This is also the subject of my dear Tess's PhD -- looking at whether the adoption of US-style capitalism in Europe is likely to destroy the social-democratic model.
I'd note that the US really is unique in having such dispersed ownership of companies. In the UK, while we in principle have an "Anglo-Saxon" system, the companies are all really owned by a fairly small group of pension funds, insurance funds and investment trusts. This makes them a bit more susceptible to democratic pressure, IMO.
Michel Albert also writes about this sort of thing in the context of insurance, which would suggest that there's more differences between the two systems than capital-provision alone. He notes that Europe follows an "Alpine" model of insurance, developed from mutual systems of co-insurance between farmers. The UK industry adopts a "maritime" model, developed from the syndicate system of insuring ships. The Alpine system sets one price for everyone and pools the risks together; the maritime systems prices the insurance case by case and sells it for what the market will bear. Albert argues that pooled insurance is inherently more collectivist than maritime.
On the other hand, Albert is known in the insurance industry as "the knacker who broke AGF", so what does he know.
dd
rc-am wrote:
> >"Political Preconditions To Separating Ownership from Control:
> The Incompatibility of the American Public Firm with Social
> Democracy"<
>
>tell me there's something i've missed here, but what do they think
>they've uncovered?
I haven't read the paper yet, but it sounds like an argument I've made myself - that U.S.-style capitalism, with strong pressures coming from impatient stockholders for profit maximization, puts downward pressure on wages, makes life very difficult for unions, and disperses political responsibility for the labor-unfriendly state of affairs. Bank-centered systems, paradigmatically the German, are more stable and more amenable to political pressure to be a bit friendlier to labor. But I haven't read the paper, and abstracts are often a poor guide to what's inside.
Doug
___________________________________________________________________________
_____
---------------------------------------------------------
This email is confidential to the ordinary user of the
e-mail address to which it was addressed. If you are not
the intended recipient, please notify the sender
IMMEDIATELY on (44) 171 638 5858 and delete the message
from all locations in your computer. You should not copy
this email or use it for any purpose, or disclose its
contents to any person : to do so may be unlawful.
Email is an informal method of communication and is
subject to possible data corruption, either accidentally
or on purpose. Flemings is unable to exercise control
over the content of information contained in
transmissions made via the Internet. For these reasons
it will normally be inappropriate to rely on information
contained on email without obtaining written confirmation
of it.
----------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________________________________ _____
---------------------------------------------------------
This email is confidential to the ordinary user of the
e-mail address to which it was addressed. If you are not
the intended recipient, please notify the sender
IMMEDIATELY on (44) 171 638 5858 and delete the message
from all locations in your computer. You should not copy
this email or use it for any purpose, or disclose its
contents to any person : to do so may be unlawful.
Email is an informal method of communication and is
subject to possible data corruption, either accidentally
or on purpose. Flemings is unable to exercise control
over the content of information contained in
transmissions made via the Internet. For these reasons
it will normally be inappropriate to rely on information
contained on email without obtaining written confirmation
of it.
----------------------------------------------------------