( Kapital-i, in 'I, myself', now spels Il as in isle or aisle.
Leter y spels ryd for reed or read and partys for parties.
Leter w spels swn for soon. )
Links to sektions:
The term 'konstitutional' implIs that the natur of an ekonomy be desIded, in a parlimentary maner, by agryment. That is to say not by war, sivil war, revolution or any tradition of mastery and servitud.
Kapitalism and socialism both klaim'd to be fairer ways of kondukting ekonomik relations.
Liberal ekonomiks klaim'd privat enterpris in a fry market anser'd the wishes of the
pepl as konsumers. Socialism klaim'd that kapitalism subverted the stait with privat
monopolys that diktated the distribution of ernings.
Kapitalism led to plutokrasy. But stait socialism led to burokrasy.
Many socialists belyv'd the ekonomy wud be beter run by oficials than bisnes-men. But ther is an ancient saying that no oficial ever put his job on the lIn for the publik interest. It is evident that a stait monopoly only taks ekonomik diktatorship to its korupt extryms. Stait socialism was an unlerning of the leson in kompetition taut by Adam Smith.
Ther is a story som-wer in 'The Gulag Archipelago' about som-uon hw broker'd a dyl, that wud hav benefited both sIds, being put away for kapitalist aktivitys. If individual initiativ is teroris'd out of a nation, to be left to 'the greit tycher', it is not surprising that mor tolerant kuntrys get ahed.
This is the wyknes of Shaw's 'The Intelligent Womans Guide To Socialism And Capitalism.' He sys an esentialy statik sosiety smwthly run by oficials. He konsiders individuals hw ryly chanj things to be rer enuf not to unduly afekt the infrastruktur uons fuly nationalis'd. Ther is no plas in his system for a dynamik market ekonomy. Stait socialism was often nostaljia for a rijidly hierarkik sosiety, in wich every-uon nw ther plas.
Stalin's banquets during the fors'd kolektivisation famin, Milovan Djilas on 'The New Class', the stedy bild-up of evidens on koruption from other persekuted rIters in Ystern Europ and the Soviet empIr ar not al.
Ten yers befor the twenty-strong European komision resIn'd, on the European
parliment's vot of no konfidens, ther was ampl evidens of plunder on the publik purs.
'Fiddles, fraud and fatcats' was a paj spred by 'The Sunday Times' ( 26 March 1989 ).
Brian Moynahan reported:
With customary and heroic indifference, officials in Brussels were last week shrugging off the latest assault on their bureaucracy as anti-European Commission hysteria. The accusations of mismanagement, incompetance and massive fraud levelled at the community...by Sir John Hoskyns, director-general of the Institute of Directors, was dealt with in traditional style.
The Brussels 'perks mountain' has
promoted inequality, tu. Neil Kinnock, European Komisioner in charj of
reform, was reported ( by BBC Ceefax 28 feb. 2001 ) to be targeting
'militant komplasensy' thru perks, rather than salarys. Perks sIted wer
a £1,200 per yer 'tIping alowans' to sekretarys and kash for fiktitius
railway alowanses.
The unions ar showing ther militant komplasensy by 'thretening to
tak industrial aktion, inkluding strIks'.
Any-uon, hw didnt no 'industrial aktion' is a eufemism for strIks, mIt think they wer thretening to work, as wel as strIk. The nws-flash kal'd this a protest by Eurokrats. But it sounds mor lIk ther minions squyling at being depriv'd of krums from the hI tabl.
Korporat kapitalism also poses the problem of iresponsibility.
Reminding uon of Michael Moore's tv show, 'The Awful Truth', with Krakers,
the korporat krIm-fIting chiken, the web-sIt, rtmark.com, is
supos'd ( in the words of Douglas Rushkoff, april 15 1999, 'The Guardian' ) to be a praktikal jouk against
those giant companies who...enjoy the privileges of citizenship without any of the responsibilities. ( And according to rtmark )...continue polluting our waters and murdering thousands through negligent industrial practises. Even when caught, the offending corporation needs only to pay a fine in order to continue business as usual. No one goes to jail. Meanwhile, with more money at their disposal than most countries, these multinational corporations can donate to elections and pay for lobbyists who give them more access to and influence on public policy than any group of 'private citizens'.
