9 ms·

> But actually to have any employees companies need to optimize for workers lives anyway. And it seems that cooperatives are not any better in this area - other

by piva00 2y ago

> But actually to have any employees companies need to optimize for workers lives anyway. And it seems that cooperatives are not any better in this area - otherwise everybody would work for cooperatives. There's much more at play than just "cooperatives are not any better". Cooperatives don't get as much funding from investors because investors won't be owning a larger share of them, and taking their returns, they instead invest in a traditional company because then they can extract as much as possible from their investments. That by itself already puts small scale cooperatives at a competitive disadvantage, you can't raise as much capital as the non-cooperative startup, even if their product could be better and their employers could be happier the lavishly monied startup will try to outcompete them by throwing money away until they get a larger share of the market. If somehow this situation was improved where cooperatives are not immediately disadvantaged from an earlier stage we could see more of them popping up, right now there's not nearly enough cooperatives for this comparison to be possible, simply because they get extinguished by others with more capital.

aleph_minus_one 2y ago
> There's much more at play than just "cooperatives are not any better". Cooperatives don't get as much funding from investors because investors won't be owning a larger share of them, and taking their returns, they instead invest in a traditional company because then they can extract as much as possible from their investments. Unions should put their money where their mouth is and invest in cooperatives.
- piva00 2y ago
  > Unions should put their money where their mouth is and invest in cooperatives. Unions aren't structured for investing, and that's not their reason to exist. I don't know where you are from so I can't comment on how unions function in your society, where I live they're definitely not in the same realm as a potential investor for cooperatives. You are also asking for unions to compete against VCs, and banks, let's be realistic that even a large and wealthy union is not even close in terms of wealth management as a small to mid-size bank/investor. On top of that the union has responsibilities to provide benefits to all members, a bank or investor has none of that, tilting the scale even more in disfavor of an union assuming the role of investment. It's a good thought though, another entity such as a credit union supported by workers in an industry which also takes the role on investing in cooperatives to foment them, would still be an uphill battle but if some good cooperatives came out of it maybe it could be another viable (albeit smaller) model to start companies.
  - aleph_minus_one 2y ago
    > On top of that the union has responsibilities to provide benefits to all members, a bank or investor has none of that A bank has responsibilities to its shareholders.
    - piva00 2y ago
      But not to all members participating in the machine, hence my point that unions have a responsibility over all its members.
      - hellojesus 2y ago
        To the extent the bank wants to retain employees, it does need to provide some minimum level of utility. That may be as simple as an hourly wage for some, but both shareholders and employees are participating in the machine.
  - randomdata 2y ago
    > Unions aren't structured for investing, and that's not their reason to exist. Depends on the union. A credit union is structured for investing and is literally their reason to exist.
    - alephnerd 2y ago
      Yk a Labor Union is entirely different from a Credit Union right?
      - aleph_minus_one 2y ago
        For sure, but who says that they can't become more similar ...
      - randomdata 2y ago
        Typically[1], but both are unions. Had the previous commenter been talking about labour unions then you might have something, but it clearly says "union" and "union" alone. [1] Although definitely not necessarily. A group of labour unions in these parts collectively own one of the largest hedge funds out there.
- specialist 2y ago
  Agreed! I vaguely recall SEIU doing just that. Top hit from my casual search is a report containing case studies, two of which are SEIU. A Union Toolkit for Cooperative Solutions [2021] https://unioncoops.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/union-toolkit-final-11.2021.pdf https://unioncoops.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/... Also, Richard Wolff has been advocating worker directed social enterprises (WSDE, aka coops?) for a while. Sadly, his now dated arm wavy book doesn't is more advocacy than HOWTO. Democracy at Work: A Cure for Capitalism [2012] https://www.amazon.com/Democracy-at-Work-Cure-Capitalism/dp/1608462471 https://www.amazon.com/Democracy-at-Work-Cure-Capitalism/dp/... And his website is not very focused. https://www.democracyatwork.info/ https://www.democracyatwork.info/ I'm fine with polemics (about marxism, socialism, capitalism). But I'm already convinced. Now I just want concrete action steps. Please share any other (better) resources and links.
- rangerelf 2y ago
  Unions aren't there for "Ownership" of companies or cooperatives, they're for improvement of member's work lives, it can be training, worker contract negotiations, as go-between when dealing with management or owners, etc.
