[jampekka]

Co-ops are of course worse for investors. There are no voting stock in co-ops, so the stockholders can't squeeze maximum profits off workers and consumers.

Europe had very strong socialist/non-capitalist political movements in the 19th century. Co-ops were seen as one alternative to capitalism, and were a huge movement.

For example in Finland the largest bank and largest retail chain are (consumer) co-ops, and in general co-ops are big players in the economy.

[terr-dav]

>Co-ops are of course worse for investors.

What investors?

[jampekka]

For example banks giving loans.

[terr-dav]

1. I wouldn't call that an investment

2. Cooperatives tend to be more resilient in times of crisis:

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jsc.2393

My reason for asking that question in the first place is that 'investor' isn't a role I associate with a worker-owned enterprise. The workers are the owners are the investors, so the statement reads as invalid to my mind.