The stagnation of Amerikan politiks is aparent from a Republikan 'land-slId'
with 20% of the elektorat; the 'saif syts' of ther voting system; the
prId, even, with wich som kongres-man is in the pokets of a loby.
Uon of Michael Moore's thyms is to the efekt: wI vot for the monky
insted of dyling with the organ-grinder?
( The anser to that is the nyd for a sekond congres to demokratikly
represent individual okupational interests, so the first kongres kan
kyp to its bisnes of komunity interests represented by ther lokal
and stait lyders. )
Perhaps the ekonomik justis of an ekonomik demokrasy wud be aprochabl, if the law wer simply as impartial as it is suposd to be. UK Chanselor Nigel Lawson thot that the law unduly favor'd institutions. He said he had never experiens'd the lIk of the furor this kaus'd against chanj.
Simon Rose, in 'Fair Shares', says, of Britain in 1957, tw-thirds of shers wer own'd by individuals, and 18% by institutions. Thirty yers leiter the position was revers'd. In the top 100 kompanys, individuals own'd about 10%. This was, to a larj extent, du to pension funds' tax privilejes, kausing a bias in savings.
Simon Rose says, in an other bwk, 'The Shareholder', that, in the Sity, ther ar many
jelusly garded ways of making mony with almost no risk.
Sher dyling bekaim
instant after the sekond komputerisation of the Stok Exchanj - the sekond so-kal'd 'Big
Bang'. Rose sujested the elektronik market kud do without the stok-broker and his
komision.
In jeneral, fending for uon-self kud be an option in every-uon's edukation, at
any tIm of lIf.
'The Guardian' index of top exekutivs' pay, in Britain for 1998, show'd rises of mor than 26%. That is fIv tIms the growth in averaj ernings and ten tIms the inflation rait. Mor than thirty exekutivs' basik pay and bonus top'd uon milion pounds.
The ordinary erner has to form a militant organisation that apyrs rowdily on the media to threten the kontinuans of sosiety, for the od extra per-sent inkom. Direktors quietly help themselvs, as wel as dispos of huj funds in other ways, regardles of ther investors' wishes.
In an interviw, Margaret Thatcher's defens of kapitalism was that ther was even greiter inequality in the Soviet system. Sertainly, it was not for Stalin's want of trIing, if this were not so.
Michael Heseltine has flatly stated that kapitalism myns inequality. Television exchanjes dont mak for refin'd argument. That is to say kapitalism maks no sens as a system unles its inequality is justify'd by som standard distinguishing it from frybwters or embezlers.
The demokratik defens is the rIt of fry enterpris to be rewarded by how wel it myts konsumer wishes. Hens, the most suksesful entrepreners wil hav the hIest inkoms. Thys insentivs of a fry market ensur the popular wil is properly serv'd.
J K Galbraith under-mIn'd this kais with his theory of 'The New Industrial State.' He argu'd a
theory of konverjens by korporat kapitalism towards the stait-manaj'd ekonomy.
Big projekts kom from lobying politicians. And wat's left of the 'fry' market kan not
be left to mak up its own mind. Ther ar tu many development kosts at staik to permit
the publik to turn down firms' nw produkts. Mor-over, big mony kan best aford the
komercial konditioning kal'd advertising, the imposing of the latest fashon lIn on pepls
social nyd to konform.
Pepl hw say mas media advertising isnt very efektiv mIt as wel say Christianity wasnt very efektiv wen every uon went to church. The fakt is the adverts on tv ar sermons every fw minuts for the materialist relijon, not of gud we houp to be sav'd for, but guds we houp to saiv for.
