14. May 2008 by admin.

“What type of government is best?” is perhaps a flawed statement. Considering the different forms of government, including constitutional monarchy, federalist republic, unitary republic, confederacy, Marxist socialism, and anarcho-socialism, what comes to mind is not the form, but the needs of the people. Some government will favor certain groups of individuals over other groups. Whether it be inborn traits (talent) or political dispositions (bias, opinions, worldviews), an isolated group of people will perform very differently under different governments. For example, if the person or group has a strong sense of individualism, or a strong sense of collectivism, he or they will certainly fit in differently in various forms of government. Depending on what traits the government values, such as intelligence, physical strength, rational ability, moral conduct, or respect of law, some individuals will prefer certain types of governments over others. Thus, good government should be tailored to the needs of the people, and the effective ruler can design a system where each group feels they have their own place in society.

Furthermore, the programme of the government is also important. Regardless of government structure or arrangement of people, the goals and agenda of the government is what ultimately gets political, economic, and social progress done; it is not a question of the type of regime, but rather the effectiveness which means most in the end. Political stability must come first, because even if the people are starving in a war, the unity must come first or else the country is no longer a country. A politically strong, not necessarily aggressive position, has the people in its best interest. A ruler of such a country will make a minimum of political enemies and a maximum of allies through diplomatic relations. Next, economic stability and growth must be created. Ideally a laissez-faire libertarian type of management, varying degrees of state control can be performed, depending on the situation, and still make conducive situations for growth. Finally, when all things are settled under the heavenly blue sky, social progress can be considered. The rights of the people, economic prosperity, universal education, and beautification of the cities can be worked towards.

The proper question, then, is “what type of government and goals is best for all parties involved?”

Similarly, this question applies also to the corporate structure of the 21st century. Many forms of corporations exist, including top-down hierarchical, pyramid-shaped, flat-end shaped, shareholding, non-shareholding, horizontally integrated, or vertically integrated. Regardless of organization type, the corporation must effectively put into use the different talents, contributions, and needs of the executives, employees, and customers. Notsomuch that employees or customers should fit the mold of the corporation or be fired or cease to transact business with, but the corporation must also actively fit the needs of its own people. In order to achieve this, corporation must find was to find people with exceptional talents it can use, as well as actively find the right market rather than attempting to have the customers fit the products and services of the corporation in a monopoly (e.g. Apple Inc.).

The goals of the corporation must be clear. Unity and harmonious work between executive and employees must be reached. Allies and rivals must be seen keenly. True long-term allies as well as true long-term rivals, both of which help the growth of the company, must be recognized from the crowd. Strong customer relations should be built, both in the community and elsewhere. Even when the industry is losing money in a depression, the strong bond between every person in the corporation and every person that the corporation interacts with must hold it together.

Once unity is reached, economic stability should be the next goal. Profits are still profits, and still essential for the survival of the corporation. If the company is making no net profits and losing all the money to consumers and customer service, it might as well close down, because it is, as they say, “mixing in the mud.” Such a scenario can occur if the business spends half its operations servicing customers and accepting returns. The corporation is virtually giving away money to customers. That is not only unethical, but also poor businessmanship. A true executive, then, will create proper conditions for growth that the lives of the employees will be improved over time.

Finally, once the corporation has achieved stability, other priorities can be considered, such as the social impact of the corporation, excellent customer service, setting up the workers for life (Japanese model of economics), building new company buildings by world-renowned architects, and sponsoring other organizations such as the Olympics.

Posted in Government | No Comments »

4. April 2008 by admin.

It is not products, that make money, it is information of products that make money. Everything in our reality is fundamentally a mental construct. Good information, would lead to profit. Inaccurate information, would lead to loss. Amazing that the top corporations are only vaguely aware of this fundamental law.

Information, channeled through person-person relationships via six degrees of separation (in reality of business, more often two to three degrees) ultimately lead to profit. Communications, relationships to people, are equally important as information in business. Having good friends, and having a widespread reputation, can help critically in business.

Page Listings

A feature that would benefit online catalogs currently would be to allow some kind of deleting of obsolete or more importantly, duplicate listings of same products. Currently, all listings are permanent; there is no way product listings can be deleted, not even the creator of the page (the owner of the product listing, who is a merchant), is able to delete it. Page deletion can only occur through a complicated process of appealing to online catalog’s review board. If current trends continue, in a few decades many top corporations will have a catalog size that is unmanageable, even with a huge editing team and ample resources, top corporations would not be able to clean the mess it brought itself into.

Not even laws are made forever permanent. The effectiveness of a state lies in its ability to respond quickly to situations with new laws, modifying current laws, and scrapping old laws.

What makes online catalogs so successful on the Internet? Convenience. Customers can surf from Levi Jeans to Blu-Ray Players to Basketball Supplies, without leaving the site, buying everything they need in a single shopping basket, and paying only once. This is the power of online catalogs. Power comes at price; there is a hidden commission charged to the sellers, resulting in a higher price than the market. The only way online catalogs can continue profit while charging higher prices is to be better than online stores. The only way to be better than online stores is to have clearer product listings, and higher payment to time-spent ratio. (Customers spend much valuable time searching for the lowest price). Merchant honesty is the only way to generate the maximum profit for online businesses; there is no other more efficient alternative. Only then, will customers continue to use the online catalog.

Taking a Unitary, Federal, and Confederalist government as an example, online catalog corporations would more or less resemble a Federalist system, or a two way power exchange between corporation and customer. A Unitary system would be more of the old railroad corporations of the 1800, as well as large banking institutions. A Confederalist system would resemble Wikipedia, where users have most of the power to write articles. However, I would hold off comment on Wikipedia for the moment. A Federal system seems to be notsomuch ideal, but more desirable. Online catalogs, then, have a special relationship with sellers, and can bypass merchants (or states, in the case of government). Quite a design for checks-and-balances.

Posted in Government | No Comments »