5 ms·

We'd most likely be stuck in the '40s, and the world would have about 40-80x as many people living in abject poverty. Co-ops work when everyone involved is a tr

We'd most likely be stuck in the '40s, and the world would have about 40-80x as many people living in abject poverty. Co-ops work when everyone involved is a true stakeholder, I am not so much a stakeholder in my bank, nor in Intel, nor ASUS, but I still benefit from my transactions with them.

j88439h84 8y ago
You can still do business with a coop you're not a member of.
opportune 8y ago
I do not understand your comment. A coop is simply an employee-owned company (usually with more even distribution of ownership than many nominally employee-owned companies). You do not need to work for a coop to do business with them
- rbanffy 8y ago
  > I do not understand your comment. A world of co-ops is close enough to anarcho-syndicalism that many Americans get an allergic reaction.
  - cryoshon 8y ago
    a defect of the american mind doesn't speak to the validity of the concept as a whole. besides, we're talking about the society which is just fine with anarcho-corporatism...
    - ianai 8y ago
      Where did the anarcho- terms come from? I don’t remember seeing them in my academic Econ days.
  - walshemj 8y ago
    Not the farmers who are in producer coops
- walshemj 8y ago
  Your talking about the original coops some worker coops the OP is talking about either a producer or a consumer coop. I suspect this is a producer or consumer coop and those are fairly popular in the states many famers for example and part of KFC is a producer coop.
- closeparen 8y ago
  Intel is in one of the most capital-intensive businesses possible. Employees are not going to just pool their savings to buy a fab.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - criddell 8y ago
    I don't think they would need to. Intel has around $20 billion of debt on their balance sheet and I doubt that's money borrowed from shareholders.
    - ianai 8y ago
      It’s never been easier for companies to raise capitol. I’m sure coops can raise the same funds.
      - closeparen 8y ago
        No! You raise capital by selling an ownership interest or a portion of your future cash flow. When you’ve done that, it’s no longer employees who own the company and its profits. Do you think entrepreneurs give up control and ownership of their companies just for fun?
        ianai 8y ago
        Loans are a thing for established companies. Does not require an ownership change. But is certainly out of range for most SV startups.
        closeparen 8y ago
        You're still paying capitalists a consideration in exchange for the use of their capital. Whether you want to pay them equity or interest, whether you want to document it as "wages" or "profits minus debt," the same thing is happening under the hood: capitalists, not workers, are reaping part of the rewards, and those rewards come from risk, not labor.
MaysonL 8y ago
My coop bank (i.e. credit union) was one of the first tranche of financial institutions to implement Apple Pay.
ianai 8y ago
The 40s would be a lot closer to the “golden era” of the 50s than today. For one, the US was still capable of infrastructure projects- and big ones.

j88439h84 8y ago

You can still do business with a coop you're not a member of.

opportune 8y ago

I do not understand your comment. A coop is simply an employee-owned company (usually with more even distribution of ownership than many nominally employee-owned companies). You do not need to work for a coop to do business with them

rbanffy 8y ago
> I do not understand your comment. A world of co-ops is close enough to anarcho-syndicalism that many Americans get an allergic reaction.
- cryoshon 8y ago
  a defect of the american mind doesn't speak to the validity of the concept as a whole. besides, we're talking about the society which is just fine with anarcho-corporatism...
  - ianai 8y ago
    Where did the anarcho- terms come from? I don’t remember seeing them in my academic Econ days.
- walshemj 8y ago
  Not the farmers who are in producer coops
walshemj 8y ago
Your talking about the original coops some worker coops the OP is talking about either a producer or a consumer coop. I suspect this is a producer or consumer coop and those are fairly popular in the states many famers for example and part of KFC is a producer coop.
closeparen 8y ago
Intel is in one of the most capital-intensive businesses possible. Employees are not going to just pool their savings to buy a fab.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- criddell 8y ago
  I don't think they would need to. Intel has around $20 billion of debt on their balance sheet and I doubt that's money borrowed from shareholders.
  - ianai 8y ago
    It’s never been easier for companies to raise capitol. I’m sure coops can raise the same funds.
    - closeparen 8y ago
      No! You raise capital by selling an ownership interest or a portion of your future cash flow. When you’ve done that, it’s no longer employees who own the company and its profits. Do you think entrepreneurs give up control and ownership of their companies just for fun?
      - ianai 8y ago
        Loans are a thing for established companies. Does not require an ownership change. But is certainly out of range for most SV startups.
        closeparen 8y ago
        You're still paying capitalists a consideration in exchange for the use of their capital. Whether you want to pay them equity or interest, whether you want to document it as "wages" or "profits minus debt," the same thing is happening under the hood: capitalists, not workers, are reaping part of the rewards, and those rewards come from risk, not labor.

MaysonL 8y ago

My coop bank (i.e. credit union) was one of the first tranche of financial institutions to implement Apple Pay.

ianai 8y ago

The 40s would be a lot closer to the “golden era” of the 50s than today. For one, the US was still capable of infrastructure projects- and big ones.