After been taken in by Meritocracy International’s policy towards cronyism within government and high level industry, my thoughts turned to the smaller companies. How would a Meritocratic government implement a zero tolerance towards it ? how would you stop small business owners giving jobs to friends or friends of friends instead of another equally skilled potential employee ? Would it need a monitoring department to randomly check employees method of entry into a job ?
Zach
This is not a wide-reaching economic pressure on all the people (the corrupt system is). The corruption inherent in the current system produces such traps as personal debt, loan sharks and betting shops, the threat of being evicted; all of which are supported and in cases encouraged (parasitic business) through government non-action towards them.
Workplace values are also important, however the idea of a meritocratic government is to create and develop its actual principles and policies that would deal with the initial grand sweeping changes that affect so many people in fundamentally unfair, unmeritocratic ways. So, adjustments to the workplace are not a helpful starting point particularly as it will invite criticism.
Meritocratic policies need to have a clear focus on the most egregious systemic injustices, i.e. unmeritocratic unreason that operates throughout the modern Western world.
http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2014/aug/28/elitism-in-britain-breakdown-by-profession
These are the types of key issues (directly related to meritocracy) that most need meritocrats’ attention.
Workplace values are important, but by no means should this topic get in the way of discussing how we are actually going to get rid of unmeritocratic unreason in practice.
There are much more smart, effective moves to be made by a meritocratic government that would eliminate part of the core values (and thus problems) seen in the modern workplace: it’s more of a knock-on effect that we’re looking to achieve in the workplace than a first principle or primary item of national concern (meritocratic, socially conscious concerns).
I would for example want to focus more on providing people with guaranteed housing, than focus on what may not even actually affect their workplace environment enough in comparison (to housing focus).
The grand sweeping changes are the more powerful ones. On that basis they should be getting more attention.
Monitoring everyone’s Facebook or every small business is an extreme waste of police time. We need to be smarter and more efficient than the current system, if anything.
Thanks for your clear reply. I fully agree with what you said and I am as much, if not more interested in supporting this type of move.
I agree it would attract criticism by ordinary working people who are already at the mercy of greedy elites. I think once the stage has been set, so to speak, in the main arena of politics and large industry, by ridding the people of the privileged, people will start to see some hope, and in doing so begin to lead in a similar way.
Let’s look at it a lightly different way. Running a small business is done in a typical way and with little regard to widespread effects of the values most small businesses have. Without the financing to truly consider anything outside the box… there may not be much that can change without grand, sweeping changes to national values first.
Meritocracy at the core must be about a radically new view of the overarching structure of the nation. The fundamental meritocratic principles, like taking working capital BACK from the rich tax dodgers, royal benefits scroungers, and putting it back into public good like education and healthcare and housing … is a much more powerful message.
Without that emphasis, people will likely see any proposed measures to be within the existing view where government obstructs true change and doesn’t make serious, radical changes. However, that doesn’t mean focusing only on a populist message. If NON-radical meritocratic ideas can be outvoted by the supporters of democracy, it’s not a path worth pursuing in the first place. But, all that said, meritocracy must come from a highly rational, populist viewpoint to end up with a populist message after laying down the most abstract, rational policies, some of which will seem draconian/elitist.
Meritocratic policies must clearly come from an established view of the people being the prized value of the economy, i.e. hardworking merit and socially conscious policies; everything must flow from that positive, constructive view. It’s not worth trying to appease politically correct liberal sentiments (unreason); however it’s also critical to stick around the fundamental and most leverageable points (positively emphasize merit; positively captivate, inspire and attract the meritorious). We can start with the highest morally outrageous offences of UNmeritocracy and work outwards from there.
The policies that make the most sense (100% inheritance tax after $1m) can be assumed to be real and necessary. We simply accept that the first meritocratic government will actually take control and implement these, along with ideas that branch outwards from these initial measures.
I don’t think it’s useful to focus on the workplace so much, because the workplace is not even where the “elite” are focused. Cameron’s speeches for example never approach that territory. They have no idea about the real world. I have identified that meritocracy is inherently socially conscious. So, we should look towards the social good; the public good. The first meritocratic government can essentially do whatever it wants when it has taken power. There are much bigger strides to make than checking for cronyism in every little workplace box. What about far-reaching laws?
It’s maybe a good point of moral consideration for thought food, though. The modern workplace has so many problems attached to it. What about giving people 2 months’ unemployment notice, no matter what type of working agreement they are under? What about changing the standards that all employers must meet? Injustice in the workplace is a good starting point for thought in this area.
We could look at studies about happiness vs. performance in the workplace… we could look at health problems employees have to deal with… anything. But the most meritocratic central, powerful changes will come from meritocratic causes. Today starting a business is technically not that difficult, but there are more financial pressures than ever due to austerity… it all leads back to meritocracy vs unmeritocracy. The stranglehold over public resources needs to be reversed. We need to turn the tables on the rich, for true social mobility.
