Decentralize Power
Take Back our Government
By Wendy Joy Welsh
HelpUncleSam.org | June 7th, 2023
“If a monkey hoarded more bananas than it could eat, while most of the other monkeys starved, scientists would study that monkey to figure out what the heck was wrong with it. When humans do it, we put them on the cover of Forbes.” -Nathalie Robin Justice @welcomewords
Within this article is a description of how we can rid our country of monopolizing behavior and put more power in the hands of the people by leveling the playing field for small businesses, co-ops and individual workers.
We know we need change, and the root of the problem is staring us in the face: hoarded power. This is because this system allows power to be hoarded. Since individuals and corporations with the most amount of power have the advantage and typically win in business, any individual or business without it will ultimately be consumed by the giant corporations. To survive in such a system, one must destroy all competition lest one be destroyed. In essence, our economic system is like a demolition-derby, where the last man standing is the winner, or a video game with some players so overpowered as to turn all the other players into obedient non-playing characters. Any such system leads to an unstable economic environment with severe economic inequality. The result will be that only one or a handful of corporations will control everything, a system known as fascism. That looks like where we are headed. “The definition of fascism is the marriage of corporation and state.” – Benito Mussolini.
Why are the banana hoarders on the cover of Forbes? Because they are the winners of this twisted game. Being the best monopolist is “winning.” Destroying others is “winning”. Unethical business practices help facilitate “winning”, which is why unethical business practices aren’t shameful in this culture. To see it another way, in this twisted game, winning is providing for your family. Those on the cover of Forbes are the best providers. But an economic system should not be a game. There should not be one winner. An economic system should prioritize stability. We all need a stable system. The children of our society, our future, can’t thrive and grow into healthy citizens in a dog-eat-dog world.
There are so many reasons not to allow power to be consolidated besides being on the road to fascism. Another reason is corruption. The more economic inequality, the more likely that those with power will undermine our democratic republic by buying politicians. Another reason is that we end up having to bail out the Too Big to Fail giants. An ideal system would feature a lot of small businesses and co-ops. A system of small companies would offer more choices of where to work and where to shop. More importantly, it would result in power being more evenly distributed throughout the system.
Enormous Corporations are neither Natural nor Truly Functional
Our society tends to assume that enormous corporations are natural, but in reality they aren’t even functional. When companies get large, they become unwieldy. To manage large organizations owners need to create hierarchical structures such as divisions, project groups and/or branches. These are just mini-organizations within a large corporation. For example, it is impossible to run a large company of 100,000 employees without creating subgroups.
Is it possible for corporations to have completely autonomous subgroups? This already happens. Many manufacturing corporations employ OEMs (Original Equipment Manufacturers). OEMs are completely separate corporations creating some of the components, which are sold by other corporations. So, a paradigm of cooperative corporations already exists and works within many industries today.
Basic Idea
Consolidated power is often used to exploit and control those without power, and that happens in both the public and private sectors. The basic idea is to limit both public and private consolidated power. Public power would be limited via regulation. Private power would be limited by an entirely new system of taxation, which would tax the hoarders and not the workers. No more income tax, just a monopolist tax. Our current tax system is like Robinhood who steals from the king to give to the poor, but in the end: the king still owns all the land; the king still controls the army and the government. The monopolists are becoming like the king: hoarding all the land and buying politicians.
To stop this hoarding of power, we need to change the tax system to make our economic environment inhospitable to consolidated power. Instead of taxing income, tax power. Tax individuals and corporations based on how much power they have. Have that tax go up exponentially, in a way to make it absolutely unsustainable to have hundreds of thousands of employees and/or own the majority of the land. The goal is to turn “too big to fail” into “too big to exist.” The working class would be better able to compete. Economic inequality would diminish, and monopolistic control over us would subside.
This new tax system need not affect social safety net programs, which would still be funded through taxation. But all taxation will be levied on those with power not on the working class. Also, these programs will likely improve in the absence of the corruption which results from concentrations of power.
Anti-Trust Laws Aren’t Enough
Today we have corporations with overwhelming consolidated power, so it is obvious that our anti-trust laws aren’t enough. The problem is that the usefulness of anti-trust laws is dependent on politicians being proactive and not corrupt. If instead we also use tax to limit hoarded power, it removes the need for direct intervention by governmental officials. Keeping the officials’ grubby little hands off such power regulation also lessens the likelihood of corruption. It doesn’t give officials anything to sell to power-hungry individuals. Just as the Income Tax is now calculated yearly, so would be this tax on power. This means that every year we would get a little closer to breaking up hoarded power, and breaking up of power will happen naturally over time.
