# Elizabeth Warren has introduced legislation to Give Workers More Control Over Corporate Decisions **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 16, 2018, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-has-introduced-legislation-to-give-workers-more-control-over-corporate-decisions/819733 "2018-08-16T15:27:30Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2018, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-has-introduced-legislation-to-give-workers-more-control-over-corporate-decisions/819733/61 "2018-08-17T18:57:37Z")
> [@Corry\_El](#): > > As I said before, I don’t think it’s a strong argument to just look at one aspect of the Continental European approach to business and society and assume that transplanting it to an Anglo-Saxon business culture country would have the same end result for society as a whole. Plus there’s the cherry picking element of a) Germany v France or Italy (not on codetermination per se with Italy which doesn’t have it, but the general results of the Continental approach including France and Italy, not just Germany and the Nordics as if the US were so much more similar to the latter than the former, who says?) b) ignoring the upside of the Anglo-Saxon approach (much more corporate value creation in US compared to Europe in recent decades, and a blow out when it comes to value in new, as opposed to old, industries). > > But then the Warren proposal… You missed the thrust of my argument. There’s lots to discuss about the Warren proposal. But to dismiss it as crazy or absurd is ignorant. Because there are examples of this sort of governance in other countries and in the US. To be sure, this ignorance is not unusual in the US. But [conservative attacks](https://twitter.com/zachdcarter/status/1030062637361586176) on this proposal by Warren deserve mockery. The German experience doesn’t _necessarily_ carry over to the US? Sure, I’ll buy that. In reality, there are many types of mixed market economies in the world. Sweden has lots of government spending _and_ strict cutoffs for welfare payments to the unemployed. Germany’s system is centered on banks; Japan’s before 1989 was centered on big conglomerates (still is, albeit to a lesser extent). The US is driven by the stock market. None of that was planned by the way: the US system was shaped by state regulation of insurance companies (which limited their influence) and state/federal regulation of banks (ditto). Back to the OP. You can interpret Warren’s proposal on its merits, but in reality it’s an opening bid. We have some pretty pronounced problems in US corporate governance; Warren’s proposal and a milder version of it (which is more likely to be passed) deserve debate. But the first step is to address arguments that are a) common among conservatives and b) really stupid. Then the adults can talk. ---
**Author:** ![Dewey\_Finn](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dewey_finn/32/4222_2.png) [@Dewey\_Finn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dewey_Finn)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2018, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-has-introduced-legislation-to-give-workers-more-control-over-corporate-decisions/819733/62 "2018-08-17T19:10:27Z")
A lot of people think it’s wrong that virtually none of the companies or individuals responsible for the Great Recession had any sort of criminal penalty (jail, fines, etc). Most of them didn’t even lose their jobs. Edited to add that her proposal is one idea to prevent that from happening in the future. Someone who uses a gun to steal $2,000 from a bank goes to jail for a good long time, while a banker can steal a lot more without being charged with anything. ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2018, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-has-introduced-legislation-to-give-workers-more-control-over-corporate-decisions/819733/63 "2018-08-17T19:13:20Z")
So let me restate and summarize. Bad argument: Look at Vanguard and Germany. Conclude: Warren’s proposal is great! Actual argument: ruling out Warren’s proposal as not reflecting the realities of capitalism is ignorant of the empirical realities of capitalism. I gave counterexamples. There are many others. This ignorance, compounded by a lack of self-knowledge, is fairly typical in US conservative discussion. I gave a citation. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2018, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-has-introduced-legislation-to-give-workers-more-control-over-corporate-decisions/819733/64 "2018-08-17T19:38:46Z")