Possibly an effective measure would be to fine employers for firing competent (meritocratic) workers. Today there are highly social/cronyistic, and even political reasons that can get you fired. Instead, perhaps, 3 votes from co-workers would earn you a large amount of money for unearned unmeritocratic unemployment. If we want a positively work-focused world, surely people need to feel secure in building up their potential for merit!
I think there are meritocratic policies, and then there are policies not focused on achieving meritocratic justice. Possibly, holding the image of greedy “elites” is key to forming some meritocratic policies. It is meritocratic justice to turn the tables on them. And we must do that keenly and gladly. No half measures. No energy should be spared.
For more effective policies, we want to shake up the world and truly rattle up the corrupt media at its worst revulsion for meritocracy. How can we stop CEOs of multinational corporations from using their predatory corporate model? We need smart measures that send shockwaves around the world. We need policies that are clearly meritocratically Just. We need powerful messages the media would have to twist, but not well enough to distort our true intentions. We must be bold and unflinching in getting rid of unmeritocracy.
I don’t think at this stage, however, that aspect is so important (populist messages) … we must start from extremely rational, smart policies and changes that need to be implemented the most, once a meritocratic government gains power. What are the key policies? 100% inheritance tax, and equal opportunity for every child. But we need many more ideas.
Again, I don’t disagree. I was just curious being new to Meritocracy, and coming from the angle of a manual worker myself as a driver. i see many types of people at work. I see the ones who don’t think or speak about anything remotely political, then there are those who are interested in seeing the ‘elite’ get their comeuppance. Most people don’t really know how justice for working people can be achieved partly due to not having access to knowledge or information that would otherwise enlighten them and inspire them to keep fighting. Lots have neither the brains or will. I consider myself lucky to have inherited my Fathers questioning nature and defiance of corrupt authority. He himself, was a student of Sociology and History, and later an English literature lecturer. I feel my vocation is wasted and rejoiced when I first read about Meritocracy.
I like your ideas on turning things round with the media and implementing a major shift in perception by the public. I think it needs to be timed and synchronised well to have an effective impact. Something like a major media news report on some activism paired with a political statement by an official of the Meritocracy Party explaining that something big is happening for a change.
Jobs are a joke. Jobs have nothing to do with the motivation trinity of Autonomy, Mastery and Purpose.
This explains why 95% of people hate their jobs, and why they are brain-dead demotivated morons in their free time.
As for all office jobs - software will soon replace your ass, and for every manual labor job - well both software and hardware will replace your ass. When an Amazon warehouse without any humans can operate 24/7 and move 5x as much product as a human-run warehouse, why would you keep fighting for jobs when machines can do a better and safer job?
I fear you may be right Ed. Threats of exponential advancement of technology is pointing towards exactly that. The workplace should be a social environment as well as a place for commerce and manufacturing. If Meritocracy is to take hold we need to, like Marcus Aurelius said, using happiness vs performance is a good tool and can unite people and weaken greedy elites. I have yet to find a good occupational health representative at one of my workplaces. It is just brushed under the carpet. Profit comes first in most places.
We’re still a long way from complete automation of boring jobs. And in the cases where we are, nobody will listen to meritocrats because the Meta Paradigm of the modern workplace is neofeudalist and neoliberal i.e. the profit principle rules;- the barons of industry want to squeeze out maximum profit for themselves. No matter what level of creativity and autonomy we see today (Hollywood for example) it’s all about maximizing profit. So when will the corporate value system give us our say? Never, not until we fight for meritocracy through activism.
Any mainstream mention of robotocization on the Internet by clickbait journalists operates under the same umbrella value systems of Abrahamism; slave morality; obedience to the current corrupt system. If you (like they) think technology itself will revolutionize the rational and empathic traits of the parasitic billionaires… you are sorely mistaken. They will remain just as selfish until meritocracy takes this ability from them. Otherwise, we would already have sorted out grand unmeritocratic, neofeudal human issues such as JSTOR putting research material behind paywalls.
Oh yeah? Watch this video, EVERY INDUSTRY is covered, and only CURRENT TECHNOLOGY is mentioned.
@Ed_Chy you completely ignored the rest of Marcus’ post…
Jobs won’t disappear overnight because the social collapse that would ensue from sending millions of people into unemployment in a short time period is a risk no government wants to take.
And while it will probably happen gradually, robotisation will not change the system for the better unless meritocrats are calling the shots or the increase in wealth inequality has been sorted out.
There was a quote from Stephen Hawking recently on this:
If machines produce everything we need, the outcome will depend on how things are distributed. Everyone can enjoy a life of luxurious leisure if the machine-produced wealth is shared, or most people can end up miserably poor if the machine-owners successfully lobby against wealth redistribution. So far, the trend seems to be toward the second option, with technology driving ever-increasing inequality.
