|
gradenko_2000 posted:the degree of compromise that they will do in order to retain market share would be consensual among the workers though, rather than at some arbitrary point determined by the CEO. yeah it'd be a lot better, but I don't think "self-exploitation" is an inaccurate description of tge compromises employees would have to make to stay comptetitive.
|
#
?
May 3, 2018 05:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 15:31 |
|
|
Just because its not full communism now doesnt mean you should reject. Democratic workplaces themselves can also be breeding grounds for larger leftwing movements much like the worker's councils in russia.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2018 05:16
|
|
|
Jizz Festival posted:yeah it'd be a lot better, but I don't think "self-exploitation" is an inaccurate description of tge compromises employees would have to make to stay comptetitive. If we're going to go in this direction, then every time you perform labor you're exploiting yourself. You have to be able to draw a line where exploitation retains its negative connotation as a social relation. Otherwise it's just like exploiting a resource, and it loses meaningful social dimensions.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2018 05:18
|
|
|
kotkin fuckin owns hard, lol at the idea of him being an ideological liberal. Magnetic Mountain is a real good read if you want a deep, deep dive on soviet industrialization and the early promise of "lived socialism"
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2018 05:19
|
|
|
Forget 'self exploitation', the literal first thing that will happen in an all coop economy is the creation of 'outsourcing coops', who will rent out their scarce & specific capital for a fee. You'll end up with 'capitalist' firms that rent out capital, and 'labor' fiends that have to lease capital. And you better believe the rentier forms will be extremely exclusive about who they let in.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2018 05:19
|
|
|
communism, or anarchism whatever your favourite flavour is, should be treated like buddhist enlightenment: youre never gonna get there, but there is always value in pursuing it, always improvement to be made
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2018 05:20
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:If we're going to go in this direction, then every time you perform labor you're exploiting yourself. You have to be able to draw a line where exploitation retains its negative connotation as a social relation. Otherwise it's just like exploiting a resource, and it loses meaningful social dimensions. i think it's acceptable to use it with worker coops because even though decisions within are made democratically, the drive to ramp up the exploitation is coming externally, from competing in the market.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2018 05:21
|
|
|
rudatron posted:Forget 'self exploitation', the literal first thing that will happen in an all coop economy is the creation of 'outsourcing coops', who will rent out their scarce & specific capital for a fee. You'll end up with 'capitalist' firms that rent out capital, and 'labor' fiends that have to lease capital. And you better believe the rentier forms will be extremely exclusive about who they let in. A truly cooperative economy would be one gigantic coop, because the issue of monopoly power loses its meaning when everyone has an equal stake in the one big monopolistic firm. Of course, at that point you're practically talking about socialism anyway - so there's no point when cooperative economics wouldn't just be a transitionary period into some form of socialism. Jizz Festival posted:i think it's acceptable to use it with worker coops because even though decisions within are made democratically, the drive to ramp up the exploitation is coming externally, from competing in the market. Right, but just because it's practically or literally true doesn't mean it has a definition of social utility. If you accept that working in a democratic workplace is "self-exploitation" then that can be leveraged into a political weapon to imply there's no real difference between being in a capitalist firm or a democratic one. Pener Kropoopkin fucked around with this message at 05:33 on May 3, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 3, 2018 05:30
|
|
|
rudatron posted:The end result of a coop markets exhibit is niche firms exploiting their market share to expropriate the surplus value of other forms. Its still capitalism. well the whole point of rad lib reformism is "capitalism without feudalism" imo Georgism is better than our neoliberal hellscape
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2018 05:47
|
|
|
R. Guyovich posted:workers distributing profit fairly and democratically to everyone in the firm. "this is exactly like capitalism," yossarian says. "i see no difference here" The workers forming a co-operative in the field of production are thus faced with the contradictory necessity of governing themselves with the utmost absolutism. They are obliged to take toward themselves the role of capitalist entrepreneur – a contradiction that accounts for the usual failure of production co-operatives which either become pure capitalist enterprises or, if the workers’ interests continue to predominate, end by dissolving. but i wont lie, turning businesses into coops is cool Ruzihm fucked around with this message at 05:55 on May 3, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 3, 2018 05:52
|
|
|
this is also why worker's cooperatives generally aren't that competitive, because they can't compete without being horrible to themselves - and how do you vote that in? there aren't a lot of worker's cooperatives around for a reason support workers owned businesses, sure, but it's just experimental without any wider social movement behind it
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2018 05:56
|
|
|
so the workers who own the co-op will have to act like capitalist entrepreneurs to generate profit for the co-op that they own
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2018 05:56
|
|
|
Top City Homo posted:well the whole point of rad lib reformism is "capitalism without feudalism" It's better, but it's not good enough to aim for. Being a Georgist is like making a pre-emptive compromise with a force that won't negotiate. Co-ops are a worthy pursuit because they can already be realized under present conditions. Why go through the trouble of overthrowing capitalism if you're just going to do Georgism?
