It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is "PROUT" what OWS seeks??

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 6 2011 @ 04:40 PM
link   
PROUT is PROgressuve Utilisation Theory - a sort of cross between socialism/communism & capitalism

I heard an advocate on the radio over the weekend calling it "mass capitalism" - the workers own the company but the society generaly remains capitalist in that it is free of centralised planning and people are free to trade as they wish.

His vision of it was not quite as restrictive as the system advocated on the Wiki article above, but then perhaps he was doing a sales job & not dwelling on the negatives?!


He was advocating the Law of Social Cycles as a driver for the rise & fall of systems - basically when the difference between rich & poor gets too much, then the system falls apart - we are in an "aquisitor" phase at the moment.

The basic tenants espoused on the radio related to economics - if productivity increases and wages do not increase then you have surplus supply which leads to firms having to close, unemployment, social discord, etc.

He advocated PROUT co-operatives - every industry/company/factory/whatever to be owned 51% by its employees - the rest to be "freely traded" as a way of ensuring, for example, that increases in productivity resulted in increases in wages - teh 51% worker/owners ensuring they get the reward for their increased output.

this in turn would prevent the disparity in productivity and wages developing, and ensure a better distribution of wealth.

I am sure there is more depth to it than this, but it was at least interesting to hear someone espouse what sounded like a reasonably viable alternative economic system.



posted on Nov, 6 2011 @ 05:00 PM
link   
Sounds like an improvement of the system we have, buy if you're talking about what OWS needs, it's people, especially on the west coast, because the east coast OWS should be winding down due to weather. Hope both sides strengthen though.



posted on Nov, 6 2011 @ 05:04 PM
link   
So the conversion to this"prout" system entails forcibly stripping existing ownership of companies from the rightful owners; and handing it over to an inexperienced minimally educated employee comittee?


Great...
Like this "foggin " genius complaining about being told what's on the restaurants' menu?

uhm... how about "no".
edit on 6-11-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-11-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-11-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 6 2011 @ 05:28 PM
link   
reply to post by 46ACE
 


I didn't see anything about force there at all - the "how" is not, AFAIK, specified.

as a member of the public I do not think that striping people of their legally aquited wealth is a good thing, but forced sales - now that might be justifiable. Of course there are a lot of fish hooks in that too - but there's no need to make it sound like the October Revolution.



posted on Nov, 6 2011 @ 05:30 PM
link   
plan is insane if it is a plan at all which I doubt
but they may be geared towards it

It's kind of like socialism
Even if you are for socialism and rally for it and a liberal supports you as a president, all you will get is corporatism



posted on Nov, 6 2011 @ 05:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by 46ACE
 


I didn't see anything about force there at all - the "how" is not, AFAIK, specified.

as a member of the public I do not think that striping people of their legally aquited wealth is a good thing, but forced sales - now that might be justifiable. Of course there are a lot of fish hooks in that too - but there's no need to make it sound like the October Revolution.

That's exactly what it is.
You're not the "pseudo revolutionary" bonehead in the video are you?" They tell us: what's on the menu; how to cook it; what time to be here. Its a"dictatorship".
Yeah Ireally want to work with this guy..
I.E:
" Wheres Steve?"
"Not here yet".
"It's time for his shift; I 've gotta get my kids from the"sitter" before 5:30..."
" Hi guys"
" Hey Steve:Where've you been man? I can't keep hanging around waiting for you everyday!"
" YOU CAN'T TELL ME WHEN TO COME IN"!( my father's on the comitee!)


Giving this "idea" an undeserved 30 seconds:So what exactly would give anybody any incentive to risk capital and start and build a business only to hand 51% over to abunch of "tagalongs"???.

edit on 6-11-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-11-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-11-2011 by 46ACE because: spelling



posted on Nov, 6 2011 @ 06:10 PM
link   
I guess a good starting point would be for the workers to come up with enough cashflow to secure 51% of the business.



posted on Nov, 6 2011 @ 06:19 PM
link   
reply to post by tamusan
 


You'd have to think that teh basic model would be for "the collective" to take out a loan to buy out the previous ownership, then pay it back.

If the company was not efficient/profitable enough to service that then the initial premise would have to be that it was overpriced!!



posted on Nov, 6 2011 @ 06:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


A loan was one of the ways I considered they could come up with the cash.

I think there should be a test phase on a few businesses to see if the plan is viable. I think there should rules put in place where nonproductive employee/owners could easily be voted out. I know I hate picking up the slack for a poor worker, and imagine I am not alone in my thinking.



posted on Nov, 6 2011 @ 06:39 PM
link   
reply to post by tamusan
 



Yeah I could see it getting quite complicated!

it is not something you'd do overnight - the whole PROUT idea is for an entirely different economic system & way of thinking - a philosophy.

