SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
AnonTechie (2275)
Journal of AnonTechie (2275)
Our economic future depends on young reformers, not ineffective revolutionaries
Many of our capitalist institutions have been damaged by cronyism, greed and a short-term mindset. But capitalism is more than its faults and the unpleasant outcomes brought on by a selfish class.
Revitalizing capitalism begins with reform, which means introducing changes within the existing structure. However, the newest cohort to enter corporate life, Gen Z, has little confidence in the corporate system. They are unwilling to play a game where they don’t trust the rules or referees.While we don’t have an extensive amount of research on this cohort, we do know that Gen Z seems to be less involved in civil engagement and reluctant to engage in teamwork.
And according to a recent study from Ethisphere, Gen Z both embraces the strongest ethical commitments and is the least likely to report bad behaviour at work. Nearly 39 per cent of Gen Z respondents chose not to report misconduct when they witnessed it — an 11-point gap from their Gen X and Boomer colleagues.
Gen Z employees don’t believe reporting corporate misbehaviour is worthwhile because they fear retaliation and have no confidence corrective action will be taken. So how can Gen Z be effective agents of reform in a system they don’t believe in?
[...] Under conventional capitalist thinking, it’s worth being trustworthy if it leads to cost savings. We need to depart from this reductionist view.
When the youth don’t trust the system, the highest priority of the establishment must be rebuilding that trust. Seeking to be seen as trustworthy is what will convince the next generation skeptical of our institutions to work with us on reform.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 03, @07:54PM (8 children)
Capitalism is a pyramid scheme. If it switches to employee owned businesses then capitalism could thrive, but as is the managers at the top get paid way more, and the owners are paid exorbitantly. People want fair treatment and to be part of a team. Managers and owners are just another cog and shouldn't be given such outsized rewards when they do the least work! Humanity has been mostly stuck in these pyramid power structures and that is the problem. A few European countries have found pretty successful systems, but the UK and US are under full assault by some massively wealthy groups trying to double down on the corporate hellscape of Western Capitalism.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 03, @08:53PM (7 children)
Nice description of income and wealth inequality (aka wage inequality), but please don't confuse with
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyramid_scheme [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 03, @10:23PM (6 children)
So modern corporate structures are pyramid schemes with some utility. Seems like a minor distinction, and when employees are trading their time for money then actual pyramid schemes seem better, the suckers lose less valuable dollar bills instead of their limited time of existence. Seems a minor distinction that tries to separate Capitalists from more vulgar con-artists, yet they are essentially the same especially since the 70s. We never needed Musk to push electric vehicles, we needed Big Auto to be punished for their crimes against the people like destroying public transit, actively hampering EV adoption, and pushing climate change denial. Our problems are vast, yet many humans seem intent on pretending it is all hippy hogwash.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by khallow on Sunday February 05, @05:00AM (5 children)
No, the previous AC's point was that most modern corporate structures aren't pyramid schemes at all by definition of pyramid scheme. While I think the angst over "corporate structures" is way overrated, surely you agree that it is remotely conceivable for corporate structures to be bad in more ways than one, right? Then use appropriate labels to describe the badness.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 06, @03:40AM (2 children)
I see the mammon machine has already devoured most of your soul.
(Score: 2, Touché) by khallow on Monday February 06, @05:43AM (1 child)
It's called a "dictionary" and doesn't require a lot of souls to run.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 06, @09:43PM
If the dictionary is too hard, perhaps this recent graphic novel (aka cartoon) will help?
https://leasticoulddo.com/comic/20230205 [leasticoulddo.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 07, @11:27PM (1 child)
You are technically, not morally, correct. Per usual. If only you could get past your brainwashing.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday February 08, @03:19AM
That you think there is anything moral about a simple semantics argument indicates to me that you don't understand what is morally correct in this situation. Morality has yet to be relevant to this thread.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by krishnoid on Friday February 03, @08:56PM (5 children)
Blah blah blah economy blah blah capitalism blah blah corporate blah blah Gen Z blah blah engagement. I see "future of the economy" and think "what's the replacement for the US petrodollar once renewables move from novelty to infrastructure?"
(Score: -1, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 03, @09:25PM (1 child)
The solution according to the influencers is simple:
DEL capitalism
REN marxism capitalism
ECHO Tune in, turn on, drop out
FORMAT C:
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Monday February 06, @07:23PM
You are supposed to:
FORMAT A:
Then, the computer is supposed to respond:
ERROR: unable to format drive A. Now formatting drive C instead.
