The lies of the Socialists
- Thread starter SUPERPOKES
- Start date
Ahhh, so it won't be the collectivized workers (shareholders) making the decisions. Decisions will be made by the people the government puts in charge (BOD and majority owners). I can't see any possible way that could go poorly...
How do you interpret the vague answer you posted? Just so you're clear, that's actually why I asked a direct question in response to your thoroughly chickenshit answer.
I interpret it as the company will be governed by a board of directors elected by it's owners (the workers)
Collective agriculture worked so well in the USSR through the years. It looks like it is doing the same in Venezuela.
I agree that the Bezos, Gates, and others probably should share some of their wealth with their workers but it is totally wrong to diminish their innovations and work habits because they had a dream and the drive to succeed. Reminds me of small town America where everyone was envious of the business owners who were successful and had “money”.
I agree that the Bezos, Gates, and others probably should share some of their wealth with their workers but it is totally wrong to diminish their innovations and work habits because they had a dream and the drive to succeed. Reminds me of small town America where everyone was envious of the business owners who were successful and had “money”.
We would kill for the GDP growth the USSR had during collectivization of agriculture
Dan since ownership doesn't improve life I suppose you wouldn't mind deeding over your business to me
It’s nothing but a bunch of debts. You can have it! Assume all the liabilities and it’s yours!
But to be serious I don’t see collective ownership as materially improving the average worker’s life.
It has been my experience that for the average worker a job is nothing but a chore a worker has to put up with so he can go out and live his life. The company political intrigue does nor interest him. My employees - and I have loved virtually every one of them for over 50 years - lose all interest in the company the second they walk out the door at 5 o’clock. There’s nothing wrong with that attitude, IMO. It’s just the way they are wired. They are not “ownership material” in the sense that all they care about is will the job be there tomorrow morning. Trying to load them up with ownership responsibilities and being involved in making ownership decisions is not what they care about. I think in large part that’s why socialists have been met with such resistance and apathy from lunch-bucket workers. Frankly, my dear Pilt, they don’t give a damn!
You are confusing ownership and management. As the owner of over 100 companies, the only added burden in my life is a bunch of shareholder letters I have to throw out. I would bet most posters on this board own even more companies and don't even have to deal with all the shareholder letters.
And what kind of majority would be needed to be elected to this board? What does "owner" mean?
Does Joe the high school dropout janitor have equal chance to be elected as Phil with the MBA who works in marketing?
Those are two separate questions. Here's a third:
What happens to the existing shareholders who don't work there? Will outstanding shares be confiscated?
Last edited:
1 not a corporate gov expert, but I am pretty sure the current majority requirements would work fine
2 yes in the same way he has an equal chance of being elected to the school board
3 existing shareholders are expropriated in pure socialism
No, I don’t think I’m confusing ownership with management in this case. The owner ultimately calls the shots. Otherwise he/she owns nothing. If the line worker is the owner he should be expected to be up to date on the inner workings of the one company he owns. As owner if management makes a decision with which he and others strenuously disagree do they walk out on a wildcat strike? They’re owners, aren’t they? Why couldn’t they leave at any time for any reason, tell management to shove it, they own the damn place, they’ll be back when they come back and not before. Management can hardly punish the owner.
You'll just have to trust me on this Dan since I'm a prolific owner of businesses
I’d be interested to know how many of the businesses you own are owned equally by the workers on the line. Each worker have as much ownership percentage as you?
Damn, you wrote that before I signed off. Your writing suggests to me you don’t know/understand the typical working man/woman. Now, goodnight!
As a working man I think I have a pretty good idea, and I think the benefits of ownership (profits) with out the downsides of managing are extremely attractive, which is why I own so many businesses.
And those are?
He doesn't have an equal chance of being elected to the school board. We both know that.
So you are willing to have your existing shares in the companies you don't actually work for expropriated by the government? Previously you didn't seem very eager for the government to decide how big your house could be or what kind of car you could drive.
Similar threads
