Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
Good. I see we really don't disagree, and I probably should've seen that sooner.

I'm not as confident as you about what would result from various corporate board reforms/revolutions, and think it's best to say "we don't know" the effects would be of reforming corporate boards in various ways.

My thinking, any of this sort of thinking really, assumes an environment where corporations and the wealthy would not be allowed to corrupt democracy with money and similar things. In that non-corrupted dream context, the people we elect to handle overall community interests are ideal people to have as insiders voting those interests on corporate boards. We might even want to give them the majority of 'votes'. But everything decided preliminarily has to be tentative, and communities and nations should be expected to learn from experience and keep modifying until they get things still imperfect but as good as probably possible and way the hell better than the current anti-social madness.

fairleft

by fairleft (fairleftatyahoodotcom) on Tue May 25th, 2010 at 02:42:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Others have rated this comment as follows:

JakeS 4

Display:

Occasional Series