5 ms·

Co-ops are fascinating to me as an alternate evolutionary branch of capitalism. Like the marsupials to the placentals. Also like the marsupials, in most cases w

Co-ops are fascinating to me as an alternate evolutionary branch of capitalism. Like the marsupials to the placentals. Also like the marsupials, in most cases where co-ops compete with regular capitalist businesses they go extinct.

nervousvarun 2y ago
Agreed but you could say the same thing about monopolies though right? Anti-trust legislation exists to prevent that sort of extinction.
- darby_eight 2y ago
  It exists to preserve competition, which theoretically is supposed to ameliorate the negative aspects of privately owner enterprise.
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > which theoretically is supposed to ameliorate the negative aspects of privately owner enterprise It’s because non-competitive markets are a market failure [1]. Not amelioration. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_failure https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_failure
soco 2y ago
Important note: yes they go extinct in a market shaped by regular capitalist rules.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > they go extinct in a market shaped by regular capitalist rules Source? Because unless America, much less Wyoming [1], are not “shaped by regular capitalist rules,” this statement is false. [1] https://www.wyomingrea.org/about/coop-map/ https://www.wyomingrea.org/about/coop-map/
- mminer237 2y ago
  Why are there so many co-ops in existence today then?
rqtwteye 2y ago
In the short term dictatorships usually are superior to democracies because they can move fast and have less stakeholders to satisfy. So a capitalist business will usually beat out a co-op. That doesn't mean that society as a whole gains.
solarpunk 2y ago
I'm afraid I don't understand. My state is chock full of co-ops that compete with their corporate counterparts. Hell, there's (at least) 3 separate co-op grocery stores in my city, they each compete with an Aldi, and multiple local grocery chains in their respective neighborhoods.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > My state is chock full of co-ops that compete with their corporate counterparts Same, and we’re deep red. My power company is a member-owned co-op. It’s cheap as hell (6.8¢/kWh for wind) and doesn’t enjoy burning down the state as a hobby.
  - solarpunk 2y ago
    oh damn, I completely forgot about utility co-ops! I'm envious of those, they're all over the state but they're only out in the sticks.
thesuitonym 2y ago
Co-ops are just the way that socialism can exist in a capitalist society. And while capitalist businesses can usually undermine them using all the tools of capitalism, notice that co-op workers are usually happier and paid better, co-op customers are treated better and receive better service, and the community suffers less from having a co-op in the area.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- gadflyinyoureye 2y ago
  How are co-ops anti-capitalist? They appear to me no different than a shareholder or partnership. Are most law firms socialistic in that they have partners who work for the firm getting a share of its profits?
  - anon291 2y ago
    They're objectively not any less capitalist than a private company with restrictions on share transfers.
  - thesuitonym 2y ago
    The workers own the means of production. That's the only thing that socialism means.
    - rybosworld 2y ago
      This is completely incorrect.
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
      - greenie_beans 2y ago
        how is "socializing" the ownership of a business not socialist?
Dibby053 2y ago
>in most cases where co-ops compete with regular capitalist businesses they go extinct After seeing time and time again the success of workers of bankrupted companies pulling up their compensations and unemployment benefits to rebuild the company in a co-op model, I wonder if it's not the opposite. "Money attracts money", and I don't think it's too crazy to think that if everybody had access to low-interest credit under the same conditions as the big players, this model would be the norm, rather than the exception.
- Nasrudith 2y ago
  "Everyone has access to low-interest credit under the same conditions as the big players." just sounds like a fantastic (in the fantasy sense) recipe for inflation as the underlying capital and goods sought remain constant but the monetary supply increases. In addition to potentially creating something resembling another 2007 financial crisis worth of mispackaged bad debts.
  - Dibby053 2y ago
    Central banks fought the 2007 crisis by increasing the monetary supply of a receding economy, so I don't see how removing the intermediaries and having the central bank itself allocate the resources in a fair way could make things worse than they are now. I'm not talking about letting people borrow at 0% to spend in food and utilities. What I'm thinking of is a system where the path from business plan to business isn't determined as much by the amount of capital one already has, which is what causes the usual corporate structures to be formed in the first place: those who assume "all" the risk in turn receive "all" the benefits. That often doesn't reflect the real stakes at play. Investors can have a diversified portfolio (and often plenty of spare capital for more tries), while workers invest 100% of their work on the same company for years or decades. The co-op model is more natural but the dynamics of money make it more rare than it should be.
marssaxman 2y ago
That may well be what tends to happen in the large-scale economy, but in my personal experience, co-ops crowd other businesses out over time because they are far less likely to piss me off and alienate me. At this point "co-op" has become a pretty strong quality signal: it's not going to be flashy, and it might be a little inefficient, but it will always be decent.
sangnoir 2y ago
REI competes with corporates just fine in the US, a country so capitalist they still ask everyone it they ever were associated with Communism before they let them visit - more than 2 decades after the fall of the USSR.
- oldpersonintx 2y ago
  [dead]

nervousvarun 2y ago

Agreed but you could say the same thing about monopolies though right? Anti-trust legislation exists to prevent that sort of extinction.

