True Cost Doctrine

Posted by & filed under .

I. Introduction to the True Cost Doctrine:

 

A.  The notion of private property and private ownership is a defining feature of the documents that were prepared at the foundation of the United States of America.  However, those who have property have continually encroached on those who do not, and our processes of government continue to allow them to do so with reckless abandon.

 

Let no pundit terrify the public by rousing populist support against the propertyless classes with claims of impending violence.  Let it be known that this doctrine seeks to fairly define a gluttonous private excess that is more fairly defined as “public-private.”

 

The fact that Wall Street operates solely by the bottom line reported by the corporation and not by the true cost of that corporation’s operation has resulted in the expectation for a corporation to push its expenses off on the public.

 

We have gathered at the public right-of-way outside PepsiCo’s corporate headquarters not to refute the claim that there ought to be a separation between public and private property, but to refute the claim that PepsiCo is to be considered a truly private institution.

 

B. Explication of PepsiCo’s true cost-

 

1. They must account for the epidemic of obesity related diseases that their products create: in the cost of the loss of human life, the cost of medical care, and the cost of preventative education.

 

2. They must account for the billions of public dollars that are spent to create and maintain the highway system upon which they depend.

 

3. They must account for the gas and pollution that gets their materials to the factory, the product to the distribution center, the distribution to the retail franchise, and the customer to the retail franchise.

 

4.They must account for the cost of wars, subsidies, and climate change that make a petroleum-based economy possible.

 

5. They must account for the body-image crises that they perpetuate through their advertisements, which prey on vulnerabilities and insecurities to manipulate the consumer to purchase the product, only to leave that person still desiring that impossible image and yet further from it.

 

6. They must account for the government assistance programs that help sustain their workers who are not paid a living wage.

 

7. They must account for the years of carefully-developed underground culture that they gleefully co-opt and use to sell their products.

 

8. They must account for the litter that their disposable products create, the landfills that are the final resting place, and others (including the incarcerated) who clean up that litter.

 

9. They must account for the billions spent by courts to hear suits brought agribusiness monopolies that they rely on, despite the fact that these monopolies make food dangerous and expensive for the consumer.

 

10. They must account for the economic and military warfare held in defense of “American interests.”

 

11. They must account for the collapse of American jobs, which is largely the result of “free trade agreements” that have given PepsiCo significant advantages in global trade.

 

12. They must account for public parks, arts, and transportation which provide them with consumers and an advertising market.

 

13. They must account for the mis-education of public schools (especially the most needy) through their televised commercials during NewsCorp’s in-school news show, naming rights, vending machines, and other logo-placements.

 

 

II. The True Cost Doctrine

 

Any institution that is unable to account for the true cost of its operation is to be considered a “public-private” institution, except for the reasonable footprint that any large operation will leave.

 

 

III.  In regard to “public-private” land

 

All “public-private” land, whether a city-owned building that is managed by a private board of directors, a private park that was mandated in exchange for flexibility with building codes, or a corporation considered “public-private” under article I of the “True-Cost Doctrine” is to guarantee the freedom of speech as though the land was fully public.

 

Any institution that feels that they are wholly private is expected to address the public professionally and civilly.

 

 

IV.  public-private governance

 

All “public-private” corporations must work with an accessible, horizontal system (e.g. a General Assembly or Spokes Council) to establish a system to give the public a voice at the board of directors.

One Response to “True Cost Doctrine”

  1. Robert Dinsmore

    This is a little strong for my liking, but I agree with the overall message. We do not charge people or companies for behavior that is detrimental to society. I think we are only now starting to understand what some of these behaviors are and what their ultimate cost to us all is.