must stay and remain the private property of individuals.

by Zwackus on Thu Feb 4th, 2010 at 10:32:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Of course, working out how to stop that utopia being subverted and corrupted is left as an exercise for the reader. That's the nature of utopias.

En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Feb 4th, 2010 at 08:46:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I have no idea.

Carefully?

It's not as if the current media environment works for the good of society either. It's the difference between a dragon thrashing around wildly and one that's being sent to destroy the kingdom by the evil wizard. Both are going to mess you up.

by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Thu Feb 4th, 2010 at 10:47:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series