I apologize for not being clear in my comment. None of my musing was meant to allude to public policy or law. It was about what an individual (or group of individuals) could choose to do with a corporation to avoid perverse incentives in the future. I'm not really interested in directly enforcing anything.
To make a play on an old programming joke:
Once there was an individual who noticed there was a problem with society. He said to himself "I'll use the State to change things!" Now there were two problems.
The first part of my comment doesn't require a state change. I'm sure you can issue securities with a 10 year clause.
The second part of my statement is that while I largely agree with you we Still have state controlling things in the world and it's largely a good thing. You don't want a world without the State controlling an aspect of the free market.
It's not that you don't like the State, it's just that adding additional controls can lead to large unanticipated side effects. Especially sweeping changes like some of the ones I proposed. Totally get this.
That doesn't mean it won't work. Like UBI, these ideas need to experimented on and data needs to be gathered to verify whether it will work. You can't dismiss the fact that that changing public policy Won't work because it currently DOES work.
To make a play on an old programming joke:
Once there was an individual who noticed there was a problem with society. He said to himself "I'll use the State to change things!" Now there were two problems.