So, what's stopping workers from controlling the means of production?

[CrusaderFrank]

The central thesis of Socialists is that "working people own and control the means of production and distribution...where the production of society is used for the benefit of all humanity, not for the private profit of a few"

Well, what's stopping workers from ownership and control?

 

[Sallow]

The police force and military.

 

[uscitizen]

Just proves we are not nearly as socialist as right wing nuts claim.

 

[Katzndogz]

The central thesis of Socialists is that "working people own and control the means of production and distribution...where the production of society is used for the benefit of all humanity, not for the private profit of a few"

Well, what's stopping workers from ownership and control?

It fails every time it's tried. What was the name of that airline that turned the whole company over to the workers to run? I forget, it went bankrupt long ago.

 

[uscitizen]

The central thesis of Socialists is that "working people own and control the means of production and distribution...where the production of society is used for the benefit of all humanity, not for the private profit of a few"

Well, what's stopping workers from ownership and control?

It fails every time it's tried. What was the name of that airline that turned the whole company over to the workers to run? I forget, it went bankrupt long ago.

yeah and so did a lot of airlines that were not turned over to the employees.

Does this prove that traditional ownership and management is no better then the employee variety?

I sold my company to my employees several years ago and they are still doing fine.
It is an auto Electronics and AC shop.
They still do work for the state govt and some auto dealers as well as drive in customers.

 

[ThinkCritically]

The central thesis of Socialists is that "working people own and control the means of production and distribution...where the production of society is used for the benefit of all humanity, not for the private profit of a few"

Well, what's stopping workers from ownership and control?

Its called a CO-OP. Not many of them in existence though.

 

[Widdekind]

The central thesis of Socialists is that "working people own and control the means of production and distribution...where the production of society is used for the benefit of all humanity, not for the private profit of a few"

Well, what's stopping workers from ownership and control?

Its called a CO-OP. Not many of them in existence though.

why don't workers buy stock ? if they want more say, in 'their' business' policies; then why don't they "pay to play", and buy their way in, through open "market means", like everybody else, who already does so ? is there need, for "Government & politics", to be invoked, when markets already long ago had the means, by which people could (non coercively) exert their influence, into firms ?

 

[ThinkCritically]

The central thesis of Socialists is that "working people own and control the means of production and distribution...where the production of society is used for the benefit of all humanity, not for the private profit of a few"

Well, what's stopping workers from ownership and control?

Its called a CO-OP. Not many of them in existence though.

why don't workers buy stock ? if they want more say, in 'their' business' policies; then why don't they "pay to play", and buy their way in, through open "market means", like everybody else, who already does so ? is there need, for "Government & politics", to be invoked, when markets already long ago had the means, by which people could (non coercively) exert their influence, into firms ?

They can if they work for a corporation, but you must remember that the typical share holder hasn't enough shares to effect the decisions of the corporation.

 

[Epsilon Delta]

The central thesis of Socialists is that "working people own and control the means of production and distribution...where the production of society is used for the benefit of all humanity, not for the private profit of a few"

Well, what's stopping workers from ownership and control?

People like Barak Obama!

 

[Widdekind]

They can if they work for a corporation, but you must remember that the typical share holder hasn't enough shares to effect the decisions of the corporation.

if everybody else can, then workers could form "investment trusts", to pool their purchasing power ? "they all invest their money, in "Acme workers investment fund", which then buys big blocs of shares" ?

 

[ThinkCritically]

They can if they work for a corporation, but you must remember that the typical share holder hasn't enough shares to effect the decisions of the corporation.

if everybody else can, then workers could form "investment trusts", to pool their purchasing power ? "they all invest their money, in "Acme workers investment fund", which then buys big blocs of shares" ?

Many corporations offer stock options as a form of financial compensation. Thus increasing worker incentive as they become more invested in the success of the company due to their increased level of ownership and reward for the business's success.

If a corporation doesn't offer stock options, then workers can still buy stock in their company.

Nothing is stopping workers from blocking together and buying up large shares of their respective company, nothing except cash to pay for those shares in the company that is.

 

[Widdekind]

workers can still buy stock in their company.

Nothing is stopping workers from blocking together and buying up large shares of their respective company

Unions have already done so ?

