this post was submitted on 03 Jul 2023
732 points (91.3% liked)

Memes

45532 readers
1071 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Jake_Farm@sopuli.xyz 9 points 1 year ago (5 children)

As if workers give a shit about customers.

[–] this@sh.itjust.works 20 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That would be an improvement actually, because the customers of these companies are not users, they are other companies looking to advertise or buy users personal data. The users of for profit social media are in fact the product, not the customers.

[–] erogenouswarzone@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago

Great counterpoint. This is what Reddit has been missing for the last 6-8 years: actual thought instead of regurgitation.

[–] yogthos@lemmygrad.ml 20 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They do when they work in a cooperative and have a stake in the business being successful.

[–] daniel@notdigg.com -3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

My question is always: so if me and 10 other people have a great idea for a business, where does the money to start it come from? Most businesses take years to turn a profit, so in this collective, are we all just pouring in our savings until it takes off?

What if we all bust ass for 3 years, never getting paid because we’re building the product, we launch and start getting orders, and find that we’re getting a lot more orders than we expected, so we hire / bunch of people to help fulfill orders. Do those new hires all get an equal share, even though they weren’t there for the 3 years of unpaid R&D? Do they have to contribute money when they get hired for the share of the building that the rest of us already own?

I’m all for workers rights, and workers standing together collectively to get fair wages and working conditions, but when people say “workers should own the means of production”, they can never seem to explain how that would actually work.

[–] bloodfart@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

Two things stand out about this comment:

You’ve framed the idea of worker ownership in the context of profit maximization. It’s important to keep that in mind when running a business because you gotta know how your opponents are thinking and making decisions, but the point of worker ownership isn’t profit but instead agency.

I find it hard to believe that in always asking this question no one has ever answered with an overview of the different collective ownership forms that have existed throughout recorded human history or even a brief synopsis of how your country’s corporate law structures allow for it.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Simply, the central bank can play the role of a VC where people with great ideas apply for loans or grants.

[–] daniel@notdigg.com 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You expect a bank to make high risk loans to unproven ideas? What about loans did things which are controversial (think dispensary or brewery)?

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml -1 points 1 year ago

Yes, I expect the state bank to make loans for unproven ideas. This isn't nearly as outrageous as you seem to think. State funding in China is used precisely in this way to stimulate businesses in areas where China wants to advance right now. And if a dipensary or brewery was seen as socially necessary and viable they could get a loan like anybody else.

[–] PostmodernPythia@lemmy.ml 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Workers don’t give a shit about customers because that’s how the incentive system is set up. Give workers the profits, you give them a good reason to give a shit about how clients feel.

[–] lightrush@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago

As well as ensuring those profits will keep flowing through their retirement, and you get the long term planning incentive.

[–] ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm reminded by that guy on TikTok

"You just lost a customer"

"Good"

[–] ComradePorkRoll@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You skipped over the part where he says "You think I own this business? You think I own IKEA?" implying he would care if he actually had any skin in the game which he would if his job operated as a worker co-op.

[–] galloog1@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)
[–] Neuropotpie@midwest.social 2 points 1 year ago

Co-ops can be capitalistic and are capable of functioning under capitalism, but they would also work much the same under any market economy. Decisions and would be profits are democratized/socialized.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Capitalism is a system of capital accumulation with the people who own the means of production hiring workers to operate them. Co-ops are a market economy, but they're demonstrably not capitalism because capital is distributed fairly amongst the workers doing the work. Learn the difference between markets and capitalism.

[–] ralC@lemmy.fmhy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

Unsurprisingly, those who manage their own small business and aren't at mercy of a giant corporation do. So...🙄