|
|
|
|
|
|
by gremlinsinc
3171 days ago
|
|
|
Why does it have to be either socialism or capitalism? What if every employee became a shareholder and reaped rewards for such, making companies employee owned and 'SHARING' everything.. ---it's a more privatized way of running socialism and imho works better... I do think gov't should cover healthcare/education -- maybe require service in military, or local community initiatives for those who are pacifists/not fit enough to serve. Employee owned companies / Worker Co-ops I think are the wave of the future, and the next big economic shift. I'm wanting to start a web dev / growth hacking company built around that principle, where even the janitor would be an employee-owner (that's an example, janitorial would probably be contracted out). Good examples are Winco foods -- where some cashiers who started with them in the 80s/90s are worth > $1 million dollars and are still working in-store: i.e. haven't necessarily moved to any sort of 'exec' position. They've just received shares/stock to raise up their living standards substantially. |
|
|
There is nothing stopping this from happening. You can start such a company now. Heck, you can start a communist commune within a free market system. It doesn't happen much because it doesn't work well enough. The classic corporate structure is far more common because it works.
Even if you took all the shares from the shareholders of an existing company and gave them to the employees you'd revert to inequality soon enough. How much are the new cashiers at Winco foods worth? How many of the old Winco foods employees are still rich? How many of the ones who got rich and stayed rich are still working as a cashier? How big is Winco foods compared to Walmart? Most people who have a million dollars don't want to work as a cashier, a few counterexamples notwithstanding. The basic principle of making employees invested in the success of the company is a good one, but the government shouldn't force that model. Let businesses apply that model where they think it works. Google gives stock to employees, great! Company X doesn't, also great.
> I do think gov't should cover healthcare/education
I agree, the government should finance this for people who can't afford it, but the government should not be running the hospitals or the schools for the same reason that the government should finance food for people who can't afford it, but they shouldn't run the supermarket.
> -- maybe require service in military, or local community initiatives for those who are pacifists/not fit enough to serve.
Why? The all-volunteer military works well. Compensate people for the job instead of forcing them to do it.