Welcome to the new version of European Tribune. It's just a new layout, so everything should work as before - please report bugs here.
Display:
In that scheme you'd get controlled equity risk vs uncontrolled explosive equity risk - the latter being the inevitable outcome of the current system, and Not a Good Thing.

So I wouldn't see controlled equity risk as a problem, because any scheme that controls risk is also going to lower volatility. It becomes hugely less likely that the entire economy will implode because of a bubble, and the real risk of going underwater becomes much lower for everyone.

As for the political argument - you can't immediately fix a democratic deficit by moving money around. You need to have decent representation first - as in policy influence at every level, and not just token show-voting every few years - and then you can start on the rest.

Unfortunately with the current system, even if there's an outbreak of something approaching bottom-up democracy, it's soon co-opted into the usual economic tyranny, making power redistribution politically impossible.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Tue Jun 14th, 2011 at 04:30:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Others have rated this comment as follows:

Display:

Top Diaries

130 Years Later

by Helen - Aug 2
15 comments

From the Quiet Mutiny

by Oui - Aug 6
22 comments

Whistling in the wind...

by Frank Schnittger - Jul 17
147 comments

Always Read the Footnotes

by Cat - Aug 2
14 comments

Occasional Series