Tuesday October 3, 2023
  • Venezuela
  • Mexico
  • Colombia
  • Chile
  • Brazil
  • Argentina
  • Podcast
Versión Español
PanAm Post
  • Home
  • Regions
    • South America
    • North America
    • Central America
    • Caribbean
  • Politics
  • Economics
  • Opinion
  • Podcast
  • Authors
  • Contact
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Regions
    • South America
    • North America
    • Central America
    • Caribbean
  • Politics
  • Economics
  • Opinion
  • Podcast
  • Authors
  • Contact
No Result
View All Result
PanAm Post
No Result
View All Result

Home » Elizabeth Warren’s New Proposal for “Accountable Capitalism” is Ludicrous

Elizabeth Warren’s New Proposal for “Accountable Capitalism” is Ludicrous

David Unsworth by David Unsworth
August 22, 2018
in Uncategorized
FacebookTwitterTelegramWhatsapp
Elizabeth Warren believes the government can tell corporations to elect 40% of board members from the ranks of their employees (WikiCommons).

Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren recently declared herself to be “capitalist to my bones.” The remarks infuriated many fellow travelers on the progressive left who have been on the rise lately in the wake of Bernie Sanders’ wildly successful 2016 primary campaign in which he won 43% of the vote. They left many political commentators scratching their heads.

Warren is almost certainly mounting a presidential campaign in 2020. She faces smooth sailing in her 2018 reelection bid in Massachusetts, and has emerged as one of the leading voices on the progressive left. Sanders and Warren, however, occupy the same space. If they both run in 2020, they will be shooting each other in the foot.

RelatedArticles

Three Signs That Elon Musk Has the World at His Fingertips

15 Republicans Who Voted Against Trump Are Already Facing the Consequences

February 1, 2021
Dollarization Advances in Venezuela with Debit Cards for Foreign Currency Accounts

Biden forbids linking COVID-19 with China

January 28, 2021

Warren is probably astute enough to realize that, even with Sanders taking nearly half of Democratic primary voters, and having the support of the increasingly radical activist base of the Democratic Party, a self-avowed “democratic socialist” candidate facing any Republican in November 2020 would almost certainly be crucified.

Even the perpetually negligent and incompetent mainstream media would likely get in on the action. It’s hard to believe that the nation’s major newspapers, editorial boards, television stations, radio stations, and magazines would sit back and give a socialist candidate a pass. That would be ludicrously irresponsible on their part, and would undoubtedly provoke a backlash on the part of independent and moderate voters, the vast majority of whom remain skeptical of socialism.

It is impossible to know what is in Elizabeth Warren’s heart. Perhaps she really is a capitalist, although her actions and policy proposals certainly do not seem to back such a contention.

What appears most likely is that Warren realizes that outside of some very “blue” districts and states, proclaiming oneself a socialist is still political suicide in the United States. Thus, she must take her democratic socialist ideology and repackage it. Rebrand it. Reshape it. Make it palatable to a wider audience.

Demagogues throughout history have needed a public enemy to blame for society’s ills. Convince the masses that this enemy is to blame for their problems. Claim that you are the one who has the only solution to neutralize this enemy. Propose legislation to that effect.

Enter Elizabeth Warren and the “Capitalism Accountability Act.”

It sounds delightful, doesn’t it? Too much capitalism has ruined America and threatened working class people. Unregulated and unchecked capitalism is the problem.

For Warren and Sanders, corporations aren’t there to provide goods and services in a free market economy: they are there to screw over the little guy. And they must be stopped.

Their political influence is the greatest clear and present danger to the American public, so it’s time to put corporations under government control.

Under the terms of the legislation, among other things:

1: Company directors would be explicitly instructed to consider the interests of all relevant stakeholders — shareholders, but also customers, employees, and the communities in which the company operates — when making decisions.

2: 40 percent of the directors would be elected by the company’s workforce, with the other 60 percent elected by shareholders.

3: Corporate executives would be required to hold on to shares of stock granted to them for at least five years after they were received and at least three years after a share buyback.

