I want to know more details concerning the economic policies of Social Capitalism which Meritocracy advocates. What role if any will free markets and the private sector play in such an economy? How will privatization be regulated? How will this economic model be superior to the mix economies which are active today? And last but not least what ways will Social Capitalism differ from the State Capitalist models implemented by the USSR,China and other leftist countries? or the state influenced privatization policies of Nazi Germany?
Social Capitalism
1 Like
We advocate banks being state-controlled and run by publicly accountable officials working in the interests of the People. Other large financial macrostructures should be under public control too if necessary, but the rest of the economy (businesses and freelancers) would remain private.
2 Likes
In the introduction to the inheritance tax on Meritopedia, there is a section called the Bank of the People Redistribution which references the IMF paper “The Chicago Plan Revisited” by Kumhof and Benes as a solution to banking for the people. This is the best source I’ve seen of in terms of an alternative to banking. I certainly don’t know enough about the paper or the topic to say that the paper should or shouldn’t be the entirety Meritocracy’s plan in banking but it seems to be a very good start. Does anyone know more about the significance of Kumhof’s plan to Meritocracy?
Also, I just learned of the American Monetary institute which is associated with the new Chicago Plan. The AMI is based on founder Steve Zarlenga’s book “The Lost Science of Money”, which seems to be pretty good. Through congressman Dennis Kucinich, the AMI has also introduced legislation to reform the banking system. Kucinich is known for being mayor of Cleveland, where I’m from, in the late 70’s and having stood up to the banks on a major issue saving the people a bunch of money whilst having a mafia hit put on him in the process. Is anyone familiar with the American Monetary Institute?
2 Likes
I downloaded the paper I will read it when I have a chance. I am very interested to know the improvements and benefits that a meritocratic mixed economy would bring compared to those of the US. Another question I have is exactly what services would belong to the public and/ or private sectors? does Meritocracy mostly favor a strong government or a limited government?
On Monday, September
Meritocracy favors a strong government. The idea that government is better off minimized is propaganda. This is in support of market powers who want to make the major decisions. It allows financial oligarchs to dominate the institutional nature of society and they always rig it in their favor. Someone is always going to have the ability to affect large amounts of people with their strategic decisions but the question is whether those people are acting to for themselves or for the people.
It is a common attitude that government is fundamentally unable to identify what is good for the people in those situations. A problem is that we don’t have the best, most qualified meritorious professionals in the positions of most power under Democracy.
Institutions , whether they be public or private, determine social outcomes so the only option there is is to create institutions in the most effective way and Meritocracy offers that possibility.
2 Likes
yes I do agee with you on limited governments being a propaganda to favor big corporations however I would like to know exactly what services will be the divided between private sector and public or which shared? and what determines this share or division? I personally find the economis aspect of meritocracy quite intriguing and I will definitely look into the American Monetary Institute and Steve Zarlengathank you for sharing 
economic* which businesses exactly would remain private and what did you mean by freelancers Roberto?
Freelancers are people who work for themselves. In some countries they’re technically businesses but I made the distinction as I don’t know whether it’s the same everywhere and they’re an important part of the economy.
The fundamental idea behind Social Capitalism is that the public have control over the money supply by turning the banks into publicly accountable institutions. I.e. the shareholders should be the general public and not just private individuals. Experts should run this for the public good, not greedy CEOs.
The rest of the economy remains as it is initially (depends on the country and its current situation). Whether an important industry should be public or private would be up to the people and the meritocrats in power, deciding what’s best for everyone. These decisions should be made on experience and studying what works and what doesn’t work.
For example, private prisons have shown to be a terrible idea because the corporations running them want to save as much money as possible. That translates into less guards, less meals, sometimes prisoners not even getting the basics, etc… and more importantly a private prison wants more “clients” - more prisoners! That’s insane and there have been cases where a judge is bribed to send more people to prison (in the US).
1 Like
RE: The Chicago Plan Revisited
Here’s a good presentation about the paper. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6x8RqiAqno
2 Likes
I created a page for Social Capitalism. Let’s sophisticate the concept of it together. There’s much for our consensus to be achieved. 
http://meritopedia.org/index.php/Social_Capitalism
3 Likes
The pages on Social Capitalism/ Meritopedia seem to have been taken down. 