I am well aware of this. But look at the facts, when Google Cars, VW, Honda, Ford, BMW, and Telsa Cars all have self-driving car technology that will soon be released, whether we like it or not. The number one job in America - The Truck Driver - will be replaced. This means every tax driver, uber driver, truck driver, garbage truck driver, courier, delivery van, etc… will all be replaced. After that if there are less people working then there is less money supply, therefore prices must drop, and at the same time people should have more time on their hands. The average job now is part-time NOT full-time, if you look at the best data.
The access to this fancy technology is not the problem either. All the blueprints to the robotics and the software all lands up online, and open-source alternatives get quickly made. So access to the same private technologies is not the issue here either.
I say that the only issue is that undue financial pressures like rent and mortgage interest are stealing peoples time away and making us time poor. Without time we can’t come together and form communities, with time available we can. This may seem contradictory to what I said earlier about having more time going from full-time to part-time work, but what we have is a creeping trend of rent VS hourly wage, rents are higher than ever while wages are lower than ever. Imagine a world where 90% of your income goes to rent and only 10% of your income goes to food, bills and other essentials. That’s what’s happening and it’s kind of scary. This is how they are eliminating the benefits of technology and making us time poor once again when technically we shouldn’t be time poor anymore.
I think what’s going to happen, is the menial boring jobs will, and are slowly already, begining to integrate computer skills into them, making them easier to monitor and measure output of by bosses. In a way, the computer/tablet will be part of our job so much, making social interaction all but none-existent within the workplace.
I understand some jobs perform better by integrating computers into them, I just think the balance of work/play is wrong entirely. Profit takes precedence and people lose out, plain and simple. The rotten part of the economy needs to be removed and replaced by a healthier system, both metaphorically and literally.
It’s true full time, secure jobs are being destroyed by the elite by replacing them with zero hour contracts or employment agencies that swap and change workers to suit their needs. There is far too much manufacturing of rubbish and not enough interest in skilled jobs and quality goods.
Money-minded capitalism focuses on abstracts like products and managing models that generate money, not human Quality of Life. We need grand sweeping changes that curb the money-minded thinking and press capitalism into the service of the people. Not just profit. Profit is fine if it produces a social good. Micromanagement and austerity for example may seem to benefit in the short term but the human loss is too great for it to be healthy and sustainable for the nation.
While we still have time poverty and a neofeudal value system at the core of money-minded capitalism, there’s no room for creating services or ideas that truly benefit the people. All the higher skilled workers and work environments are subtly pushed towards robotic, money-minded purposes and ideals. There is no escape. There’s too few companies ran by people purely for the people … and this is not going to impact the surrounding money-minded economy. The whole system has to change. Nothing less will actually achieve anything. To say that automated labor jobs will create free human beings is magical thinking. The billionaires will not just give up the control. The organization aspect is managed by the psychopathic slave drivers, not well-meaning doves. The only evolution the money-managers are capable of is the petty, short-sighted pursuit of money.
Let’s look at this mathematically from the standpoint of prices.
Food prices = very reasonable, many alternative foods to choose from. You will never starve.
Water prices = very reasonable, you can always get a rain water tank, recycle your own water, or use a water condensation device to get water from the air.
Electricity prices = quite reasonable, and you can always generate it yourself via solar cells, wind power, geothermal loop under your house, hydro power if you have a small river running on your property, etc… So there are alternatives to go 100% free if the electricity prices get too high.
Rent price = VERY UNREASONABLE, no alternatives. Unless we are allowed to move to the middle of nowhere with a community of people then surviving on ones own is not a psychologically healthy option.
So you know how scientists are always going on about Time & Space. Everything is time & space. Well people are time poor and they are land poor. We have no time to form communities based on our personality types, and we have no land to use in common. For example, instead of the stupid football field in my community, am I allowed to suggest to build a common science laboratory for public use? No I am not allowed to do that. How about a common automotive workshop for public use? Can I suggest that? No I am not allowed to do that. Common land must be used for ball games, because it is of primary importance to get the ball from once side of the field to the other side of the field and back again, yay go the raiders!
(And before you give me the negative liberty talk again, if you understand the science you can dig clay out of your own property and burn your own bricks, an open-source brick maker can make 500-bricks per day. Almost every property has aluminum-oxide which you can turn to aluminum, therefore you can make metal on your property. Wood is another building material, and carbon neutral when burning for heat… If you have the knowledge, and a community with the time, anything is possible… But I am not an advocate for Anarcho-Libertarianism, that has never worked, just look at Somalia. So all my suggestions are within a positive liberty framework and with a government.)
