3 ms·
You've got an interesting point I haven't thought too much about. A threat to capitalists could also be that there could become too many of them. That would in
by rightbyte 3y ago
You've got an interesting point I haven't thought too much about.
A threat to capitalists could also be that there could become too many of them. That would increase competition.
I wonder how public traded companies should be regarded in this manner. Do capitalists have enough of an edge in voting power to not be threatened by pleb owners? Or maybe is it easier to make us hold the bag with better access to gossip and insider knowledge?
- mjburgess 3y agoThere are two forces i can think of here: 1) public traded is good because it broadens the ownership base of a company; 2) public traded is bad because it compromises the interests of labour to align with capitalists. We should also add that public trading of companies leads boards to ever more aggressive and socially destructive forms of competition which might not be permitted if not be for their shareholders. On balance I'd say we'd be better of getting rid of public ownership in this sense, and i'd also be inclined for very high marginal taxes on high profit margins and much more radical competition regulation. This would bring capital's power more in line with labour's. But on this i've really no idea; and the analysis here is too thin
- soco 3y agoBut does public trading really widen the ownership base? Or the buyers are in a sufficient majority the same, so the 1-2 shares bought by "the pleb" don't actually count in any decision?