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2018 05:59
|
|
|
i dont think anyone is saying that just worker coops competing in an otherwise capitalist economy are the ideal goal. ultimately though they are still vastly better than working for the private profit of capitalists.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2018 06:00
|
|
|
Yandat posted:this is also why worker's cooperatives generally aren't that competitive, because they can't compete without being horrible to themselves - and how do you vote that in? They are generally respectably competitive though, basically every study on them has shown this.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2018 06:06
|
|
|
also honestly ive found very few people who will disagree with the fundamentals of workplace democracy, even otherwise chuds out here in redneckland. simply pointing out that random rear end in a top hat rich people in new york or london or hong kong who have absolutely nothing to do with your actual work are the people actually profiting from your labor, and wouldnt it be fairer if the people who actually did the job were the ones who ran it and profited, just hits an innate sense of fairness that basically everyone has.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2018 06:07
|
|
|
reignonyourparade posted:They are generally respectably competitive though, basically every study on them has shown this. i can't think of a single worker's owned cooperative that i buy stuff from or interact with on any level does newman's own salad dressing count
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2018 06:09
|
|
|
Yandat posted:i can't think of a single worker's owned cooperative that i buy stuff from or interact with on any level People like starting companies where they get all the profit and get to tell people what to do instead Mondragon in Spain is a good example of a coop being competitive even on an international stage
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2018 06:11
|
|
|
worker owned coops don’t need to make profits because profits are after wages
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2018 06:13
|
|
|
worker owned coops should be more competitive under market capitalism because they eliminate the profit overhead and can therefore offer lower prices accordingly
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2018 06:15
|
|
|
just wanna say yeah this ISNT prolix please continue (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2018 06:15
|
|
|
bernie has proposed some cool stuff for cooperatives https://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/recent-business/legislative-package-introduced-to-encourage-employee-owned-companies quote:Legislative Package Introduced to Encourage Employee-Owned Companies
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2018 06:15
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:worker owned coops don’t need to make profits because profits are after wages They have to make profit just to reinvest in order to remain competitive under conditions of capitalism. Mondragon for instance, hires seasonal labor that don't have a stake in the co-op so they can earn profit from their labor and expand the firm. Even if you don't exploit non-affiliated labor, you still need to accumulate surplus value at the firm level.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2018 06:16
|
|
|
Karl Barks posted:People like starting companies where they get all the profit and get to tell people what to do instead the real issue is that there won't be worker's cooperatives springing up because they'll never get the capital to do so. that's why people who want to make profit get the money to produce, and the cooperatives never will
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2018 06:16
|
|
|
Yandat posted:the real issue is that there won't be worker's cooperatives springing up because they'll never get the capital to do so. that's why people who want to make profit get the money to produce, and the cooperatives never will bernie 2020 quote:The second bill introduced today would create a U.S. Employee Ownership Bank to provide $500 million in low-interest rate loans and other financial assistance to help workers purchase businesses through an employee stock ownership plan or a worker-owned cooperative. Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.) introduced a companion bill in the House.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2018 06:17
|
|
|
Yandat posted:the real issue is that there won't be worker's cooperatives springing up because they'll never get the capital to do so. that's why people who want to make profit get the money to produce, and the cooperatives never will Why won't they get the capital? I don't think it's a silver bullet, but it's a concrete step people can take that democratizes 40+ hours of their week
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2018 06:19
|
|
|
Yeah, the solution to the credit problem is political intervention, and that means electoral victory so - technically feasible but practically extremely difficult. Anyway Yandat, you've probably done business in a co-op before. Grocery stores are the most common forms of worker cooperatives. Pener Kropoopkin fucked around with this message at 06:24 on May 3, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 3, 2018 06:19
