4 ms·

Why this model isn't more popular is really confusing to me. Technically trained people have the skills that make the world go round. We should be extorting peo

Why this model isn't more popular is really confusing to me. Technically trained people have the skills that make the world go round. We should be extorting people with capital through the nose for them and making sure that we are taken care of instead of treated like disposable cogs.

noobiemcfoob 7y ago
I tried to start a tech co-op. Ours failed because of a lack of shared definitions on too many topics. What was 'work'. What was 'learning/training'. We could agree on goals, but intermediary steps towards those goals were all over the place. Without a clear provider of vision and decision, it crumbled. This part is true of any venture, but I think becomes even more critical in a co-op since the authority is necessarily shared.
- vincent-toups 7y ago
  A cooperative can be democratically run but still have a powerful executive figure who is invested with the ability to determine these sorts of things. I think in broader terms, cooperatives are bound to be less efficient than an equivalent capitalist controlled venture, but that difference doesn't have to be a death sentence for the cooperative.
  - noobiemcfoob 7y ago
    We did. Even in a hierarchy, an executive's primary role is to build consensus, but in a co-op you're contending with increased ego from the participants. In a hierarchy, not being the executive makes it easier to back down on an issue. In a co-op, part of your mind must see yourself as an owner. In a co-op, every active employee needs at least some degree of CEO-ness. And then you have too many CEOs in the boardroom. > that difference doesn't have to be a death sentence Despite my failed attempt at one, I completely agree. To me, the co-op must be the way forward. It's the only likely contender I've found that might bridge capitalism and socialism.
subhobroto 7y ago
> Why this model isn't more popular is really confusing to me. Technically trained people have the skills that make the world go round If you are brilliant at engine design does not mean you are brilliant at selling cars. Selling cars make money. There is negative value in a bunch of engines lying around. As software engineers we design automation to make a business more efficient. To make money you need to run a business.

noobiemcfoob 7y ago

I tried to start a tech co-op. Ours failed because of a lack of shared definitions on too many topics. What was 'work'. What was 'learning/training'. We could agree on goals, but intermediary steps towards those goals were all over the place. Without a clear provider of vision and decision, it crumbled. This part is true of any venture, but I think becomes even more critical in a co-op since the authority is necessarily shared.

vincent-toups 7y ago
A cooperative can be democratically run but still have a powerful executive figure who is invested with the ability to determine these sorts of things. I think in broader terms, cooperatives are bound to be less efficient than an equivalent capitalist controlled venture, but that difference doesn't have to be a death sentence for the cooperative.
- noobiemcfoob 7y ago
  We did. Even in a hierarchy, an executive's primary role is to build consensus, but in a co-op you're contending with increased ego from the participants. In a hierarchy, not being the executive makes it easier to back down on an issue. In a co-op, part of your mind must see yourself as an owner. In a co-op, every active employee needs at least some degree of CEO-ness. And then you have too many CEOs in the boardroom. > that difference doesn't have to be a death sentence Despite my failed attempt at one, I completely agree. To me, the co-op must be the way forward. It's the only likely contender I've found that might bridge capitalism and socialism.

subhobroto 7y ago

> Why this model isn't more popular is really confusing to me. Technically trained people have the skills that make the world go round If you are brilliant at engine design does not mean you are brilliant at selling cars. Selling cars make money. There is negative value in a bunch of engines lying around. As software engineers we design automation to make a business more efficient. To make money you need to run a business.