3 ms·
Cooperatives still need to pay rent, purchase raw materials and have access to the capital. All of those factors are ways in which the wealth created by the co
by crdoconnor 11y ago
Cooperatives still need to pay rent, purchase raw materials and have access to the capital.
All of those factors are ways in which the wealth created by the cooperative's labor can be diverted to the 1%.
That said, ride sharing cooperatives would be vastly superior alternative to Uber. If cities mandated that ride sharing organizations had to be cooperatives, that would be one way in which they could stem the outflow of wealth and provide a decent middle class job to their citizens.
- ethbro 11y agoGranted. But just because we can't realize the final solution to the capitalist bourgeoise swine isn't a reason against an ownership structure that promotes more employee equity. ;) The honest argument is probably access to capital. When you boil it down, why would a capital owner trust a structure that was fairly antithetical to him or her and their pals? It's starting off with a fairly big black mark. And then of course there's the "too many leaders, not enough followers" issue. I'd love any links that pointed to whether anyone has come up with a good solution to the tension between the efficiencies of centralized control and the equality of diffuse control in a general manner. I thought Kim Stanley Robinson's Red Mars idea of a truly randomly elected legislative body was interesting. Jury duty for legislature, in essence. Albeit you'd probably need a separate body to develop professionalism.
- crdoconnor 11y agoI'm not against it, I'm just pointing out that even with an equitable ownership of a business the value of your labor is still being leeched upon via your factors of production.