Re:Founding vs. Inheriting
by js8 on Sunday May 09, 2021 @01:54PM
(#27098046)
I think your objection to that analogy doesn't affect much the main moral argument against it. Yes, maybe it's less brutal, and you have more freedom, but it is still, IMHO, fundamentally unfair, i.e. that of all the people who collectively built something, some of them get the hereditary right to control the institution (the owners), while some of them do not get the right (the workers).
Who gets the fruits of labor (and how much) is IMHO always a matter of debate in any society. I do not believe there is an objective justification (contrary to some free market advocates). In any case, if you own shares of a company, your labor input can be zero and you still get fruits; I don't know how that is fair (unless this entitlement is divided among all members of the society, like for example all citizens of Norway share the oil profits).
> Genuine question: why don't we see more coops?
IMHO, two reasons. One is lack of legal framework. You have to keep in mind that legal frameworks for modern corporation evolved over at least 300 years, and in the beginning, there wasn't even things like limited liability.
Second, in practice coops face threat of investment strike, because investors simply do not want that system and they are more connected than workers are. Sometimes both of these are a factor, for example many coops faced problems getting bank loans, etc.
It's like asking in 15th century, if democracy is so great, why don't we see more of it? Humans are creatures of habit, and often there are existing power structures that have to be resisted first.
Who gets the fruits of labor (and how much) is IMHO always a matter of debate in any society. I do not believe there is an objective justification (contrary to some free market advocates). In any case, if you own shares of a company, your labor input can be zero and you still get fruits; I don't know how that is fair (unless this entitlement is divided among all members of the society, like for example all citizens of Norway share the oil profits).
> Genuine question: why don't we see more coops?
IMHO, two reasons. One is lack of legal framework. You have to keep in mind that legal frameworks for modern corporation evolved over at least 300 years, and in the beginning, there wasn't even things like limited liability.
Second, in practice coops face threat of investment strike, because investors simply do not want that system and they are more connected than workers are. Sometimes both of these are a factor, for example many coops faced problems getting bank loans, etc.
It's like asking in 15th century, if democracy is so great, why don't we see more of it? Humans are creatures of habit, and often there are existing power structures that have to be resisted first.