Nowadays, konsumption is lIkly to be the devil's bargain of
bI now, pay leiter, with the help of the kredit kard kompanys. ( Thys pepl want to own the world. )
In 'The First
Circle', Solzhenitsyn has a Rusian nationalist trIing to purj forein
words. For instans, he replases 'kapitalism' with the Rusian word for
'usury'.
Galbraith's deskription of korporat kapitalism deprivs it of the demokratik apolojy for
liberal ekonomiks.
To regain demokratik lejitimasy, kapitalism wud hav to akomodat
equality of lobying. That is, al okupations shud be proportionaly represented in the
komunity's produktion requirments. Vokational representativs ar nyded for the systematik
diskusion of the nation's konsumption nyds.
In short, an elekted ekonomik sekond chamber, or komprehensiv sekond kongres of
special interests out in the open, is requir'd insted of big buks behind klos'd dors.
This is the first requirment of a konstitutional ekonomy. An ekonomik parliment lobys
the politikal parliment. Lobying the produktion nyds of the komunity shud be a ful
and open konsultation of the komunity. That is, it shud be parlimentary.
LIkwIs,
lobying the konsumption nyds of the individual shud be via ther rational representation.
Konsumers shud be abl to advertis ther wishes, in a fyd-bak relation with industry,
not myrly an indoktrination by big bisnes.
Alvin Toffler bekaim influential in Republikan polisy-making. His famus sosiolojikal work, 'Future Shock', advokated esentialy the saim idea:
Such 'social future assemblies' might represent not merely geographical localities, but social units - industry, labor, the churches, the intellectual community, the arts, women, ethnic and religous groups, students, with organized representation for the unorganized as well. There are no sure-fire techniques for guaranteeing equal representation for all, or for eliciting the wishes of the poor, the inarticulate or the isolated. Yet once we recognize the need to include them, we shall find the ways.
Konstitutional interpretation of the market ekonomy in terms of politikal demokrasy is
at lyst as old as the sekond world war. I myn the idea that konsumer spending is a 'vot' on
resorses. Mrs Thatcher air'd this viw.
But in a demokrasy, every-uon has an equal vot. Dos this myn that Bernard Shaw's
theory of equal inkoms is korekt? ( Sy 'The Intelligent Womans Guide To Socialism And
Capitalism.' )
In the sekond prefas to his bwk, Shaw klown'd that he had riten it for every-body but
that the only person hw understud it was Albert Einstein. Ther is a truth in this jest.
Einstein said his theory of relativity is a 'prinsipl theory'. So is thermo-dynamiks,
wich rekognises in prinsipl that a perpetual motion macyn is
imposibl.
Shaw's prinsipl theory of equal inkoms is analjus. Ther is no suficient justifikation nor nesesary rationalisation to be found for any unequal inkom distribution, wich is, therfor, not a basis for lasting social agryment. That is the sum of Shaw's theoretikal achyvment.
The open-ended growth ekonomy is a wud-be perpetual motion macyn. Konservation of enerjy is the prinsipl both of teknolojy and ekolojy, with regard to the macyn and the environment, respektivly.
The unstabl ekonomy is uon of lyp-froging pay awards, plundering al availabl funds
to any given okupation. Ther is no prinsipl of diferential payment, only a question of
wich jobs ar in the best position to tak most, despIt publik disaproval.
In his novel, 'Marriage', H G Wells said : LIf's a skrambl and wil be for hundreds of
yers yet.
Resorses ar limited and it maks sens to sher them pysably, rather than destroy them
in fIting over them or trampling and wasting them in the stampyd to get ther first. This
kan hardly hapen til every-uon has enuf, represented by a basik inkom.