> [@Measure\_for\_Measure](#): > > There’s lots to discuss about the Warren proposal. > > But to dismiss it as crazy or absurd is ignorant. Because there are examples of this sort of governance in other countries and in the US. That depends on why you think it’s absurd. If you think it’s absurd because you think the economy will collapse if it’s implemented then the example of other countries would suggest that this is not correct. But if you think it’s absurd because you think it’s morally wrong to grant (partial) control of people’s property to other people, then the fact that any number of other countries are doing this has no real bearing. ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2018, 12:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-has-introduced-legislation-to-give-workers-more-control-over-corporate-decisions/819733/65 "2018-08-18T00:19:43Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > That depends on why you think it’s absurd. > > If you think it’s absurd because you think the economy will collapse if it’s implemented then the example of other countries would suggest that this is not correct. > > But if you think it’s absurd because you think it’s morally wrong to grant (partial) control of people’s property to other people, then the fact that any number of other countries are doing this has no real bearing. Ok, then you think that tweaking the rules on corporate governance of publicly traded _limited liability_ companies is… morally absurd. I say that if folks want to set up their own companies and profit from them, no problem. But if they want the benefits of limited liability, then they are going to have to play by public rules. I agree that companies should have the option of transforming themselves into partnerships, whereby stockholders can take on unlimited liability for the corporation’s decisions. Good luck with that. News flash: property institutions didn’t just spring from Zeus’s head fully armed. They are the result of _policy_ decisions. Property has never _ever_ been unregulated, nor has it ever been free of governmental encumbrance of one type or another. ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2018, 7:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-has-introduced-legislation-to-give-workers-more-control-over-corporate-decisions/819733/66 "2018-08-20T07:13:03Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > I think the combination might tip the balance a little too far in the workers’ favour if they get a union _and_ the ability to vote for board members who would promise to grant anything the union demands. At that point, the employees may as well set up a cooperative. And that’s\* terrible!\* Oh, wait. ---
**Author:** ![puddleglum](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/puddleglum/32/137_2.png) [@puddleglum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puddleglum)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2018, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-has-introduced-legislation-to-give-workers-more-control-over-corporate-decisions/819733/67 "2018-08-20T16:42:38Z")
> [@Measure\_for\_Measure](#): > > So let me restate and summarize. > > Bad argument: Look at Vanguard and Germany. Conclude: Warren’s proposal is great! > > Actual argument: ruling out Warren’s proposal as not reflecting the realities of capitalism is ignorant of the empirical realities of capitalism. I gave counterexamples. There are many others. This ignorance, compounded by a lack of self-knowledge, is fairly typical in US conservative discussion. I gave a citation. Warren’s proposal does not reflect the realities of American capitalism. This is an important point because it is the only type of capitalism we have in America. American capitalism is about big young companies that grow fast and generate great returns. America has 19 companies that are bigger than Germany’s largest company, Volkswagen. Of Germany’s 10 largest company only one was created in the last 50 years. The price to earning ratio of the German stock market is 25% lower than in the US. Germany’s economy is about old firms that are well managed and grow slowly. Their economy’s strengths are an educated, law abiding populace that excels at craftmanship. Adopting rules such as Warren’s would hurt what is strongest in America’s economy, young dynamic companies that create huge value is short amounts of time, while doing nothing to replace it with Germany’s strengths. We would get Germany’s weaknesses and American weaknesses. What would we get in return? Not insulation from malfeasance as the Siemens bribery scandal, or Volkswagen’s falsifying emissions shows, in the book the Big Short the term Dusseldorf was used by traders as shorthand for the dumb money buying all the subprime loans. ---
**Author:** ![Buck\_Godot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/buck_godot/32/6573_2.png) [@Buck\_Godot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Buck_Godot)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2018, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-has-introduced-legislation-to-give-workers-more-control-over-corporate-decisions/819733/68 "2018-08-20T17:10:03Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Maybe this could be applied more broadly - to unions, for instance. How about we compromise and have the Corporations just have the same restrictions regarding political spending as unions currently do. 1. All expenditures both direct and indirect reported annually online for all to see. 2. Politcal expendatures can be made only if share holders enough share holders “opt in” and relinquish a portion of their dividends to finance them. ---
**Author:** ![Dewey\_Finn](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dewey_finn/32/4222_2.png) [@Dewey\_Finn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dewey_Finn)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2018, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-has-introduced-legislation-to-give-workers-more-control-over-corporate-decisions/819733/69 "2018-08-20T17:42:47Z")
I get the impression that some people think that labor unions and corporations are equivalent in power somehow. I doubt that. I suspect that corporations are vastly more powerful in America today than the few labor unions left. For one thing, only one in ten employees is in a labor union. Even among public-sector workers, only one in three is. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2018, 7:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-has-introduced-legislation-to-give-workers-more-control-over-corporate-decisions/819733/70 "2018-08-20T19:08:39Z")
