That would certainly be one way of attaining long term vision.

But who will enforce this requirement? Only pension funds and other large shareholders have any (and often impractical) leverage over the board C-suite. Wall-street shareholders demand faster growth until they themselves can exit out. They don't care about the business or the services or the employees. They want a high growth return, year-over-year until their own investment carry continues to exist.

Stock buybacks used to be illegal. Lots of ways to use policy to encourage long-term shareholder value if boards and corporate bylaws won’t.

Stock BuyBacks have nothing to do with long or short-term vision.

The previous restriction on them was an example of controlling capital markets with statute. That was the point. These are all just words on power and numbers in a database. We can change the rules whenever we collectively choose to.

Stock buyback is equivalent to paying a dividend. If stock buybacks are prevented, companies will continue to layoff and pay out dividends. It doesn't solve the root cause that employees don't have a seat at the decision-making table.

At a minimum, if corporation laws were modified such that every laid off employee must be issued 1 year worth of shares as a golden parachute, the incentives will all get aligned very quickly and employees will not be abruptly thrown away.

It is not the same as a dividend. Not even close.

By definition, one returns cash, the other doesn’t.

The stock buyback also prevents market price discovery because of an artificial price floor.

The buyback is also a subject to buyback tax, transaction fee at the broker, and the benefits of the buyback are not captured by the long term holders, only by short term holders, e.g. insiders, who often sell into the buyback guaranteeing a price floor and effectively an execution price.

Some companies such as Toyota supposedly have 100 year business plans:

http://www.gongol.com/research/economics/100yearplans/