2 ms·

Do you have a specific example of country and company? I am curious about how worker-owned they were.

YuriNiyazov 4y ago
https://soviethistory.msu.edu/1985-2/cooperatives/ https://soviethistory.msu.edu/1985-2/cooperatives/ This is not secret knowledge
- mejutoco 4y ago
  I did not claim it was secret, and you provide no explanation. The example you provide is 1985 Soviet economy, no coop names (for other readers). I wanted to ask instead of assuming before making the following argument to the previous claims: > You might be surprised to learn that companies still existed/exist under communism, with not a single investor around ;) > Those were not actual companies that existed. They were just another part of the government with a different name. > no, there were worker owned coops. As I suspected, these "worker owned" cooperatives are completely dependent on the party (unlike current cooperatives). That is not my idea of "owning", since party members that are "workers" of the cooperative only in name would be deciding a lot of things in how the cooperative is run. > Many cooperatives were vulnerable to exorbitant taxation by local officials, high interest rates on loans, and protection rackets run by criminals, the cost of which inevitably were passed onto consumers in the form of mark-ups. “Kooperativshchiki” (cooperative owners) thus became a term of abuse in ordinary Soviet speech. So I agree with user nradov here: "Those were not actual companies that existed. They were just another part of the government with a different name. " I must concede, at some point the lines can become blurred.
pas 4y ago
Hungary. No specific companies. These were always small. Think like 5-6 people. The obvious problem with USSR-style communism was/is the authoritarian dictatorship, so everything had to be integrated into the power structure, so only very small companies were allowed to be independent. If you became successful without the Party? That's a no-no, so thanks and the Party will take it from here. If you became successful with the Party? Great, now here's a bunch of chinovniks to help you.

https://soviethistory.msu.edu/1985-2/cooperatives/ https://soviethistory.msu.edu/1985-2/cooperatives/ This is not secret knowledge

mejutoco 4y ago
I did not claim it was secret, and you provide no explanation. The example you provide is 1985 Soviet economy, no coop names (for other readers). I wanted to ask instead of assuming before making the following argument to the previous claims: > You might be surprised to learn that companies still existed/exist under communism, with not a single investor around ;) > Those were not actual companies that existed. They were just another part of the government with a different name. > no, there were worker owned coops. As I suspected, these "worker owned" cooperatives are completely dependent on the party (unlike current cooperatives). That is not my idea of "owning", since party members that are "workers" of the cooperative only in name would be deciding a lot of things in how the cooperative is run. > Many cooperatives were vulnerable to exorbitant taxation by local officials, high interest rates on loans, and protection rackets run by criminals, the cost of which inevitably were passed onto consumers in the form of mark-ups. “Kooperativshchiki” (cooperative owners) thus became a term of abuse in ordinary Soviet speech. So I agree with user nradov here: "Those were not actual companies that existed. They were just another part of the government with a different name. " I must concede, at some point the lines can become blurred.

pas 4y ago

Hungary. No specific companies. These were always small. Think like 5-6 people. The obvious problem with USSR-style communism was/is the authoritarian dictatorship, so everything had to be integrated into the power structure, so only very small companies were allowed to be independent. If you became successful without the Party? That's a no-no, so thanks and the Party will take it from here. If you became successful with the Party? Great, now here's a bunch of chinovniks to help you.