>I'm already too old to hope to see anything of the kind revived anywhere. What I think would be a good system is the self-managed capitalism, with no cross-ownership. You may own something where you work, and you may borrow money to anyone else but have no say there, only the percentage of the profits commensurate with the size of your loan against the total worth of it (value of labor included), for as long as it's not repaid. And I'd also gladly see a system where it's impossible to make money on ruining a business, only on increasing the value.

with you in theory for the big companies, where shareholder meetings are a joke because the individual vote has no meaning. But assume you invest in a small company when the plan is to develop a piece of software and after the money is in the company their workers scrap the plan and want to build something different? I do believe taking greater amounts of risk/investing more entitles you to decide on company policy, unless you have the option to withdraw your money anytime without further notice. And such a clause wouldbe used by raiders somehow, as we both know.