  - aleph_minus_one 2y ago
    If an investment into a work cooperative improves the life of the members, it does serve these stated goals.
pembrook 2y ago
But what are you suggesting? We forcibly allocate capital less efficiently; make markets less efficient and less responsive to innovation; with the sole aim of achieving a utopian worker-cooperative owned world? Hrmmm, where have I heard that before...
- ClumsyPilot 2y ago
  > make markets less efficient and less responsive to innovation I wish we didn't force capital to do things like that. Then it can run wild with Mandatory arbitration which bars access to the justice system, algorithmic manipulation of prices for rents / real-estate (1) and installing spyware on the customer's computers (2) and MITM attacks of your communication (3). They are all free market innovations. Very efficient at doing the wrong thing. 1 - https://rentalhousingjournal.com/fbi-searches-property-management-company-in-rent-price-fixing-investigation/ https://rentalhousingjournal.com/fbi-searches-property-manag... 2 - https://www.pcmag.com/news/hp-accused-of-quietly-installing-spyware-on-windows-pcs https://www.pcmag.com/news/hp-accused-of-quietly-installing-... 3 - https://techcrunch.com/2024/03/26/facebook-secret-project-snooped-snapchat-user-traffic/?guccounter=1 https://techcrunch.com/2024/03/26/facebook-secret-project-sn...
- forgetfreeman 2y ago
  The market has spent the GDP of Madagascar to fuck over cabbies in a handful of metro areas in the US. Meanwhile "efficiency" in the ISP market has lead to regional near-monopolies and some of the worst residential bandwidth on the planet. Let's not with "efficiency and innovation" yeah? The emperor is clearly buck-ass naked.
  - pembrook 2y ago
    Ahhh yes, the old "because the market didn't turn out the way I wanted it to once, it means the entirety of the capitalist system and the idea of free markets is fundamentally broken" retort. I call this the "Jr. developer fallacy." Start a job, encounter some bugs, suggest rewriting the entire codebase from scratch on [insert-trendy-framework].
throwaway7ahgb 2y ago
Capital markets has mostly two* components : Stocks and Bonds Investors don't need to own part of a company to buy a Bond, they just want to see good credit rating and yield. *VC is also part of capital markets but mostly private and such a small % of global investment.
- nradov 2y ago
  New companies have no credit rating. Investors would never buy bonds sold by a new cooperative that needs a huge amount of capital to build a new semiconductor fab or something.
nicholasnorris 2y ago
The investment schemes do not have to stay static while only the structure of businesses change. Even if it did, would it not makes sense that investor priorities would change if their only options beyond cooperative businesses were some very small startups and mom & pops? A system of public banks could handle investment based on the priorities set by all citizens. Everyone would effectively become a shareholder. Successful businesses could be taxed based off what the public invested in those new cooperatives, and those taxes would be used at least partially be used to fund more startups.
specialist 2y ago
Yes and: IIRC, long-term governance of coops has been a challenge. Coops have been vulnerable to "hostile takeovers" (I don't know what to call it), transmuting from benefitting members yet another rent seeking enterprise that remains a "coop" in name only. I was a long time member of PCC and REI. As I understand it, both experienced juntas. Histories I'd love to understand better. I've read that most farmer coops also fell prey, becoming profiteers, from helping to harming their members. IIRC, there was even a personal account here on HN by a dairy farmer. In conclusion, I'd LOVE for coops to be the norm. My biggest concern is how to structure coops to remain true to their mission and resilient to enemy action.
randomdata 2y ago
> simply because they get extinguished by others with more capital. Unless you go to where capital isn't concentrated (i.e. rural areas), then co-ops are everywhere. It is not uncommon to be able to get your groceries at a coop, your gas, your phone/internet services, you name it.
apantel 2y ago
If labor and capital truly are in tension as so much of our social and economic philosophizing says, then it’s no surprise that a structure optimized for labor is less attractive to capital.
WalterBright 2y ago
> they instead invest in a traditional company because then they can extract as much as possible from their investments Sure. And workers extract as much as possible from their employers. And customers go for the lowest price possible, and sell their stuff for the highest price possible. That's how people are. In the 50s, my dad was in Italy watching the news on TV. A man had just won the lottery. The reporter asked him what he was gonna do with the money. Before he could reply, another man stepped in front of him, saying "he's a loyal member of the Communist Party, and he's going to give it to the Party!" The winner pushed him aside, announcing "Oh no, I'm not a Communist anymore!"
carom 2y ago
There are plenty of successful companies that did not take outside investment, why are none of them cooperatives?
renewiltord 2y ago
Coops work where they work and don't where they don't. Mutual insurance coops also have to fight traditional banks and single-owner insurers and they do just fine. State Farm is huge. Co-ops are just not good at some kinds of markets and so they lose there.