My point is that it seems like something that OWS would find attractive - it would "overthrow" the existing order, it is not actually socialism as such, and PROUT people actually seem in favour of OWS - there's a bunch of pages across the web saying so - google search

I'd be very interested in a system that could both reign in the excesses AND preserve the great majority of economic freedoms that capitalism has.

I don't think it'll happen in my lifetime (I'm over 50).....but it'd be interesting to watch the beginnings if it did happen ...& to hope for the best!



posted on Nov, 6 2011 @ 07:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by tamusan
I guess a good starting point would be for the workers to come up with enough cashflow to secure 51% of the business.


Yeah It's called a "business plan" and any bunch of employees who think they know their bosses business better can produce one(on any "home" pc)and approach a bank for financing to build their own facility.( After meeting All govt regulations!
)No "revolutionary" systems needed.


If he thinks running a frachise business is "so easy";
In this country; the "NOODLES KID"Is a "slave" to no one but his own insecurities...
edit on 6-11-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-11-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 6 2011 @ 09:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by 46ACE
 


I didn't see anything about force there at all - the "how" is not, AFAIK, specified.

as a member of the public I do not think that striping people of their legally aquited wealth is a good thing, but forced sales - now that might be justifiable. Of course there are a lot of fish hooks in that too - but there's no need to make it sound like the October Revolution.


So you think that business owners are going to willfully turn over their stuff to workers en masse? This is so outrageous. It's just more incremental socialism, which leads to communism. These guys just keep putting on different masks to hide their communist wolfiness...


Unless the business happens to open up it's shares of stock to their employees, and that does happen sometimes. I doubt they would give them voting stock though.
edit on 6-11-2011 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 7 2011 @ 02:29 AM
link   
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
 


I don't believe I mentioned willingness or otherwise anywhere.

But never mind - carry on with not even trying to understand what I posted



posted on Nov, 7 2011 @ 05:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
 


I don't believe I mentioned willingness or otherwise anywhere.

But never mind - carry on with not even trying to understand what I posted

You're right you didn't :We are just left to "assume": We wake up one day and all companies are mysteriously 51% employee owned...
So Let's NOT ask the obvious question: "Hey what happened?What's the ditch behind the factory for? and what's that GAWDAWFUL SMELL????"


edit on 7-11-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 7 2011 @ 05:57 PM
link   
reply to post by 46ACE
 


As I said - I imagine it would take a very long time to change society - longer than my remaining lifetime.

but, as always, feel free to make the assumptions you need in order to not have to actually think about the problem.



posted on Nov, 7 2011 @ 07:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by 46ACE
 


As I said - I imagine it would take a very long time to change society - longer than my remaining lifetime.

but, as always, feel free to make the assumptions you need in order to not have to actually think about the problem.

The "problem" is govt being taken over by big money, not "capitalism"and"ownership". Though I know those words to a socialist are like"sunlight" and "crucifixes" to a movie vampire

edit on 7-11-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 7 2011 @ 07:53 PM
link   
What we seek is to end the "Banking-Corporate-Military Industrial Complex Dictatorship" and we seek to end the ability of a company to finance a political campaign. We want the restoration of the fortress known as The USA while preserving and maintaining free, open and honest elections by only allowing private citizens to donate to campaigns!

We seek to maintain the democratic election process by preserving the republic for future generations!



posted on Nov, 7 2011 @ 08:01 PM
link   
reply to post by 46ACE
 


Where youy have money you have influence - it has always been the way back to the Roman Empire and probably previously.

Where you ahve massive amounts of money you ahve massive amounts of influence.

I'd be interested in watching a thread about how to get rid of the influence while retaining the money - but it is actually OT here


I can see you hate socialism and everything to do with it...I got not probelm with that....but my question was actually whether this philiosophy is what OWS might be looking for - not whether it, or me, is good bad or whatever.

Thank you Thelma - even if you didn't answer the question specifically at least you made comment relevant to it ....unlike some!



posted on Nov, 7 2011 @ 08:04 PM
link   
Anything in there on topic (?) if you please?
forget it Mr. "immaculate" I'm going to go catch up on a little (Vietnam era) war novel reading. Had enough of "molly coddling" evasive word game playing socialists and communists for one night.



posted on Nov, 7 2011 @ 08:07 PM
link   
reply to post by 46ACE
 


Because it's simple enough even someone with a lukewarm iq could comprehend it. This is who we fight against!




top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join