Let me say that I have not participated in any way in the Occupy movement, other than to follow it and voice support here online. I have the greatest respect for what the vast majority of the protesters are trying to accomplish, and I endorse what they have to say. If my personal situation allowed, I would probably join them on the ramparts. The Occupy Wall Street movement has contributed one invaluable insight, and that is this:
If our political system is broken and our democracy has been subverted by powerful financiers, then the solution is to get at the source. We can't change our politics until we change the behavior of the financial/corporate world...and we can't change that without getting on to the streets and initiating a face-to-face confrontation with the movers and shakers.
I'd like to add one other dynamic to that equation -- we can't change things, even with that face-to-face confrontation, unless there is a mechanism to move the money in a direction that will either support the movement or, at least, stay on the sidelines.
The Occupy movement is being forced into a new phase, and I think it must go beyond a physical presence. The next phase should include stepping up the financial pressure to force needed structural change. What Occupy needs -- what this country needs -- is an new investment vehicle - a mutual fund or funds that are pledged to invest in companies that will abide by a new code of corporate conduct laid out in alignment with the concerns of the Occupy movement.
I'd like to make the case briefly for this new kind of fund and to sketch out the basic principles -- below the "jump" -- and in a later diary, to flesh out how this might work in practice and how it could be effective when similar ideas have made no difference.
First off, I know this isn't an entirely new idea. There are mutual funds that are aimed at environmental concerns and green energy. Others purport to vet investments based on hewing to rules reflecting respect for labor, or other progressive causes. These have been too narrow in their focus and far too small in their scope. They may have provided some limited amount of capital to companies that liberals like, but mostly they probably just make liberals feel better about investing their money. What I propose is an investment vehicle that's aimed at the core problem -- the issues behind the OWS movement (it shouldn't be ideological in a way that would divide the 99%)-- and I propose that the effort be broad enough to bring in a huge amount of capital.
The core problems are the way the corporate and financial world is skewed to promote the interests of an elite few, how the American capitalist system has skewed so badly in focusing on short-term rewards to shareholders (usually the execs with options benefit the most), and the way corporate money is spent to corrupt and pervert our political system. So, that should be the focus.
Some have proposed moving money from banks to credit unions, but that just skims the surface. The fact is most of the 99% has very little money in banks. Most of us are laden with debt, and those of us who can save won't leave big sums in a bank which pays negligible interest rates. Big-ticket items like moving mortgages to credit unions would have more impact, but I think we need to cast a wider net than just aiming at the banks.
I'm not in a position to make this happen, but maybe someone has concrete ideas about how to get the ball rolling to create a high-profile investment vehicle that is aimed at changing the playing field, to boost companies that get it -- that are focused on lifting the 99%, not the 1%. I'd love to get your input and your effort. Labor-run pensions and such could be a powerful source of capital, along with committed individuals who pledge to invest with the fund(s) we create. The trick is to to get this insanely ambitious project off the ground.
We can begin to change the dynamics of the corporate and financial sectors, and ultimately the political sector, if all the supporters of OWS would pledge to contribute to a investment fund that would operate on certain principles, including investing only in projects and companies that:
1) Pay CEOs something that resembles "reasonable compensation" -- say, a guideline of no more than 50 times what the companies average worker makes. Personally, since CEOs are making 343 times what workers make, I'd like to see that sliced by a factor of 10, so that the cutoff would be 35x what the average worker earns.
There is no reason why shareholders should be subsidizing lavish lifestyles for CEOs. Companies would be in better shape if they didn't waste precious resources on a bogus competition for executive talent, or include incentives that for the execs that work against the long-term interests of workers and the other 99%
2) Restrict political activities to obey the regime that was struck down by the Roberts' Supreme Court.
Again, companies spend a lot of money on political activities, in part because they can. If we can't fix the law, then take out the incentive to do it.
3) Does not exploit foreign labor -- pays living wages, etc.....
If we level the playing field globally, everyone will benefit. Seems obvious, but it's not really happening, is it? It's time to introduce a new reason -- a new force to improve corporate behavior.
I think these changes could actually start a movement of money in the right direction...if the investments actually happen. The money must come. Politicians will follow the money and that would cleanse our political system.