> [@Dewey\_Finn](#): > > I get the impression that some people think that labor unions and corporations are equivalent in power somehow. I doubt that. I suspect that corporations are vastly more powerful in America today than the few labor unions left. For one thing, only one in ten employees is in a labor union. Even among public-sector workers, only one in three is. It depends on how you define power, but I tend to think of labor unions as vastly more powerful than corporations. Where corporations have a lot more power is on matters pertaining to themselves specifically, and mostly at a local level. Meaning, they’re very good at getting local governments to give them massive tax breaks and so on - things which benefit this specific corporation but don’t do anything for corporations as a group. By contrast, unions don’t tend to have interests that are specific to themselves. (The exception is big public service unions, who are generally don’t face corporate opposition.) Their efforts are geared towards things which benefit unions as a group, most specifically laws and regulations which enhance union power. Corporate efforts to oppose these things are relatively half-hearted - the Chamber of Commerce will tend to be prominent in opposition, but the COC is not the full weight of corporate power, and most corporations will be busy lobbying politicians for far narrower issues that are of interest to their company specifically or perhaps a few peers. So unions have the edge. In addition, while corporations have money to spend, unions have money and membership, which is a more powerful force. ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2018, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-has-introduced-legislation-to-give-workers-more-control-over-corporate-decisions/819733/71 "2018-08-20T20:53:45Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > It depends on how you define power, but I tend to think of labor unions as vastly more powerful than corporations. When 1/10 members of a workforce are union, your union is, other than as a lobbying force, essentially neutered. A strike won’t actually _do_ anything, which leaves the union basically no power. The union can lobby… But in terms of spending, _every labor union in the country_ (unions which speak for tens of millions of people) spends a total of four times as much as… [two people](https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/15/kochs-brothers-labor_n_4966883.html). Not “all companies”, not “all billionaires”, just _two people_. Businesses? Blows 'em out of the water: All business sectors combined to spend at least $9.5 billion to influence politicians at the federal and state levels in the 2012 election cycle, including campaign contributions and lobbying. Labor unions spent $600 million. So once striking loses its bite (which, for the vast majority of corporations, it has) the argument that the unions are more powerful than the corporations is just bizarre. ---
**Author:** ![Dewey\_Finn](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dewey_finn/32/4222_2.png) [@Dewey\_Finn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dewey_Finn)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2018, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-has-introduced-legislation-to-give-workers-more-control-over-corporate-decisions/819733/72 "2018-08-20T21:21:37Z")
> [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > When 1/10 members of a workforce are union, your union is, other than as a lobbying force, essentially neutered. It’s not that 1/10 members of a workforce are union, but that one in ten workers in the US are members of unions. And that percentage is inflated by the larger number of public-sector employees in unions. Only 6.5% of private sector employees are unionized. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2018, 10:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-has-introduced-legislation-to-give-workers-more-control-over-corporate-decisions/819733/73 "2018-08-20T22:04:55Z")
> [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > The union can lobby… But in terms of spending, _every labor union in the country_ (unions which speak for tens of millions of people) spends a total of four times as much as… [two people](https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/15/kochs-brothers-labor_n_4966883.html). Not “all companies”, not “all billionaires”, just _two people_. Businesses? Blows 'em out of the water: > > All business sectors combined to spend at least $9.5 billion to influence politicians at the federal and state levels in the 2012 election cycle, including campaign contributions and lobbying. Labor unions spent $600 million. > > So once striking loses its bite (which, for the vast majority of corporations, it has) the argument that the unions are more powerful than the corporations is just bizarre. You seem to have entirely ignored what I wrote. OK. ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2018, 8:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-has-introduced-legislation-to-give-workers-more-control-over-corporate-decisions/819733/74 "2018-08-21T08:38:52Z")
