>A democratically run company is still an owner of private property, the fact that citizens have a say is irrelevant to the idea that property is privately owne

>A democratically run company is still an owner of private property, the fact that citizens have a say is irrelevant to the idea that property is privately owned. Yes, I agree - however, the fact that ALL citizens have a say is not irrelevant. The case you're talking about is one where the State acts in its capacity as an agent of the citizenry, similar to how a manager can hire, fire or sign contracts within the bounds set by the owner or owners. It doesn't mean the manager owns any property, simply that he as an agent of ownership is currently in possession of it.