Since our Democratic Meritocracy incorporates a Social Capitalist system where free lancers and other businesses remain within the private sector, (I still need to do the research and I encourage other members to look into this as well), and since we will be implementing a millionaires inheritance tax, I am proposing that we look into the Separation of Business and State where the state does not tax corporations and allow them to operate freely until the owner is deceased where the state collects all the assets at the moment of the CEOs or shareholders death in which we of course distribute that money into the public sector as originally planned by the Meritocracy party. If we can promise certain enterprises more market revenue then what is allowed by the current political establishments we can perhaps attract wealthy people to fund our party. At the moment I still don’t know how exactly to implement this strategy and I am not that knowledgeable concerning economic matters but I highly suggest and encourage members who are look into this idea. To begin I am currently reading a book called The Separation of Business and State by Ryan Dawson and The Entrepreneurial State: Debunking Public vs. Private Sector Myths by Mariana Mazzucato to develop a thesis, antithesis and then synthesis to my idea. I believe that our Social Capitalist system should differ from other mixed economies by havin g a clear division between the public and private sector.but we must all educate ourselves so that we may implement this new economic model efficiently. The first country to establish Democratic Meritocracy will either reflect greatly or poorly on the rest of the party depending on whether it succeeds or it fails. keep in mind that our system is completely new and do not know what the outcome will be it is important that we address all possible flaws within the Democratic Meritocratic system.
Separation of Business and State within Social Capitalism
Whether we should not tax ALL corporations or may be some corporations and not others still remains the question. also the state can apply a meritocratic rule where those corporations that contribute more revenue, capital in GDP or what not into the nation can get a taxation exemption. but like I said this requires much research if anyone has knowledge pertaining this issue please share 
.
The Entrepreneurial State is a good book and provides a lot of empirical work that supports our emphasis on the state’s role in societal advancement and the subsequent claim of the public to the benefits of technological development.
The relation between the private and public sector is a key topic for us and I agree that we need to get some good info on this. One of the more relevant aspects of this is technology’s role. Mazzucato and others like Bill Lazonick show a lot about how the State is often overlooked and under-used, to the benefit of the few.
As far as the suggestion of the separation of business and the state, considering what kind of intervention would best serve private industry and the collective seems challenging at this point.
Lastly, this is a bit off topic but relevant to Mazzucato. Gar Alperovitz has written about the need to consider the role of the collective in generating the benefits of technology in the article “The Distribution of our Technological Inheritance” and his book “Unjust Deserts”. There are similar themes in Mazzucato’s research. I think this line of inquiry can provide the basis for a meaningful argument in support of a new philosophy of private property, new legal arrangements regarding intellectual property and a restructuring of the way we develop technology and distribute the benefits thereof.
I am wondering what you think about the role of centralized state power in the private sector.
As far as I know, none of us (yet) have any expertise in these matters and so we ultimately are armchair activists but that is beside the point. If we are the interface that can introduce the party to widespread support, then what we say about things like Social Capitalism is relevant.
Finance in Social Capitalism is a crucial aspect of the relationship between business and the State. Public Banking and the 100% inheritance tax will allow equity finance to be predominant over debt financing. Public Banking will be crucial in getting rid of unjust cost of capital or usury which greatly distributes wealth from poor to rich. A common concern about the inheritance tax is access to startup capital, this shows how Public Banking and 100% IT resolves this.
A more robust system of equity finance can satisfy our principle of supporting initiatives for small and medium size enterprises. People will be empowered to put their ideas into action more often and without as much risk, since the State mainly fronts the money but maintains a share of ownership and continues to play a role in these enterprises. It is up the State to effectively finance meritocratic ideas. Part of launching Social Capitalism will be to experiment with a variety of these new meritocratic institutional structures.
The economies of scale that the largest corporations achieve can be undertaken by new meritocratic institutions like public corporations which help ensure material conditions for equal opportunity and can better deal with humanitarian and sustainability issues.
The role of the State in business should not be viewed as a bad thing for a Meritocratic Republic. One of the advantages of this system is that we can utilize the knowledge of the human race much more effectively. This fact is why Meritocracy can claim to resolve so many of the material issues of our times. Once the forces of shadow economics are overcome, we can suddenly realize the true potential of a political economy as if people mattered. We must make people recognize the potential for developing a technological infrastructure which radically improves material conditions, especially for the poor. It is also necessary to show how and why such an initiative is impossible without a strong government.