Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by omalleyt 2645 days ago
Citizens would be the shareholders
5 comments

Small shareholders (less than 0.01% holdings) have essentially no voice in a corporation's policy; nor are they a consideration for the board of directors. Sometimes they are the beneficiaries of policies that are satisfying major stockholders, but not in a big way.

No, this metaphor does not work.

In what way does that meaningfully differ from the way a democracy is supposed to be run? Shareholders are treated as "voters" in a democratic organization, where 1 share = 1 vote.
Despite the common wisdom governments tend to care a lot about citizens bitching. A friend used to work as a lawyer for a state utility board. They sit and listen to rants by 75 year old cat ladies and then consider how to mollify them.
So who gets the majority of shares in the country? Should it be the executives, or the funders? Maybe we should have a 1 vote per tax-dollar system.
Wait, I thought the way this whole "shares and CEO's" thing was supposed to work is that Moldbug would get to decide that, and everything would work just fine afterwards.
Being a small shareholder is even worse.
True, the shareholder role is certainly better than the "employee" role for example.
> shareholders

Shareholders have zero say in how modern corporations are run.

Why? Can't the vote? There is even such a thing as activist shareholders.