( Not even this is posibl til the pepls of the world agry on the respektiv limits
of ther populations, insted of going to war over ther sher. )
A basik inkom myns a basik equality of ekonomik rIts and dutys, wen translated
into konstitutional terms. If this is an ekonomik franchis, it shud kom with its own kind
of responsibilitys, just as the politikal franchis dos. Having an equal vot, to be
represented in the kuntry's law-making, myns uon is expekted to abId by and serv thos
laws.
Similarly, the rIt to a basik inkom shud be as a modest duty, for a basik waij, to do
basik maintenans work for sosiety. Such work shud not be for its own sake but just such
as is nesesary. 'Workfare' is a basik inkom in this sens. Mor-over, paying a basik waij is a
wId-spred legal requirment of privat employers.
Ar, then, kapitalism and socialism koming together in a konstitutional fraim-work for inkoms,
konsider'd as an ekonomik franchis? The politikal model of demokrasy kan go som way
to rekonsiling the tw doktrins. Every-uon has an equal vot but they giv unequal numbers
of vots to the kandidats.
Uon kud argu that konsumers ar the voters and bisneses ar the kandidats
for ther spending power. Unequal profits rejister popular preferens. ( This suposes an
ekonomik parliment to redres unfair advantajes of korporat kapitalism under-mining the
fry market. )
A demokratik paradox of the mix'd ekonomy remains. In politiks, wen a kandidat is elekted
with a big surplus of vots, thos vots dont bekom his own to elekt hw he plyses. Tho,
a show of popularity wil further his politikal advansment.
Konsumers may demokratikly desId wat produsers get the most profits. But
produsers ar also konsumers. Produsers' unequal profits wil mak konsumers' inkoms
unequal and prevent market chois from being striktly demokratik, as a
rul.
Kan a konstitutional ekonomy work with demokratik konsistensy? Kan fry markets work lIk fry elektions? It may help to konsider that universal sufraj evolv'd out of leser franchises. The Chartist William Lovett ridikul'd the komplikated and expensiv list of voting qualifikations.
The nIntynth sentury ekonomist, Ricardo distinguish'd thry kinds of inkom: rent from land, interest from kapital, and wajes from labor. Thys may be spoken of as 'franchises'. They ar frydoms konfer'd by law, that not al sosietys grant to every-uon. Land nationalisation abolishes rent. Muslim law forbids interest. And slaivs ar not fry to ern wajes.
R H Tawney's 'The Acquisitive Society' quots Mr Justice Brandeis' verdikt
that property, yus'd for an 'industrial absolutism', konfers 'a private
franchise or jurisdiction'. And Mr Hobson was quoted on a funktionles
'Improperty' konfering wat Tawney himself kal'd a 'private tax'.
Thys expresions, a privat franchis and a privat tax, kontain an
in-sIt, that is mor important than disaproving unjust advantajes
of the fw over the many.
Rent, interest
and wajes ar the rIts to rais privat taxes, wich, in efekt, grant finans franchises to the privat sektor.
Ther ar also publik
sektor franchises, notably in wel-fer stait benefits. Thys ar rais'd by taxes, by wich we myn implisitly, publik taxes.
Publik and privat taxes may be kompar'd to the miselany of voting restriktions in nIntynth sentury Britain. The rationalisation of both privat and publik taxation to an inkom franchis wud kompar to the evolution of universal sufraj.
Hermione Parker ( 'Instead Of The Dole' ) rekons that it wud be mor kost efektiv to
re-plas Britain's imensly komplex social sekurity system, wich probably no-uon houly
understands, with a basik inkom.
She says social insurans starts from the premis only thos, hw hav byn in paid
work, deserv inkom sekurity. This kreats a rat rais sosiety in wich thos, hw work for
nothing, ar sekond-rait sitizens. For instans, ( rIting in 1989 ) women hw giv up work
( that is paid ) to rais a family; thos hw lwk after sik relativs or the elderly.
In politiks, an efektiv vot for al depends on a rationalisation of the elektoral system thru
proportional representation, properly spyking. ( That is a transferabl vot. ) With this
system, kandidats ar elekted on resyving a quota or elektiv proportion of the vots.