How often should I have my memory checked? I used to know but...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 03, @11:45PM
I'd be more worried about what is going to happen if the current acceleration away from the "petrodollar" continues thanks to politicians continuing to play games with both the currency and foreign relations.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 04, @07:04PM
US renewabledollars.. the pit is bottomless
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday February 08, @03:22AM
I'm puzzled why the answer isn't merely the US petrodollar with a different label? What's wrong with the US dollar has nothing to do with its continued use for oil trade and wouldn't be fixed or made worse by changing what it's used in trade for.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Azuma Hazuki on Saturday February 04, @07:44PM (5 children)
Price controls as a function of elasticity of demand. The less elastic the demand, i.e., the more "need" and less "want" something is, the more safeguards in place. No one should starve or be homeless, but when it comes to things like luxury cars, caviar, or jewelry? Go nuts.
A little thought, especially in the context of medicine, makes it clear that laissez-faire in the face of inelastic demand is a systemic case of "your money or your life." And sometimes both.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday February 05, @03:31PM (3 children)
(Score: 5, Touché) by turgid on Sunday February 05, @04:26PM (2 children)
Easy fix, eh? People chasing "easy fixes" got us Trump and Brexit. Have we not learned our lessons?
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 07, @10:09PM (1 child)
Khalliw still struggles with the 1/6 insurrection and serms fine with literal traitors from the GOP being in congress.
(Score: -1, Troll) by khallow on Wednesday February 08, @03:30AM
I imagine you have this problem a lot. This is half true. I haven't had trouble with the January 6 protest since a few hours afterward when I could see that it wasn't going anywhere. But I indeed am fine with those "literal traitors" you seem worked up over.
The real problem I see here are the people who continue to soil their pants more than two years later after absolutely nothing has come of the January 6 protests.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by istartedi on Monday February 06, @01:06AM
Medicine isn't laissez-faire. It's been fully captured by oligarchs. Some people will see this as hyperbole, but to me it is nothing more than a racket at this point. Things like colchicine (a drug that's thousands of years old) going from less than $10 to $400 aren't the product of a laissez-faire market. The jacked up price is due to a law that was bought and paid for by pharma bros. If the system were laissez-faire, we could have just bought Canadian generics and ignored those guys. The same thing happened to several other drugs that had formerly been way long off patent, due to a law that granted monopoly on the drugs if your company did a test that certified the drug in some new way. AFAIK, in all cases the cost per dose to perform the tests would have been mere pennies if the government had simply financed the tests through taxes, or even if they had simply required vendors to perform the tests. Anyway, I digress.
Health care isn't laissez-faire. It's a racket that needs to be broken up and there are some really obvious ways to do that, which won't happen because the racketeers will mow you down with their Tommy guns, see (OK, not really).
1: transparent pricing, where we've actually had some half-hearted moves but it's still a PiTA to get prices sometimes.
2. End provider networks. All insurance reimburses service from any provider, all using the same price. Interesting point on this--in the car insurance market place, the practice of insisting that you use a particular body shop is known as "steering", and it's illegal, but like I said. Healthcare is a racket.
3. Consolidate the hodge-podge of existing government programs. We've got Medicare for seniors, Medicaid for poor people, etc. and because there are different rates negotiated by these programs as well as insurance companies, you tend to get treated differently by providers based on your insurance and that's obviously a problem.
4. Simplify the administration. Cap yearly expenses based on income. No more of this co-pay garbage, which just generates more administration. You get your service at the standard rate. Payment is due 30 days after the quarter. You pay no more than 10% (or some other reasonable number,) of your adjusted income for the quarter in which the service occured, after that the insurance company pays the rest. No more of these crazy formulas, denials, etc.
5. Seriously, private insurance companies are 100% dead weight. Point 4 can be easily administrated by the IRS or some other government agency with very few, or perhaps no additional personnel and very little expense to modify their software, which they do all the time anyway.
That's the low-hanging fruit. You might have some quibbles, but a lot of this is painfully obvious, and it's painfully obvious that it won't happen anytime soon because the bloated agencies, private insurance, and pharma who comprise the racket have bought and paid for the government to maintain the status quo of 2X expenditure for worse overall outcomes than other developed nations.
Some might argue that a racket is laissez-faire because it's "end stage capitalism", but I don't buy that. Reform is possible--we busted trusts 100 years ago, but it's a long tortured effort and it won't happen over night.
Appended to the end of comments you post. Max: 120 chars.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 07, @11:25PM
Gerrymandering has allowed assholes like this [soylentnews.org] to have more weight in democracy and such violent regressives are dreaming of a 2nd civil war. It is time for the non-insane conservatives to cut ties with the dregs of society.