by piva00 2y ago

aleph_minus_one 2y ago

> There's much more at play than just "cooperatives are not any better". Cooperatives don't get as much funding from investors because investors won't be owning a larger share of them, and taking their returns, they instead invest in a traditional company because then they can extract as much as possible from their investments. Unions should put their money where their mouth is and invest in cooperatives.

piva00 2y ago
> Unions should put their money where their mouth is and invest in cooperatives. Unions aren't structured for investing, and that's not their reason to exist. I don't know where you are from so I can't comment on how unions function in your society, where I live they're definitely not in the same realm as a potential investor for cooperatives. You are also asking for unions to compete against VCs, and banks, let's be realistic that even a large and wealthy union is not even close in terms of wealth management as a small to mid-size bank/investor. On top of that the union has responsibilities to provide benefits to all members, a bank or investor has none of that, tilting the scale even more in disfavor of an union assuming the role of investment. It's a good thought though, another entity such as a credit union supported by workers in an industry which also takes the role on investing in cooperatives to foment them, would still be an uphill battle but if some good cooperatives came out of it maybe it could be another viable (albeit smaller) model to start companies.
- aleph_minus_one 2y ago
  > On top of that the union has responsibilities to provide benefits to all members, a bank or investor has none of that A bank has responsibilities to its shareholders.
  - piva00 2y ago
    But not to all members participating in the machine, hence my point that unions have a responsibility over all its members.
    - hellojesus 2y ago
      To the extent the bank wants to retain employees, it does need to provide some minimum level of utility. That may be as simple as an hourly wage for some, but both shareholders and employees are participating in the machine.
- randomdata 2y ago
  > Unions aren't structured for investing, and that's not their reason to exist. Depends on the union. A credit union is structured for investing and is literally their reason to exist.
  - alephnerd 2y ago
    Yk a Labor Union is entirely different from a Credit Union right?
    - aleph_minus_one 2y ago
      For sure, but who says that they can't become more similar ...
    - randomdata 2y ago
      Typically[1], but both are unions. Had the previous commenter been talking about labour unions then you might have something, but it clearly says "union" and "union" alone. [1] Although definitely not necessarily. A group of labour unions in these parts collectively own one of the largest hedge funds out there.
specialist 2y ago
Agreed! I vaguely recall SEIU doing just that. Top hit from my casual search is a report containing case studies, two of which are SEIU. A Union Toolkit for Cooperative Solutions [2021] https://unioncoops.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/union-toolkit-final-11.2021.pdf https://unioncoops.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/... Also, Richard Wolff has been advocating worker directed social enterprises (WSDE, aka coops?) for a while. Sadly, his now dated arm wavy book doesn't is more advocacy than HOWTO. Democracy at Work: A Cure for Capitalism [2012] https://www.amazon.com/Democracy-at-Work-Cure-Capitalism/dp/1608462471 https://www.amazon.com/Democracy-at-Work-Cure-Capitalism/dp/... And his website is not very focused. https://www.democracyatwork.info/ https://www.democracyatwork.info/ I'm fine with polemics (about marxism, socialism, capitalism). But I'm already convinced. Now I just want concrete action steps. Please share any other (better) resources and links.
rangerelf 2y ago
Unions aren't there for "Ownership" of companies or cooperatives, they're for improvement of member's work lives, it can be training, worker contract negotiations, as go-between when dealing with management or owners, etc.
- aleph_minus_one 2y ago
  If an investment into a work cooperative improves the life of the members, it does serve these stated goals.

pembrook 2y ago

But what are you suggesting? We forcibly allocate capital less efficiently; make markets less efficient and less responsive to innovation; with the sole aim of achieving a utopian worker-cooperative owned world? Hrmmm, where have I heard that before...