Removing clay from every house is a desperate, irrational, extreme measure. You are suggesting desperate measures that simply can’t apply to most people (like having guns) and are most likely illegal for most people who don’t own their houses (council owned, or landlord or agency rented). I am seeing a trend here with the negative liberty suggestions that are simply too alienated from normal life. Why go that far out of the ballpark?
The far more likely option in every case is that we simply don’t have to resort to extreme personal measures, but instead bend capitalism and press it into the service of the people, directly. (This is something negative liberty ideologues can’t imagine). There is plenty labour/time already in the economy - it’s just being passed over to the super-rich and their corporations which extract $billions of wealth from the people every year and don’t give it back in time/labour. Apple recorded $50Bn revenue recently
http://www.cnbc.com/2015/10/06/big-us-firms-hold-21-trillion-overseas-to-avoid-taxes-study.html
Where is this money being put to use for genuine human advancement of Quality of Life? Why can’t a slice of corporate profit be funneled straight back into public good? We simply tax the rich, and this frees up money (working capital) for people to do their usual jobs for each other (as well as having more money to spend on such services) instead of the corporations and a tiny elite who currently have all the buying power. Then you don’t NEED an even more ambitious business plan. The grand wealth inequality is the first and most important focus of a meritocracy.
You don’t need to build a lab or a garage on a football field, the emphasis is on time and money that people need to be having more of. We already get science organizations. I will concede there is a great amount of common sense changes we should make to property/land use if people want to use it well, but why make bricks when we have construction companies ready to build strong structures?
Everyone must pay rent and tax. It goes towards the communal good as well as mandatory services like water treatment, waste collection, utilities, fire service, local schools. Not wanting to contribute to your community by paying rent IS negative liberty. Everyone must accept working within the rules and constraints of a positive liberty system. That is the only way meritocracy is possible.
The whole idea about keeping capitalism in the main sense, and simply switching the values where money and ownership (taxing the rich; education and healthcare) are concerned, is that none of the capitalist system has to be changed. This is clearly the most sensible option: change nothing of the day to day overall structure of business; but change the rules instead. It’s the smarter, more powerful option for social change. Growing your own food or making cheap bricks has NOTHING to do with actually achieving this on a national scale. It’s not a useful contribution. None of the broad aspects of the economy, like fossil fuels use, are to be expected (at least not initially) for true social change that benefits the people. That would be concern trolling and an extremely unlikely goal.
OMFG have you even looked at the three Zeitgeist documentaries? There’s no money in a resource-based economy. That means no rent either.
As for taxing companies, well unless its a global tax they will just move their HQ to a low-tax or a no-tax country, and keep only their subsidiaries in USA, therefore avoiding most local taxes. You got any other great plans?
Look some people like this BS city lifestyle, other people don’t. For the people that don’t there is no place for us, and we are not able to freely form communities based on our personality types. So I think our society is not being fair to those people who don’t want to be part of capitalism, as capitalism should be optional.
Hmmm, calling me a troll, you’ve been here exactly 4-days, and considering current events it’s mighty convenient that you joined the website at exactly this time Mr. Cypher.
In that case, making subsidaries illegal would stop Starbucks making a profit in the US. What will they do then?
Most people don’t want to leave their current homes and jobs. Why force them to? Why not simply gear the current system towards a meritocratic outcome over time? Simply refusing to be a part of capitalism because it doesn’t fit your needs right now is irrational. We need everyone to be an active part of the system, rather than primitively standing outside it and protesting true systemic change, and an end to the systemic injustice which affects everyone, especially the weak and poor who have no option to move out of the system. The weak must be protected.
I am not pretending there is no solution. I am not trolling. I am using reason.
I don’t disagree with the idea of changing the whole system, but I would like you to be very specific with your proposed solutions.
*Do you propose an increase in the company tax rate? Keeping in mind that a company can just claim more expenses like the “Royalty fee” that Apple sends offshore, and they can just break even here for all their subsidiaries. Company and Business tax is the opposite of how employee wage tax works, as they can take out unlimited expenses before breaking even or posting a tiny official “profit”.
*Increasing in the GST/VAT?
*A transaction tax like how Visa and Mastercard have a 2.5% transaction fee?
*Obviously a 100% inheritance tax - I’m with you there 110%! But I have doubts as to the likelihood of all these families, who have now become like little holographic clones of their OWO masters… Most people wouldn’t goto their full-time jobs if they thought they couldn’t pass it onto their retarded offspring. But there is hope yet, I do think people could potentially vote for a 100% Inheritance tax starting at the $10-million mark, and we can lower the mark later.
If we look at the way the OWO behaves globally, they are only afraid of regimes who Nationalize their countries oil and natural resources eg. Cuba, Venezuela, and the former U.S.S.R. They are not afraid of tax laws because of the ability to break even and claim a loss, sending revenue offshore as a so called “expense” but in actuality landing up back in their pockets in another company they own in another country.