4: Corporate political activity would require the specific authorization of both 75 percent of shareholders and 75 percent of board members.

1: Call me crazy, but I was under the impression that corporations already take into account the interest of their customers, employees, and the communities in which they operate. To fail to do this would be economic suicide. If a company is abusing or neglecting its customers, it will lose their business. Why do we need Elizabeth Warren’s legislation to tell companies to do this?

2: What right does the government have to tell a company how they elect their board of directors? If Warren wants to take over corporate boardrooms from Seattle to Miami, and Boston to Los Angeles, then perhaps she should find a better paying line of work than serving in the United States Senate. She can then buy shares in the companies she wants to reform, and elect new directors on the corporate boards. She certainly does not have a right to tell investors in companies who should compose their corporate boards. That is fundamentally an attack on private property rights.

3: On this point, Warren supporters could at least articulate a clear rationale here: Corporate executives should have a longterm vested interest in a company. In the event of access to “insider information” they should not be able to sell their shares ahead of those who don’t have access to such information.

Even if this piece of the legislation was a good idea, from whence does Warren derive the justification for her power to do this? If she really believes in such restrictions on executive stock sales, she should sit down with major Fortune 500 companies to pitch them on the idea, and get the ball rolling voluntarily, not through government coercion.

4: Setting such a threshold at 75% is nothing more than a thinly veiled attempt to end all corporate political activity. Getting three fourths of a corporate board and a company’s shareholders to agree on anything is a tall order. Doing so in a political context, would be damn near impossible. This is a backdoor to ending the Citizens United Supreme Court ruling which ruled that political campaign contributions are protected under the First Amendment.

Ultimately, Warren’s “Corporate Accountability Act” is a far cry from Stalinism or Maoism. It’s just bad legislation with no Constitutional justification. And that is par for the course on today’s “progressive” left.

People who invest in companies should determine how those companies are run, what executives do with their stock, and the specifics of corporate political activity; not the government.

 

David Unsworth

David Unsworth

David Unsworth is a Boston native. He received degrees in History and Political Science from Washington University in St. Louis, and subsequently spent five years working in real estate development in New York City. Currently he resides in Bogota, Colombia, where he is involved in the tourism industry. In his free time he enjoys singing in rock bands, travelling throughout Latin America, and studying Portuguese.

Related Posts

Three Signs That Elon Musk Has the World at His Fingertips
News

15 Republicans Who Voted Against Trump Are Already Facing the Consequences

February 1, 2021
Dollarization Advances in Venezuela with Debit Cards for Foreign Currency Accounts
Politics

Biden forbids linking COVID-19 with China

January 28, 2021
Dollarization Advances in Venezuela with Debit Cards for Foreign Currency Accounts
Analysis

Dollarization Advances in Venezuela with Debit Cards for Foreign Currency Accounts

January 28, 2021
Two Years of Guaidó: No Democracy in Venezuela, Corruption Multiplied
News

Venezuela: Where Corruption Is Covered up With More Corruption

January 25, 2021
Fatou Bensouda, International Criminal Court
Uncategorized

Who Is Fatou Bensouda? ICC Chief Prosecutor, Sanctioned by the United States

September 4, 2020
Maduro's New Order, Venezuela
Opinion

Maduro’s “New Order”

July 11, 2020
Next Post
To the Washington Post: Venezuela Is, in Fact, An Example of the Failure of Socialism

To the Washington Post: Venezuela Is, in Fact, An Example of the Failure of Socialism

Subscribe free and never miss another breaking story

  • Venezuela
  • Mexico
  • Colombia
  • Chile
  • Brazil
  • Argentina
  • Podcast

© 2020 PanAm Post - Design & Develop by NEW DREAM GLOBAL CORP. - Privacy policy

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Regions
    • South America
    • North America
    • Central America
    • Caribbean
  • Politics
  • Economics
  • Opinion
  • Podcast
  • Authors
  • Contact

© 2020 PanAm Post - Design & Develop by NEW DREAM GLOBAL CORP. - Privacy policy

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will assume that you are happy with it. Privacy and Cookie Policy.