CamTin was saying that workers should be considered investors in a moral sense: they put time and effort into the company and deserve a share of the profits. Obviously, workers are not investors in the literal sense.
I was actually trying to say something more than that workers should be considered investors, because Uber drivers and AirBnB hosts are more than just workers: they literally supply the main working capital of their respective concerns. They are owner-operators in the same sense that a taxi driver who owns his cab is, or in the same sense as an orange grower who is part of the "Florida's Natural" co-op.
Certainly workers deserve a seat at the table, and that's a fine debate to have, but surely even the most dyed-in-the-wool capitalists can agree that the owners of the capital deserve a seat at the table, and that an enterprise which by fiat excludes major capital contributors from ownership is not really a capitalist enterprise, but rather some other more exploitative form.
If the owners of the houses & cars want to sign over their property to AirBnB & Uber then you might have a point, but if they want to keep their property for themselves then they aren't really supplying "the main working capital of their respective concerns."
Certainly workers deserve a seat at the table, and that's a fine debate to have, but surely even the most dyed-in-the-wool capitalists can agree that the owners of the capital deserve a seat at the table, and that an enterprise which by fiat excludes major capital contributors from ownership is not really a capitalist enterprise, but rather some other more exploitative form.