3 ms·
Worker-owned enterprises are something perfectly achievable now, in the existing free-market societies we currently have. The reason you don't see many is becau
by bart_spoon 5y ago
Worker-owned enterprises are something perfectly achievable now, in the existing free-market societies we currently have. The reason you don't see many is because they still require capital, and the majority people with capital aren't interested in giving it to companies that then give all ownership to the workers.
So the issue becomes that for socialist-structured companies to become effective and commonplace extensive government intervention is required. At that point the line between "worker" and "communal" means of production becomes pretty thin. Like a large amount of socialist theory, there is a lot of verbiage and effort devoted to theoretical concepts that, when the rubber meets the road, boil down to irrelevance.
- sudosysgen 5y agoI fully disagree. If you were to declare by decree that all companies must be worker owned, you would create a vastly different economic and social structure from if it was actually owned communally, for example, you would have serious differences in income and capital ownership due to market competition, as well as incentives against vertical integration. This is not extensive government intervention, it boils down to a simple change in property ownership laws. Also, loans are fully compatible with worker-owned companies, so you can still have capital transfer. So I disagree very strongly that this "boils down to irrelevance".