Comments on: Delusions http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/02/13/delusions/ Wed, 07 Jan 2009 04:33:52 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.1 by: Nandan http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/02/13/delusions/#comment-659 Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/02/13/delusions/#comment-659 Would beg to differ here. "Can we as shareholders vote to make changes in the company?". The answer is as affirmative as it would be to the question "Can we as voters vote to make changes in the country/ constituency?" but if you say that can an individual shareholder make significant changes, the answer is as resounding a no as it would be to the corresponding question. (assuming 1/n as the vote power of both 'n' stakeholders and voters for now, i.e. each shareholder has one vote). Each is equally powerful or otherwise in a similar situation. If you are talking of punitive action, then it is a different matter.but that cannot be a conclusive test of ownership. Of course, this is assuming the analogy of a joint stock company. But the process of political representation is a very different creature built for a different purpose than a JSC. Probably, its mission is to maximize 'social profit/good' rather than monetary profit. As for the statement "If I own something, I should be able to make changes to it", you can make changes equal to your share. This is where another difference kicks in between the JSC and the Political system(I discard my earlier assumption to align with reality): Each person has no. of votes equal to the number of shares in the former, while in the latter, it is equal to one vote, irrespective of the population.And that is why I believe, the analogy is incorrect. Would beg to differ here.

“Can we as shareholders vote to make changes in the company?”. The answer is as affirmative as it would be to the question “Can we as voters vote to make changes in the country/ constituency?” but if you say that can an individual shareholder make significant changes, the answer is as resounding a no as it would be to the corresponding question. (assuming 1/n as the vote power of both ‘n’ stakeholders and voters for now, i.e. each shareholder has one vote). Each is equally powerful or otherwise in a similar situation. If you are talking of punitive action, then it is a different matter.but that cannot be a conclusive test of ownership.
Of course, this is assuming the analogy of a joint stock company. But the process of political representation is a very different creature built for a different purpose than a JSC. Probably, its mission is to maximize ’social profit/good’ rather than monetary profit.
As for the statement “If I own something, I should be able to make changes to it”, you can make changes equal to your share. This is where another difference kicks in between the JSC and the Political system(I discard my earlier assumption to align with reality): Each person has no. of votes equal to the number of shares in the former, while in the latter, it is equal to one vote, irrespective of the population.And that is why I believe, the analogy is incorrect.

]]> by: Yazad http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/02/13/delusions/#comment-660 Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/02/13/delusions/#comment-660 <i>The answer is as affirmative as it would be to the question "Can we as voters vote to make changes in the country/ constituency?" </i> List the changes please. The only one I can think of is changing the elected representative. Let me take the small example of a municipal constituency which elects a corporator to the municipal corporation. In Bombay there are around 20 - 25,000 voters in such constituencies (227 corporators total). Now suppose 15,000 of my fellow citizens wish to make certain changes to the roads in our constituency with money taken from the municipal taxes we pay. Can we have a vote for that (i.e. a referendum)? I'm prepared to accept defeat if the vote goes against what I want. The problem lies in the fact that we cannot do anything. Let's assume that we would like to vote for a "social good" -- doesn't change what I'm saying. If you don't want to use this analogy, can you tell me in what way do "we" as citizens "own" the roads? I am helpless in getting any changes made -- even with the support of a *majority* of citizens of my area. The answer is as affirmative as it would be to the question “Can we as voters vote to make changes in the country/ constituency?”

List the changes please. The only one I can think of is changing the elected representative. Let me take the small example of a municipal constituency which elects a corporator to the municipal corporation. In Bombay there are around 20 - 25,000 voters in such constituencies (227 corporators total). Now suppose 15,000 of my fellow citizens wish to make certain changes to the roads in our constituency with money taken from the municipal taxes we pay. Can we have a vote for that (i.e. a referendum)? I’m prepared to accept defeat if the vote goes against what I want. The problem lies in the fact that we cannot do anything.

Let’s assume that we would like to vote for a “social good” — doesn’t change what I’m saying.

If you don’t want to use this analogy, can you tell me in what way do “we” as citizens “own” the roads? I am helpless in getting any changes made — even with the support of a *majority* of citizens of my area.

]]> by: digdug http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/02/13/delusions/#comment-661 Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/02/13/delusions/#comment-661 yazad, wasn't it gratifying to label an opinion that's unlike your own delusional?. I don't like participating in discussions that degenerate into name calling...Make it civil and I'll post what I mean. yazad, wasn’t it gratifying to label an opinion that’s unlike your own delusional?. I don’t like participating in discussions that degenerate into name calling…Make it civil and I’ll post what I mean.