If unions were more powerful than corporations, their influence wouldn’t have been shrinking for the last 40 years. The fact that corporations are built to advance shareholder interests, and only shareholder interests makes them amoral actors. Absent an outside controlling force, corporations will do (and have done) absolutely horrible things, from abusing/endangering/killing workers to poisoning water and air. The question is what sort of controls make sense to appropriately direct the power of the corporation to create positive economic value for society, rather than just for the owners. Because, the point of the legal construct of a corporation is NOT to make owners rich, but to make the whole of the economy better off. ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2018, 8:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-has-introduced-legislation-to-give-workers-more-control-over-corporate-decisions/819733/75 "2018-08-21T08:45:21Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > You seem to have entirely ignored what I wrote. OK. What you wrote is baseless and kinda silly. What do you call right-to-work laws if not corporations, as a group, flexing their muscles against unions? Many corporate initiatives benefit all corporations. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2018, 12:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-has-introduced-legislation-to-give-workers-more-control-over-corporate-decisions/819733/76 "2018-08-21T12:34:16Z")
> [@Cheesesteak](#): > > If unions were more powerful than corporations, their influence wouldn’t have been shrinking for the last 40 years. > > The fact that corporations are built to advance shareholder interests, and only shareholder interests makes them amoral actors. Unions are amoral actors then, and for the same reasons. > [@](#): > > Because, the point of the legal construct of a corporation is NOT to make owners rich, but to make the whole of the economy better off. No, it isn’t. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2018, 12:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-has-introduced-legislation-to-give-workers-more-control-over-corporate-decisions/819733/77 "2018-08-21T12:37:25Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > No, it isn’t. Really? Then why did the government create rules for the legal construct of “corporation”? ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2018, 12:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-has-introduced-legislation-to-give-workers-more-control-over-corporate-decisions/819733/78 "2018-08-21T12:48:05Z")
> [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > What you wrote is baseless and kinda silly. What do you call right-to-work laws if not corporations, as a group, flexing their muscles against unions? I don’t know how much you thought this through. Right-to-work laws apply in about half the country. So if your argument is that corporations have far power than unions, you’re going to have to say there were other factors involved WRT this. ---
**Author:** ![Ruken](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f475e1/32.png) [@Ruken](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ruken)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2018, 1:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-has-introduced-legislation-to-give-workers-more-control-over-corporate-decisions/819733/79 "2018-08-21T13:07:00Z")
> [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > What do you call right-to-work laws if not corporations, as a group, flexing their muscles against unions? I call it voters flexing their muscles on election day. ---
**Author:** ![Scumpup](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ce73a5/32.png) [@Scumpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scumpup)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2018, 1:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-has-introduced-legislation-to-give-workers-more-control-over-corporate-decisions/819733/80 "2018-08-21T13:13:46Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Really? Then why did the government create rules for the legal construct of “corporation”? Going off MBA classes that were 20-some years ago…Corporations exist to advance shareholder interests and to limit their liability. The laws concerning them are about those things in one way or another, for the most part, though there are also lots of laws/rules/regulations surrounding their taxation. I don’t remember ever hearing about them existing to “make the whole economy better off.” [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-has-introduced-legislation-to-give-workers-more-control-over-corporate-decisions/819733.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-has-introduced-legislation-to-give-workers-more-control-over-corporate-decisions/819733.md?page=5)