This gets regulatory captured/lobbied away over by monied interests.
>Profit caps?
This is simply a subset of "capitalism with strict regulation". Implementing profit caps in a manner without loopholes takes detailed regulations and a judicial branch that strictly enforces them. This too will get regulatory captured/lobbied away over time.
Another issue with this is that ironically a proper implementation of this would receive even more pushback than nationalization. Why? Because you have to cap e.g. shareholder returns, otherwise it introduces awful incentives, as we're seeing with this exact case where there's a "profit margin % cap". You'd also need exec compensation caps.
I do have a relatively straightforward idea for this, though I'm sure there are holes in it that I haven't thought of - market cap growth caps. To give an example, let's say we set the cap at 5% YoY. Then if the market cap instead grows 10% in a given year, the company is forced to issue an additional ~5% of shares (of the total number of outstanding shares), which all directly go to the government. The government will then sell these evenly distributed over the next year, on the market.
Feels like this has far less loopholes than any kind of profit or revenue tax.
> “Common carrier” type of deal to allow any player to compete in an energy market, trying to stop behemoth entities from monopolistic?
See above, another subset of the category.
> Non-profit
Ah, like OpenAI? Or the one U2 has in The Netherlands?
>Capitalism with minimal regulation?
This option isn't even worth discussing.
> Government run?
This too can get lobbied away over time, as we've seen, but it takes the longest to do so, and is therefore the correct answer to the question.
This gets regulatory captured/lobbied away over by monied interests.
>Profit caps?
This is simply a subset of "capitalism with strict regulation". Implementing profit caps in a manner without loopholes takes detailed regulations and a judicial branch that strictly enforces them. This too will get regulatory captured/lobbied away over time.
Another issue with this is that ironically a proper implementation of this would receive even more pushback than nationalization. Why? Because you have to cap e.g. shareholder returns, otherwise it introduces awful incentives, as we're seeing with this exact case where there's a "profit margin % cap". You'd also need exec compensation caps.
I do have a relatively straightforward idea for this, though I'm sure there are holes in it that I haven't thought of - market cap growth caps. To give an example, let's say we set the cap at 5% YoY. Then if the market cap instead grows 10% in a given year, the company is forced to issue an additional ~5% of shares (of the total number of outstanding shares), which all directly go to the government. The government will then sell these evenly distributed over the next year, on the market.
Feels like this has far less loopholes than any kind of profit or revenue tax.
> “Common carrier” type of deal to allow any player to compete in an energy market, trying to stop behemoth entities from monopolistic?
See above, another subset of the category.
> Non-profit
Ah, like OpenAI? Or the one U2 has in The Netherlands?
>Capitalism with minimal regulation?
This option isn't even worth discussing.
> Government run?
This too can get lobbied away over time, as we've seen, but it takes the longest to do so, and is therefore the correct answer to the question.