Changing Times
At its beginning, no one knew that they were in the Industrial Age; let alone how to deal with it. It was like nothing anyone had ever seen before. Later on, great minds like Marx, Keynes, Galbraith, et al would give ‘how to deal with it’ their best shot.
Since, say, 1970, we have been in the at least as transformative Digital/Information Age. It, too, something like nothing that anyone had ever seen before. Now, the ‘it’ is an age where capital owns the means of production, and more and more, the robotic workforce? Leaving most others without access to the fruits of production.
Excepting, perhaps, a brief period from the 1930s until its end; capitalism, in all its years of quasi-existence, never abandoned servitude. Never came up with a better model for sharing the wealth of production. Didn’t have to; it was always sheltered by the influence of wealth.
This time, we must.
Before 1974, only those with a little extra left over could invest in (become owners of) the means of production. Wittingly, or not, 401(k)s were an acknowledgement that times were a-changing. Owners of 401(k) plans owned shares in the means of production. They shared in the wealth generated sans their sweat and toil. And, no one was screaming Socialism!!!
Why not make every citizen of the United States a part owner in every means of producing goods and services in the United States?
Consider the alternative.
“Why not make every citizen of the United States a part owner in every means of producing goods and services in the United States?”
Isn’t that the argument made by those who want to invest Social Security tax money in the stock market?
Jedermann, tout le monde — alles
Absolutely.
[From Chapter 12 of General Theory… by Keynes ]
…..Thus the professional investor is forced to concern himself with the anticipation of impending changes, in the news or in the atmosphere, of the kind by which experience shows that the mass psychology of the market is most influenced. This is the inevitable result of investment markets organised with a view to so-called “liquidity”. Of the maxims of orthodox finance none, surely, is more anti-social than the fetish of liquidity, the doctrine that it is a positive virtue on the part of investment institutions to concentrate their resources upon the holding of “liquid” securities. It forgets that there is no such thing as liquidity of investment for the community as a whole. The social object of skilled investment should be to defeat the dark forces of time and ignorance which envelop our future. The actual, private object of the most skilled investment to-day is “to beat the gun”, as the Americans so well express it, to outwit the crowd, and to pass the bad, or depreciating, half-crown to the other fellow…..
“to pass the bad, or depreciating, half-crown to the other fellow…..”
AKA “The Greater Fool Theory of Investing. The central premise of NFTs.
Keynes did not survive to see the introduction of the IRA and 401K for the upper middle class “investor” to use as a retirement savings vehicle. These instruments guarantee liquidity for the trader class as well as inflated equity prices on the backs of retirement savers due to perpetual demand for more savings. All are part of the larger scheme of financialization that makes the world safe for the capitalist ownership class, at least until such time as the exorbitant privilege of the US dollar as the dominant global reserve and exchange currency fails as the British pound did after WWII.
@rc,
If your point is that America should adopt a social safety net like in Scandinavian countries, then we agree.
Defined contribution retirement plans have been a poor substitute for pensions, but the pension system was unsustainable in the US. Our 403bs and IRAs have worked out well for us so far, but that could change as Trump tanks the economy, destabilizes the dollar and blinds America to the next pandemic by shutting down the CDC and putting an anti-vaxxer in charge of HHS.
rc:
We could speculate on other alternatives; but, but, they are not, not available to us. So, we do with want is available till such time as our all being citizen Rockefellers’. Ain’t happening in my life time.
https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-syndicalism
Anarcho-syndicalism is a form of anarchism. It sees labour unions as something which will cause revolutionary change. This change will give freedom and equality to the workers. Anarcho-syndicalists want to get rid of the wage system and capitalism. They believe this leads to class divisions and inequality.
The basic concepts of anarcho-syndicalism are:
Anarcho-syndicalists believe that only direct action can bring about change. Anarcho-syndicalists do not take part in indirect action, like electing a representative to a government position.
A more centralized approach than anarcho-syndicalism would be democratic socialism, which might provide public daycare, public healthcare, and a sufficient social security old age care system. However, the inherent tribalism of ethnically diverse societies allows the lower classes to easily be divided against each other guaranteeing the dominance of public interests on behalf of the elite sector. A distributed approach to socialism along work sector lines of mutual interest affords a surer means of preserving continuity of socialized interest amidst cultural diversity.