Why should we have a separate ownership class that does no work?
A question
Mason Adams
Other urls found in this thread:
Cooper Cook
Pretty sure most "owners" work hard af. Perhaps you have a sentimental notion which informs your higher valuation of certain types of work over others. Which is not to say that capitalism does not have its inherent problems.
Jayden Moore
It doesn't matter if they did work hard to get to their position whats the point of having them around when the workers could just self manage.
Landon Scott
>It doesn't matter if they did work hard to get to their position
If there was no reward, why would any put out more than the bare minimum?
>when the workers could just self manage
You still need people handling day to day operations, which tends to have power collecting. Syndicalism is workable but the initial capital has to come from somewhere.
Ian Gonzalez
>whats the point of having them around when the workers could just self manage.
because they can't
Gavin Morgan
>If there was no reward, why would any put out more than the bare minimum?
They could still be rewarded just not with the ability to do nothing and take other people's labor.
>You still need people handling day to day operations, which tends to have power collecting. Syndicalism is workable but the initial capital has to come from somewhere.
Most co-ops work perfectly fine. If we were going the syndicalist route we would probably have to seize the firms from the capitalist class.
Camden Thompson
>to get to their position
You're purposely ignoring what I actually said, and substituting your own imaginings of reality. You also don't seem to be a fan of human freedom. Bye.
Brody Jackson
Worker co-operatives work just fine.
James Sanders
how many worker co-operatives are major national or global institutions?
Jonathan Cook
Do you think the CEO of wall mart is an extremely hard worker? Or do you think that outside of small company's CEO's and bosses do basically nothing and claim the money their employees generate.