"Modifying the output of capitalism is the only method available to resolving the problem of capitalism where numbers trumped people – at the hands of people trained toward profit represented only by numbers and currencies rather than human beings. Profit rules, people are expendable commodities represented by numbers. The solution, and only solution, is to modify that output, measuring profit in terms of real human beings instead of numbers."
What about this?
"Traditional capitalism is an insufficient economic model allowing monetary outcomes as the bottom line with little regard to social needs. Bottom line must be taken one step further by at least some companies, past profit, to people. How profits are used is equally as important as creation of profits. Where profits can be brought to bear by willing individuals and companies to social benefit, so much the better. Moreover, this activity must be recognized and supported at government policy level as a badly needed, essential, and entirely legitimate enterprise activity.”
What Bernie Sanders said, may be found in this Time Magazine article about the possible candidate who agrees most with Pope Francis:
“The bottom line should be how well we are doing as human beings … The bottom line means that we should not have 20% of our kids living in poverty and elderly people in this country trying to get by on $12,000 a year.”
The quotes above are the words of a man who was himself one of the marginalised Americans, who'd died while putting these ideals into practice.
Re-Imagining Capitalism: The New 'Bottom Line', a submission to the McKinsey Long Term Capitalism Challenge, described his actions
In his 2007 proposal for a 'Marshall Plan' for Ukraine, he'd said:
'This is a long-term permanently sustainable program, the basis for "people-centered" economic development. Core focus is always on people and their needs, with neediest people having first priority – as contrasted with the eternal chase for financial profit and numbers where people, social benefit, and human well-being are often and routinely overlooked or ignored altogether. This is in keeping with the fundamental objectives of Marshall Plan: policy aimed at hunger, poverty, desperation and chaos. This is a bottom-up approach, starting with Ukraine's poorest and most desperate citizens, rather than a "top-down" approach that might not ever benefit them. They cannot wait, particularly children. Impedance by anyone or any group of people constitutes precisely what the original Marshall Plan was dedicated to opposing. Those who suffer most, and those in greatest need, must be helped first -- not secondarily, along the way or by the way. '
In 2009, both Pope Benedict and the President of the UN General Assembly referred to the need for a people-centered economy. as I describe in Economics for the Common Good and the Vatican.
Has Bernie read what Rabbi Lerner and the Network of Spiritual Progressives say about the bottom line?
“Instead of a bottom-line based on money and power, we need a new bottom-line that judges corporations, governments, schools, public institutions, and social practices as efficient, rational and productive not only to the extent they maximize money and power, but to the extent they maximize love and caring, ethical and ecological sensitivity, and our capacity to respond with awe and wonder at the grandeur of creation.”
Yet in spite of what these leaders say, I cannot find one among their supporters who would help us put it into practice.
To the end, Terry Hallman put those in greatest need first and the eulogy from Ukraine's Maidan leaders offers a glimpse into struggle, with an extract from his appeal to USAID and the Senate FRC
10 years ago, his 'Death Camps, For Children' had sent ripples through the NGO community in Ukraine. Children with disabilities abandoned to the state had become a cash cow for organised crime. He pulled no punches when describing the root problem:
"Excuses won't work, particularly in light of a handful of oligarchs in Ukraine having been allowed to loot Ukraine's economy for tens of billions of dollars. I point specifically to Akhmetov, Pinchuk, Poroshenko, and Kuchma, and this is certainly not an exhaustive list. These people can single-handedly finance 100% of all that will ever be needed to save Ukraine's orphans. None of them evidently bother to think past their bank accounts, and seem to have at least tacit blessings at this point from the new regime to keep their loot while no one wants to consider Ukraine's death camps, and the widespread poverty that produced them.."
One of the above hosts the Davos philanthropic roundtable and has signed up to the Giving Pledge.
60 years earlier, George Marshall told Harvard "Governments, political parties or groups which seek to perpetuate human misery in order to profit therefrom politically or otherwise will encounter the opposition of the United States."
It's hard to believe that no Jew nor any Catholic, nor any American who embraces those values, can help those who apply it in their deeds.
Nor is there any philanthropist, foundation or social impact investor who values a world where 'Every Child Deserves a Loving Family'