ClumsyPilot 2y ago
> make markets less efficient and less responsive to innovation I wish we didn't force capital to do things like that. Then it can run wild with Mandatory arbitration which bars access to the justice system, algorithmic manipulation of prices for rents / real-estate (1) and installing spyware on the customer's computers (2) and MITM attacks of your communication (3). They are all free market innovations. Very efficient at doing the wrong thing. 1 - https://rentalhousingjournal.com/fbi-searches-property-management-company-in-rent-price-fixing-investigation/ https://rentalhousingjournal.com/fbi-searches-property-manag... 2 - https://www.pcmag.com/news/hp-accused-of-quietly-installing-spyware-on-windows-pcs https://www.pcmag.com/news/hp-accused-of-quietly-installing-... 3 - https://techcrunch.com/2024/03/26/facebook-secret-project-snooped-snapchat-user-traffic/?guccounter=1 https://techcrunch.com/2024/03/26/facebook-secret-project-sn...
forgetfreeman 2y ago
The market has spent the GDP of Madagascar to fuck over cabbies in a handful of metro areas in the US. Meanwhile "efficiency" in the ISP market has lead to regional near-monopolies and some of the worst residential bandwidth on the planet. Let's not with "efficiency and innovation" yeah? The emperor is clearly buck-ass naked.
- pembrook 2y ago
  Ahhh yes, the old "because the market didn't turn out the way I wanted it to once, it means the entirety of the capitalist system and the idea of free markets is fundamentally broken" retort. I call this the "Jr. developer fallacy." Start a job, encounter some bugs, suggest rewriting the entire codebase from scratch on [insert-trendy-framework].

throwaway7ahgb 2y ago

Capital markets has mostly two* components : Stocks and Bonds Investors don't need to own part of a company to buy a Bond, they just want to see good credit rating and yield. *VC is also part of capital markets but mostly private and such a small % of global investment.

nradov 2y ago
New companies have no credit rating. Investors would never buy bonds sold by a new cooperative that needs a huge amount of capital to build a new semiconductor fab or something.

nicholasnorris 2y ago

The investment schemes do not have to stay static while only the structure of businesses change. Even if it did, would it not makes sense that investor priorities would change if their only options beyond cooperative businesses were some very small startups and mom & pops? A system of public banks could handle investment based on the priorities set by all citizens. Everyone would effectively become a shareholder. Successful businesses could be taxed based off what the public invested in those new cooperatives, and those taxes would be used at least partially be used to fund more startups.

specialist 2y ago

Yes and: IIRC, long-term governance of coops has been a challenge. Coops have been vulnerable to "hostile takeovers" (I don't know what to call it), transmuting from benefitting members yet another rent seeking enterprise that remains a "coop" in name only. I was a long time member of PCC and REI. As I understand it, both experienced juntas. Histories I'd love to understand better. I've read that most farmer coops also fell prey, becoming profiteers, from helping to harming their members. IIRC, there was even a personal account here on HN by a dairy farmer. In conclusion, I'd LOVE for coops to be the norm. My biggest concern is how to structure coops to remain true to their mission and resilient to enemy action.

randomdata 2y ago

> simply because they get extinguished by others with more capital. Unless you go to where capital isn't concentrated (i.e. rural areas), then co-ops are everywhere. It is not uncommon to be able to get your groceries at a coop, your gas, your phone/internet services, you name it.

apantel 2y ago

If labor and capital truly are in tension as so much of our social and economic philosophizing says, then it’s no surprise that a structure optimized for labor is less attractive to capital.

WalterBright 2y ago

> they instead invest in a traditional company because then they can extract as much as possible from their investments Sure. And workers extract as much as possible from their employers. And customers go for the lowest price possible, and sell their stuff for the highest price possible. That's how people are. In the 50s, my dad was in Italy watching the news on TV. A man had just won the lottery. The reporter asked him what he was gonna do with the money. Before he could reply, another man stepped in front of him, saying "he's a loyal member of the Communist Party, and he's going to give it to the Party!" The winner pushed him aside, announcing "Oh no, I'm not a Communist anymore!"

carom 2y ago

There are plenty of successful companies that did not take outside investment, why are none of them cooperatives?

renewiltord 2y ago

Coops work where they work and don't where they don't. Mutual insurance coops also have to fight traditional banks and single-owner insurers and they do just fine. State Farm is huge. Co-ops are just not good at some kinds of markets and so they lose there.