Identifying Power
Our natural inclination is to think of the hoarded bananas as money, but let’s instead imagine that the bananas represent power. Of course it appears as if money and power are the same thing, but money is only a transient exchange medium for power. Money is not power in and of itself. If I own all of the land, and you have all of the money, I could merely charge you all of your money in exchange for a place to sleep and your place of business. Voilá! I have all of your money.
If I own all of the land and have no soldiers, and you have an army of 100,000 soldiers, we know who would win. You would easily take my land. Control over labor is power. Just like with an army of people, there is power in having an army of robots or a factory filled with machines doing one’s bidding.
To summarize: power is control – control over labor, control over machinery, control over real estate, which includes control over natural resources.
The tax we use now merely pays for infrastructure and social safety nets. This monopoly tax serves the community better because it also keeps the power of individuals and corporations at a reasonable level. To create this type of tax system we must: a) Figure out what is a reasonable size, i.e. how big is “too big,” and then b) create a formula which quantifies power.
Optimal Size of Power
How big is too big? In order to establish controls on concentrations of power, we need to sleuth out what are the ideal sizes of the different types of power.
- Optimal Labor Power: What is the optimal number of employees? The best size would prevent CEOs from seeing their employees as merely machines. The CEO of a company should know their employees and see them as people, and the employees should see themselves as part of a team. Many people have attempted to figure out an optimal group size. For example the Dunbar Number sets it at 150 people. The Swedish Taxation Authority keeps their offices under 150 people for this reason. Some believe the optimal group size at 250, and Facebook limits “friends” to 5000. As time goes on, we will get closer to knowing the true optimal social grouping number which humans evolved to thrive. We can call this number Optimal Labor Power Quotient. In the public sector, organizations should be limited to this size as the Swedish Taxation Authority does. In the private sector the tax should be calculated in a way to incentivize that size.
- Optimal Real Estate Power: The goal is not to tax the house that you use. The goal is to make it impossible for corporations and individuals to buy up all the houses, so that the people can’t afford to buy them. The Optimal Real Estate Power Quotient (REPQ) is the optimal amount of land that people need to survive and to maintain a self sustaining food supply. We will not have to pay taxes on a personal dwelling or on the minimum amount of land needed for survival, for example growing food. Perhaps 10 acres is the best OREPQ. That would mean that anyone who owns under 10 acres would have no taxes.
- Optimal Power over Machinery: It could also be useful for small businesses to not be taxed on small equipment. If this is the case, the Optimal Machinery Power Quotient could piggyback on that Optimal Labor Power Quotient, by using how many man hours does a machine replace. Such a tax can give the government the option to tax machinery at a higher rate, which would incentivize human employees over machinery.
Calculating the Tax on Power
In the past we taxed income and profit. Here we are taxing power. Just like when we calculated income tax, we first had to determine how much income an entity accumulated over the tax period. With a tax on power, we must first create a simple method to quantify each form of power. That way we can calculate the power wielded by each individual and corporation.
- Labor Power
Calculating the power over labor could be as easy as calculating income. Use the same forms that we currently use for Income Tax. Calculate the tax for each employee, but instead of having the employee pay income tax, aggregate all of the employees’ taxes (for each corporation) into a total power over labor: Labor Power. - Machinery Power
Calculating the power over equipment could be as easy as the amount of much energy the equipment uses. This would incentivize energy efficiency. Again this would be the aggregate of all factory equipment. - Real Estate Power
The government already assesses the value of real estate. The same assessment process could be used.
Tax Exponentially
When labor, real estate, machinery, and natural resources are taxed exponentially, every year the power will be more evenly distributed, and people and corporations will not feel the need to destroy all competition.
Best First Step
A system with no monopolies will be much better than the system we have now, and I truly hope this is the only real change we ever need to make, but there are people who want a more drastic change. There are so many different paths toward so many different political ideals. Some people are communists/Marxists. Some people are anarchists. No matter which path you are on, no matter which style of government you strive for, this is the best first step.
If you are hoping for a more major change, think of this: leaving the monopolists intact with their consolidated power when a system is being rebuilt is like leaving a pack of wolves in the henhouse. The monopolistic power will undermine any noble plan. So, you need to first decentralize power before any great uprising.
So, no matter which path you are on, you need to get rid of monopolizing power, and that is good because we are going to need all groups to take on the monopolists. No politician is going to save us. We have to work together. Together we can take down the monopolists and make “Too Big to Fail” into “Too Big to Exist!”
I appreciate positive or negative feedback.