Konsider a basik waij as a quota of inkom requir'd of every worker to qualify in
ther profesion. ( For instans, Arthur Conan Doyle turn'd to rIting, wIl his doktor's
praktis languish'd. ) Som wil resyv surpluses from ther ( Ricardian ) privat sektor
franchises. Others may hav ther inkom suplemented, by 'Welfare to Work', up to the inkom
quota or basik sher in the komunity's konsumer power.
HIer levels of government requir hIer quotas to elekt kandidats. To kontinu the
analojy, yu probably want a biger financial quota than a basik waij. This may not be
enuf to pay for a pension.
A pension is a klyr exampl of a surplus inkom, that is not spent but transfer'd
into a pension fund. This surplus gos towards the inkom quota suficient to 'elekt' uon's
sustenans in old aij. The inkom surplus transfer may also go to uon's wIf, or, indyd,
dosnt only aplI to pensions. Ther ar inheritans transfers or bequests to family,
frends, dependants or for gud servis.
The John Lewis Partnership was the bequest of a bisnes-man with demokratik Idyls. Profit-shering ofers an other way for big erners to spred ther spending power, to mak konsumption mor representativ of the pepl's wishes. This further promots a fry market, in wich the most popular produkts ern the most. Bekaus, the publik is beter serv'd wen profits ar being re-invested to lwk-after the work-fors. And the pik of skils ar atrakted by the most suksesful firms that also hav the best terms of employment.
On 11 december 1869, John Stuart Mill replied to the Employés of Messrs. Brewster of New York:
The plan of industrial partnership seems to me highly worthy of encouragement; as uniting some of the advantages of co-operation with the principal advantages of capitalist management. We should hope, indeed, ultimately to arrive at a state of industry in which the workpeople as a body will either themselves own the capital; or hire it from its owners. Industrial partnerships, however, are not only a valuable preparation for that state, and transition to it, but might probably of a long time exist by the side of it with great advantage; if only because their competition would prevent co-operative associations of workmen from degenerating, as I grieve to say they often do, into close joint-stock companies, in which the workmen who founded them keep all the profits to themselves.
The proposals of Messrs Brewster is in some imporant respects a considerable improvement on the English industrial partnerships of which I have any knowledge; because it takes the employés themselves into council to determine the share of the profit to which they shall be admitted, instead of fixing its amount by the sole will of the employers, and because it gives to the council, elected by the employés, an important share in the government of the workshops, even to the extent of allowing them, by a two-thirds majority, to overrule the wishes of the employers.
Robert Ardrey's novel, 'Worlds Beginning', is about an inventor, hws partner raises the mony for produktion, by persuading his workers to risk invest in the firm for a sher in the posibl profits. Even by 1946, the idea of myr waij erners as kapitalists was revolutionary. Ardrey felt kompel'd to say that the US Konstitution was not kontravyn'd.
Sins then, atituds hav chanj'd towards the old Ricardian demarkation of the ekonomy,
into land, kapital and labor. In komon with a detested socialism, doktrinair kapitalists lIk
Margaret Thatcher, folow'd by John Major, klaim'd to want 'a klasles sosiety'.
The inequitabl sosiety remains.
Michael Moore's bwk, kal'd 'Downsize This!', refers to uon of the polIt
terms or eufemisms for making korporation redundansys. Workers ar fIr'd
to improv profits to sher-holders. Employment is exported to other
kuntrys for chyper labor kosts.
Komunitys kompyt with publik mony to indus big firms to provid
lokal employment. But ther may be no garanty they wont up-stiks to
folow the profit motiv, lyving a jobles geto.
Moore found ofis spas and staf at mor kompetitiv raits for a sizabl chunk of the US administration, south of the border, down Mexiko way. This wud relys prIm ryl estayt in Washington and down-sIz the government pay-rol, thus helping, mItily, the Amerikan tax-payer.
Richard Lung.