darby_eight 2y ago
It exists to preserve competition, which theoretically is supposed to ameliorate the negative aspects of privately owner enterprise.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > which theoretically is supposed to ameliorate the negative aspects of privately owner enterprise It’s because non-competitive markets are a market failure [1]. Not amelioration. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_failure https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_failure

soco 2y ago

Important note: yes they go extinct in a market shaped by regular capitalist rules.

JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> they go extinct in a market shaped by regular capitalist rules Source? Because unless America, much less Wyoming [1], are not “shaped by regular capitalist rules,” this statement is false. [1] https://www.wyomingrea.org/about/coop-map/ https://www.wyomingrea.org/about/coop-map/
mminer237 2y ago
Why are there so many co-ops in existence today then?

rqtwteye 2y ago

In the short term dictatorships usually are superior to democracies because they can move fast and have less stakeholders to satisfy. So a capitalist business will usually beat out a co-op. That doesn't mean that society as a whole gains.

solarpunk 2y ago

I'm afraid I don't understand. My state is chock full of co-ops that compete with their corporate counterparts. Hell, there's (at least) 3 separate co-op grocery stores in my city, they each compete with an Aldi, and multiple local grocery chains in their respective neighborhoods.

JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> My state is chock full of co-ops that compete with their corporate counterparts Same, and we’re deep red. My power company is a member-owned co-op. It’s cheap as hell (6.8¢/kWh for wind) and doesn’t enjoy burning down the state as a hobby.
- solarpunk 2y ago
  oh damn, I completely forgot about utility co-ops! I'm envious of those, they're all over the state but they're only out in the sticks.

thesuitonym 2y ago

Co-ops are just the way that socialism can exist in a capitalist society. And while capitalist businesses can usually undermine them using all the tools of capitalism, notice that co-op workers are usually happier and paid better, co-op customers are treated better and receive better service, and the community suffers less from having a co-op in the area.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
gadflyinyoureye 2y ago
How are co-ops anti-capitalist? They appear to me no different than a shareholder or partnership. Are most law firms socialistic in that they have partners who work for the firm getting a share of its profits?
- anon291 2y ago
  They're objectively not any less capitalist than a private company with restrictions on share transfers.
- thesuitonym 2y ago
  The workers own the means of production. That's the only thing that socialism means.
  - rybosworld 2y ago
    This is completely incorrect.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - greenie_beans 2y ago
      how is "socializing" the ownership of a business not socialist?

Dibby053 2y ago

>in most cases where co-ops compete with regular capitalist businesses they go extinct After seeing time and time again the success of workers of bankrupted companies pulling up their compensations and unemployment benefits to rebuild the company in a co-op model, I wonder if it's not the opposite. "Money attracts money", and I don't think it's too crazy to think that if everybody had access to low-interest credit under the same conditions as the big players, this model would be the norm, rather than the exception.

Nasrudith 2y ago
"Everyone has access to low-interest credit under the same conditions as the big players." just sounds like a fantastic (in the fantasy sense) recipe for inflation as the underlying capital and goods sought remain constant but the monetary supply increases. In addition to potentially creating something resembling another 2007 financial crisis worth of mispackaged bad debts.
- Dibby053 2y ago
  Central banks fought the 2007 crisis by increasing the monetary supply of a receding economy, so I don't see how removing the intermediaries and having the central bank itself allocate the resources in a fair way could make things worse than they are now. I'm not talking about letting people borrow at 0% to spend in food and utilities. What I'm thinking of is a system where the path from business plan to business isn't determined as much by the amount of capital one already has, which is what causes the usual corporate structures to be formed in the first place: those who assume "all" the risk in turn receive "all" the benefits. That often doesn't reflect the real stakes at play. Investors can have a diversified portfolio (and often plenty of spare capital for more tries), while workers invest 100% of their work on the same company for years or decades. The co-op model is more natural but the dynamics of money make it more rare than it should be.

marssaxman 2y ago

That may well be what tends to happen in the large-scale economy, but in my personal experience, co-ops crowd other businesses out over time because they are far less likely to piss me off and alienate me. At this point "co-op" has become a pretty strong quality signal: it's not going to be flashy, and it might be a little inefficient, but it will always be decent.

sangnoir 2y ago

REI competes with corporates just fine in the US, a country so capitalist they still ask everyone it they ever were associated with Communism before they let them visit - more than 2 decades after the fall of the USSR.

oldpersonintx 2y ago
[dead]