4 ms·
> I myself vehemently oppose the idea of collective ownership of means of production, which public companies embody I wouldn't call this "public" ownership, as
by mises 7y ago
> I myself vehemently oppose the idea of collective ownership of means of production, which public companies embody
I wouldn't call this "public" ownership, as the "public" does not own a company. Investors own a company, the pool of investors is simply enlarged such that the public may invest.
- baybal2 7y agoIn my understanding, collective ownership !== public ownership and is just anything where the amount of owners is > 1
- k_sh 7y agoI've always taken "public ownership" to imply "publicly-traded company", which means John Q. Public can call up his broker and buy some shares in the company. This in contrast to privately-held companies, which can and do have many owners, but whose owners are acquired through partnership, investment, key employees within the company, and M&A - but not through the sale of securities.
- adamsea 7y agoDoes that mean you oppose all companies or business which are owned by more than a single person?
- baybal2 7y agoYes
- memmcgee 7y agoNo that's still private ownership. Amazon, for example, is not collectively owned, even though it's owned by more than just Jeff Bezos.