3 ms·
“ The alternative is a system that isn't profit driven, where all the companies are worker cooperatives.” Enforced by a central top-down bureaucratic organizat
by andreilys 7y ago
“ The alternative is a system that isn't profit driven, where all the companies are worker cooperatives.”
Enforced by a central top-down bureaucratic organization.
In this hypothetical world would you let foreign companies motivated by profit compete in your country that only has worker co-ops? Or would you have a closed down market, similar to North Korea that only Approved Co-ops would be allowed to work in?
- anoncake 7y ago> Enforced by a central top-down bureaucratic organization. The comment you selectively quoted ends with "But it's not top-down centrally managed.".
- paulmd 7y agoThis is unnecessarily dismissive. The USG routinely enforces regulations and tariffs on companies and imports that fail to comply with US regulations. If this was extended to company structure or labor standards, so what? Under your standard, all regulation is "top down bureaucratic driven". In practice this has not proven to be incompatible with market driven economics. Not that libertarians don't scream about it anyway.
- dbingham 7y agoThe current structures we allow today are "top down bureaucratic". How do you think the C-corp and S-corp got defined? The LLC, the partnership, the sole-proprietorship are all organizational forms defined and allowed by the government. The government defines the shape of the market, and then actors are free to operate with in that shape. This is the same thing, just a different shape.