]]> by: Yazad http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/02/13/delusions/#comment-662 Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/02/13/delusions/#comment-662 Digdug, the opinion is delusional. I'm not saying you are. So there was no name calling. And please, lots of opinions on the blog are unlike mine. Including those of guest bloggers at times! Digdug, the opinion is delusional. I’m not saying you are. So there was no name calling.

And please, lots of opinions on the blog are unlike mine. Including those of guest bloggers at times!

]]> by: digdug http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/02/13/delusions/#comment-663 Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/02/13/delusions/#comment-663 I said: "..an opinion that's unlike your own delusional?". I don't think I implied anywhere that you called me that. Ok..here I go again: I don't participate in discussions where my opinion is not respected and is called names. I said: “..an opinion that’s unlike your own delusional?”. I don’t think I implied anywhere that you called me that. Ok..here I go again: I don’t participate in discussions where my opinion is not respected and is called names.

]]> by: Yazad http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/02/13/delusions/#comment-664 Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/02/13/delusions/#comment-664 I don't think all opinions deserve respect. I have explained why I think that specific opinion is delusional. Please feel free to rebut my arguments. Or keep silent. The choice is yours. I don’t think all opinions deserve respect. I have explained why I think that specific opinion is delusional. Please feel free to rebut my arguments. Or keep silent. The choice is yours.

]]> by: Nandan http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/02/13/delusions/#comment-665 Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/02/13/delusions/#comment-665 Well, there are mechanisms that exist. The IAS, the IPS etc. are all constituted for this function, i.e. carrying out day to day administrative and other functions. If you take the BMC, you have the water works department (for example) that looks into water supply related issues. The Ward Officers etc. are not elected by the people. They are employees of the BMC. Now, if you want to construct a new road, it may require a Committee that could comprise elected representatives, but that is a part of the checks and balances of the system. Thus, the citizen, in her capacity as a citizen, and not a voter, can affect changes, in theory. The politicians come in when the theory gets perverted. Well, there are mechanisms that exist. The IAS, the IPS etc. are all constituted for this function, i.e. carrying out day to day administrative and other functions. If you take the BMC, you have the water works department (for example) that looks into water supply related issues. The Ward Officers etc. are not elected by the people. They are employees of the BMC. Now, if you want to construct a new road, it may require a Committee that could comprise elected representatives, but that is a part of the checks and balances of the system.
Thus, the citizen, in her capacity as a citizen, and not a voter, can affect changes, in theory. The politicians come in when the theory gets perverted.

]]> by: Yazad http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/02/13/delusions/#comment-666 Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/02/13/delusions/#comment-666 Can citizens vote to sack non-performing employees of the BMC? Shareholders can vote to sack non performing directors. Can citizens vote to sack non-performing employees of the BMC? Shareholders can vote to sack non performing directors.

]]> by: Nandan http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/02/13/delusions/#comment-667 Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/02/13/delusions/#comment-667 Let me reply by asking you another question :Can shareholders sack the non-performing middle management of the company? Let me also take the liberty of answering it : No (legally). As I said in my first comment, a voter is at least as powerful as a shareholder.Let me reiterate: we are talking of mechanisms that respond to the demands of the 'owners' without overhauling the whole system and I believe that they exist in our democratic set-up. In theory. Let me reply by asking you another question :Can shareholders sack the non-performing middle management of the company? Let me also take the liberty of answering it : No (legally). As I said in my first comment, a voter is at least as powerful as a shareholder.Let me reiterate: we are talking of mechanisms that respond to the demands of the ‘owners’ without overhauling the whole system and I believe that they exist in our democratic set-up. In theory.

]]> by: Gautam http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/02/13/delusions/#comment-668 Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/02/13/delusions/#comment-668 Nandan, but a shareholder can sell the share of the company, to someone who does not mind the middle managment, can't he? In that sense he has a real exit option. A voter living in Mumbai has to be subject to the writ of the BMC, irrespective of whether he likes its policies, supports them or is against them. The next possible counter-argument is that he has a right to shift out of the BMC area. But that brings in the issue of who really owns the property, the voter or the BMC? In law I think the voter owns the property, and if he does not pay his tax dues, the BMC can forclose on it in leiu. But the voter has no such recourse if the BMC does not deliver the services it promises, does he? Nandan, but a shareholder can sell the share of the company, to someone who does not mind the middle managment, can’t he? In that sense he has a real exit option. A voter living in Mumbai has to be subject to the writ of the BMC, irrespective of whether he likes its policies, supports them or is against them.

The next possible counter-argument is that he has a right to shift out of the BMC area. But that brings in the issue of who really owns the property, the voter or the BMC? In law I think the voter owns the property, and if he does not pay his tax dues, the BMC can forclose on it in leiu. But the voter has no such recourse if the BMC does not deliver the services it promises, does he?

]]>