 

[ThinkCritically]

workers can still buy stock in their company.

Nothing is stopping workers from blocking together and buying up large shares of their respective company

Unions have already done so ?

Unions usually don't. The purpose of the Union is predominantly to increase wages, benefits, and employees' representational power.

Think of corporations as mini democratic governments. You have ownership (which is like the president or congress) they decide the direction of the company (or country). You have shareholders (which are like voters) who elect the executive. Just like in a democracy there are some who participate (vote) and some who do not. It is a choice, just like union members have a choice of participating in the direction of the company by buying shares and voting on the direction of the company.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

The central thesis of Socialists is that "working people own and control the means of production and distribution...where the production of society is used for the benefit of all humanity, not for the private profit of a few"

Well, what's stopping workers from ownership and control?

nothing....

Shared capitalism is a variant of the traditional capitalist system of private ownership of property, employment contracts in the job market, and market-based determination of prices and wages. It diverges from traditional capitalism by dividing the benefits and risks of capitalism among workers and retirees as well as among capitalists, blurring the capital/labor dichotomy that has dominated traditional economic relationships. As exhibit 1 indicates, the sharing occurs in three ways:

1. Through financial participation in one’s own firm.
2. Through pension fund ownership of shares in one’s own firm or in equity more broadly.
3. Shared decision-making at the workplace.

To see how extensive shared capitalist modes of compensation have become in the US, I gathered statistics on particular forms of shared capitalism compensation from diverse sources and mined the compensation questions from the 1994-95 Workplace Representation and Participation Survey (WRPS; Freeman and Rogers). My estimates, summarized in exhibit 1, suggest that approximately half of the US private sector work force is paid through some form of financial sharing (Dube and Freeman, 2000).

The Shared Capitalist Model of Work and Compensation - Cairn.info

 

[Paulie]

workers can still buy stock in their company.

Nothing is stopping workers from blocking together and buying up large shares of their respective company

Unions have already done so ?

Unions usually don't. The purpose of the Union is predominantly to increase wages, benefits, and employees' representational power.

Think of corporations as mini democratic governments. You have ownership (which is like the president or congress) they decide the direction of the company (or country). You have shareholders (which are like voters) who elect the executive. Just like in a democracy there are some who participate (vote) and some who do not. It is a choice, just like union members have a choice of participating in the direction of the company by buying shares and voting on the direction of the company.

You can participate without voting. You can still demand things from your representatives, and in the event that there's no one you support in an election it's ok not to vote. Maybe you spent time trying to get a certain person on a ballot and get them nominated, but fell short. You can still pressure your reps.

I hate this idea that voting is the be all end all, and if you don't vote you shouldn't get to have a say. That's just retarded.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

So can the workers decide to start their own company and get investors?

Are there any laws against that?

 

[ThinkCritically]

Unions have already done so ?

Unions usually don't. The purpose of the Union is predominantly to increase wages, benefits, and employees' representational power.

Think of corporations as mini democratic governments. You have ownership (which is like the president or congress) they decide the direction of the company (or country). You have shareholders (which are like voters) who elect the executive. Just like in a democracy there are some who participate (vote) and some who do not. It is a choice, just like union members have a choice of participating in the direction of the company by buying shares and voting on the direction of the company.

You can participate without voting. You can still demand things from your representatives, and in the event that there's no one you support in an election it's ok not to vote. Maybe you spent time trying to get a certain person on a ballot and get them nominated, but fell short. You can still pressure your reps.

I hate this idea that voting is the be all end all, and if you don't vote you shouldn't get to have a say. That's just retarded.

I agree with you Paulie, I was just giving a metaphor for how shareholders influence company decisions.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Um....China, Mexico, Honduras, India...etc. etc.
That is what is stopping American labor from doing anything.

 

[ThinkCritically]

Um....China, Mexico, Honduras, India...etc. etc.
That is what is stopping American labor from doing anything.

What do you suppose anyone should do about that.

 

[uscitizen]

Um....China, Mexico, Honduras, India...etc. etc.
That is what is stopping American labor from doing anything.

What do you suppose anyone should do about that.

Invade China?

Actually I am not sure that anything can be done that will reverse things for US labor. At least for the next decade or two.