3 ms·
All of your points are premised on the idea that the only purpose of a corporation is to make as much money for its shareholders as possible. But that isn't tru
by Hasu 2y ago
All of your points are premised on the idea that the only purpose of a corporation is to make as much money for its shareholders as possible. But that isn't true, especially in the case of a cooperative.
Most companies make decisions based on a list of priorities: they care about their shareholders/investors first, upper management second (upper management is usually bribed by the investors with equity, aligning their interests with the shareholders, so this is maybe a distinction without a difference), rank-and-file employees third, customers fourth, and anyone not involved with the company last.
The point of a cooperative is to flip this incentive structure on its head: the customers or workers are owners, so they get prioritized. The purpose of the company isn't to dominate the markets and become the biggest company ever, it's to make a better life for the people working for and patronizing the company, instead of just the people who own it.
> As an employee, I would prefer to work at a company where my equity does not have these restrictions placed on it.
Well obviously, if you're talking about equity in a company as something you can own and profit from without ongoing labor, you are definitionally a capitalist and you will be opposed to cooperatives.
> I would be very uneasy about investing anyone's retirement savings into such an organization.
The primary purpose of a cooperative is not to make profits for passive investors. This is like judging a fish on its ability to climb a tree.
- woah 2y ago> The purpose of the company isn't to dominate the markets and become the biggest company ever, it's to make a better life for the people working for and patronizing the company, instead of just the people who own it. That's perfectly fine, and also the reason why cooperatives are a pretty niche thing: they don't prioritize growth.
- Hasu 2y agoThey don't prioritize growth for the same reason healthy cells don't prioritize growth. You need to be cancer or a public corporation to think growth is the most important thing.
- woah 2y agoThere isn't any value judgement here. There are not more cooperatives because they don't prioritize growth. Who are you angry at?
- satvikpendem 2y agoThis oft-repeated analogy to biological systems doesn't make much sense, human individuals biologically stay homeostatic with nature, but human groups have grown exponentially, building civilization as you know it. If we didn't prioritize growth, we'd still be hunter gatherers.
- Miraste 2y agoThis is only half the answer. Cooperatives are niche in the US because they don't prioritize growth, and they exist in a legal and financial framework that does. If conventional corporations didn't receive massive amounts of investor cash and preferential government treatment to stay unprofitable for years or decades while scaling, one imagines coops would be more competitive.
- satvikpendem 2y agoThey are investors for a reason, they expect a return. If a coop does not produce good returns, especially as compared to standard corporations, why would one expect investors to invest?
- Miraste 2y agoExactly. Investors will always constitute a force against cooperatives; countries with successful coops (Spain, Italy, the Nordics, even Canada) provide other funding mechanisms to prevent private investment from dictating the entire market. The United States chooses not to do this. It is a choice, not the natural result of having a finance system.
- satvikpendem 2y agoThe US government has a lot of funding mechanisms, the economy does not rely solely on private investment. It is just that the scale of venture investment dwarfs a lot of even governmental investment in most other countries, money made from previous ventures so of course they'd deploy that capital.
- chii 2y ago> provide other funding mechanisms to prevent private investment from dictating the entire market. if this funding comes from the gov't, then you're just forcing taxpayers to subsidize a less profitable funding mechanism. It's merely a wealth transfer (from taxpayers to these coop owners).
- 2y ago