A New Model?

EniacA New Model?

The impact of the new technologies, even something as ubiquitous as e-mail have only begun to be felt in many parts of society. For instance, take shareholder voting. Usually, this ratifies selection of the board of directors and takes place once a year. This is a reflection of the difficulty of getting all the shareholders together to vote or was. Really, it’s obsolete. Shareholders should be empowered by the new technologies and there should be multiple votes each year. For instance, the extravagant pay and benefits offered CEO’s and other officers of the company might require ratification by the shareholders instead of being chosen by a board of compensation often appointed by the CEO himself.

What about government? How many places could the government in this country empower citizens to make a difference in the decision making. Right now, floods of e-mails are fired in whenever a major issue appears. But we can do better. I believe right now we have the technology to eliminate fake e-mails and other nonsense from the process. If one of my websites can screen out spam and confirm my identity so I can download modifications to my video games, surely a congressional office can do the same. I don’t think they want to do this. Floods of e-mail enable a representative to vote anyway they like. Accurate e-mails reflecting the actual views of the citizens, particularly the most energized and interest citizens would likely reflect real public concerns and handicap a representative freedom to do any act they wish for any constituency for instance a corporation having made large campaign contributions.

We don’t think about these things. We act as if the world were connected by horse drawn vehicles from another age when people communicate with every part of the world in tenths of a second. Let’s start thinking and start building a society where people matter.

James Pilant

Enraged!

I teach Business Ethics. What happened in the health care debate in the last few days is to ethics what a fire hydrant is to a dog. I am enraged. Does anybody at any time, talk ethics about this issue? And I am definitely absolutely not talking about joe lieberman’s, “I am standing for God and country based on how pettily I can act at the moment.” Revenge is not ethics.

How do I explain any of this to students? Health care reform makes them buy private insurance? Whose idea of reform is this? What do I tell them? Their government’s cure for rising health care costs is to make them buy insurance from private companies? How do I explain the importance of ethics, honor and duty, when it is not rewarded? What kindness, consideration and care have the insurance companies done to merit this? Have they been free of fraud and wrong doing?

Should I just re entitle the class Anti-Ethics: how to get ahead and don’t worry, God won’t get you later?

I can’t explain this to ME. There is no way anyone could have told me this debate would work out this way.

I believe in democracy, that people should have some kind of say in how the government functions. I believe that we are in a serious crisis in the field of health care and that it is severely damaging the country not to mention causing death and suffering for many people.

For decades, in poll after poll, the American people have said over and over again that this system is not working. In Congress over the last few days a consensus has been reached to strengthen the current system, essentially rewarding the same actors and fools who have created this crisis in the first place.

We as a free people will be forced to buy private insurance. Let me explain private to you. If the government does it, I can vote, I can complain and the government can make changes. Elected people like staying elected and even fairly small threats to their electability will motivate them. Private industry has a different motive, profits. I have no way of influencing their decisions. None. Zip. Zero.

You might say: Well James, you can buy another insurance policy, get something cheaper. Really? The insurance companies have an exemption from the anti-trust laws. They do not have to compete. With the government mandate that I have to buy insurance, I am being tied and fettered, thrown helpless into the profit making hands of an insurance company. I will be fined, possibly imprisoned if I do not. I can be relatively confident that the government and private industry will make sure I either pay or suffer.

I could go on for page after page, but what’s the point? I’m not a lobbyist. I don’t make campaign contributions in the thousands of dollars. I have e-mailed my representatives with no response at any time on these issues.

As far as I can tell in the minds of those people I had the misfortune to vote for, I don’t exist. My life has no relevance to the people in Washington.

So, tell me, what do I tell my students?

James Pilant

United States Attacks Financial Fraud Two Years Late

Justice must be seen to be done. A society in which the wealthy or well connected get different justice than others is a society in real trouble.

When someone murders someone, you start looking immediately. When you have a theft you go and start asking questions. But if you are American financial institutions, you get a two year head start.

The Obama administration has decided to launch “a sustained, multilevel attack on financial fraud.”

Isn’t that just precious? They’re on the job!

I can’t help but wonder why people who stole billions of dollars, moved many Americans into poverty and missed totally destroying the world’s economic system by a hairs breath get two years to dispose of the evidence and develop new schemes of raping the public.

I have to ask if this government and this president are serious in any way at pursuing the financial malfeasance of those who have made large campaign contributions.

Morality and ethics demand that criminals be brought to justice. But not only that, simple logic dictates that they who have victimized millions should be priority targets for investigation.