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:Yeah, the solution to the credit problem is political intervention, and that means electoral victory so - technically feasible but practically extremely difficult. i've worked for an "employee owned business" before, in the same vein as a grocery store buddy it's not what you'd hope it is
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2018 06:22
|
|
|
Karl Barks posted:Why won't they get the capital? because it's weird and risky
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2018 06:22
|
|
|
there's a huge spectrum of "employee owned" to worker's cooperative
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2018 06:23
|
|
|
Karl Barks posted:Why won't they get the capital? Bankers don't trust cooperative firms to have good credit - or, they won't issue a loan for political reasons - OR, you might not be able to buy out your workplace in the first place. The inability to get credit through loans especially plagued liberated anarchist factories during the Spanish Civil War, because French & British bankers would rather hold out and do business with a Franco regime that would guarantee their profitability.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2018 06:24
|
|
|
Yandat posted:because it's weird and risky In some industries, you might be right. But not all of them, and there are many concrete examples of that. Disclosure: I am trying to start a tech coop
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2018 06:25
|
|
|
Karl Barks posted:In some industries, you might be right. But not all of them, and there are many concrete examples of that. It's not impossible for you to receive capital if you want to start a cooperative firm, it's just way more difficult.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2018 06:27
|
|
|
Karl Barks posted:Disclosure: I am [...] a cop
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2018 06:27
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:Bankers don't trust cooperative firms to have good credit - or, they won't issue a loan for political reasons - OR, you might not be able to buy out your workplace in the first place. Yeah I would imagine factories are significantly more capital intensive up front. I think a coops main usefulness is in replacing small businesses Karl Barks fucked around with this message at 06:30 on May 3, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 3, 2018 06:28
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:worker owned coops don’t need to make profits because profits are after wages profits are also before reinvestment, which u need to do if u wanna avoid laying off your workers when the other guys use reinvest, using less labor on making the same stuff (lowering the prices of production) and can cut their prices and increase production without eating into their profits.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2018 07:10
|
|
|
Ruzihm posted:The workers forming a co-operative in the field of production are thus faced with the contradictory necessity of governing themselves with the utmost absolutism. They are obliged to take toward themselves the role of capitalist entrepreneur – a contradiction that accounts for the usual failure of production co-operatives which either become pure capitalist enterprises or, if the workers’ interests continue to predominate, end by dissolving. cooperatives aren't the be-all end-all of socialism and on their own aren't socialism. we're assuming a workers' state here
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2018 07:21
|
|
|
R. Guyovich posted:cooperatives aren't the be-all end-all of socialism and on their own aren't socialism. we're assuming a workers' state here If there's international commodity exchange, it still applies. But if you are isolationist to all but those who abide with central planning/labor vouchers, point ceded.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2018 07:37
|
|
|
And our children will live, Mr. Beale, to see that perfect world in which there's no war or famine, oppression or brutality - one vast and ecumenical holding company, for whom all men will work to serve a common profit, in which all men will hold a share of stock - all necessities provided, all anxieties tranquilized, all boredom amused. And I have chosen you, Mr. Beale, to preach this evangel.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2018 07:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 15:31 |
|
|
R. Guyovich posted:workers distributing profit fairly and democratically to everyone in the firm. "this is exactly like capitalism," yossarian says. "i see no difference here" lol you just made a strawman of karl marx's literal position on utopian projects like "workplace democracy" it's better to the extent that you don't answer to any individual jagoff and to the extent that it's egalitarian. it's still dictated by the market window into a better future and helping to realize what's possible? maybe. the same as what that future should be? hell no capitalism is ruled by the dictates of capital, and if "workplace democracy" prevents people from seeing that relationship and just makes people cheer for more :clap: worker :clap: coops :clap: as though it's the absolute plateau then gently caress that. but then again i'm pathologically suspicious of incremental change and i'd be less inclined to be suspicious of coops if there were an accompanying revolution to affect worker power both politically and economically, with coops simply being an intermediary stage Yossarian-22 fucked around with this message at 08:09 on May 3, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 3, 2018 07:59
|
|
