[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 8 KB, 334x94, Logoingles[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3471728 No.3471728 [Reply] [Original]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mondrag%C3%B3n_Cooperative_Corporation

Democratic worker self management > Corporate bureaucracy & Stalinist central planning

a society whose entire (capitalist) economy is controlled by the workers of each business would be one step closer to a true communist state. Capital would be made to bow to social welfare and society would become more...humane

tl;dr --> Cooperation is and has always been the way forward.

>> No.3471739

If I am wrong then please show me the error of my ways. Come on /sci/. I am actually interested in finding the flaws of such a society.

Here have more successful self managed enterprises while we wait
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hotel_Bauen

>> No.3471750
File: 46 KB, 473x599, 1311956738167[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3471750

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pjHTrwCstcM

Pic unrelated to video.

>> No.3471769

I will keep pushing this topic till intelligent replies are posted

>> No.3471776

There is a a flaw in your society, and its pretty big. Ready for it? It consists of people.

>> No.3471779

It's the democratic method I believe was shown in Capitalism: A Love Story.

There I just mentioned Michael Moore. You'll thank me when the ragefest hits 200 replies.

>> No.3471802

>>3471739

great idea OP, now go find 1000 random strangers and create a functioning and competitive business

>> No.3471805
File: 24 KB, 545x272, 1311961814780[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3471805

>>3471776
How is this a problem?...no really. I would love to hear your point of view. Could you explain it to me?

I have been to get stuff wrong so any wisdom you could share with me would be greatly appreciated.

Pic unrelated. Its just something to brighten up your day :)

>> No.3471819

>>3471728
if it's so great, then show it: start one and put all non-cooperative competitors out of business.
at least regular corporations share the wealth and let anyone hold stock.

>> No.3471827

>totalitarian communism
>humane
choose one

>> No.3471829

I like this idea immensely, but good luck getting /sci/ to respond to anything other than outer space fantasy and religious troll threads.

>> No.3471833

>>3471805
Well its like this. People like to disagree over every little thing. Sure most people can be generally nice to most other people, but not everyone is like that. Some people are in it only for themselves with no care for the greater society. So the only way that your plan will work, is if every one agrees with it. And if everyone agrees with a plan, then it doesn't matter what that plan is. But if even a tiny group of people don't agree with what you are doing, then it all comes down.

>> No.3471837

>>3471802

Come on now bro. Why so Cynical?.

I am sure there are thousands of cooperatives in your locality (city & state). As for money you could get venture capital and/or loans from any cooperative credit union...hell i am sure you could call up Mondragon and they would educate you in how to build a sustainable cooperative business (they also give out venture capital if you have a solid plan)

>> No.3471840

>>3471833
So they can leave and form their own business. I don't see the problem.

>> No.3471848

>>3471840
what? like in the free market?

>> No.3471850

>>3471840
Because sooner or later, they are gonna want a piece of your business.

>> No.3471878

>>3471833

I am sorry if I misinterpreted what you meant but you seem to be saying that most people are completely incapable of putting their differences aside for the sake of feeding their families and having equity in their workplace. While you are right that there are some in society that are inherently anti social and exhibit behavior that borders on psychopathy the majority of us (under the right circumstances) would gladly stand in a line to pass buckets of water to a burning house.

Exhibit (A).

> The MONDRAGON Co-operatives operate in accordance with a business model based on People and the Sovereignty of Labour, which has made it possible to develop highly participative companies rooted in solidarity, with a strong social dimension but without neglecting business excellence. The Co-operatives are owned by their worker-members and power is based on the principle of one person, one vote

> 250+ diverse companies ranging from stocks to maids.
>83,859 employees/owners
> 14,755 milion € in profits
> Lowest wealth gap between the top and bottom earners of any corporation.

they are somewhat of a rarity due to the sheer size of the cooperative but the point remains that this model is effective, humane and sustainable.

>> No.3471883

>>3471848
Your reading comprehension is not so good.

>> No.3471887

>>3471850
I don't know. Do you go around trying to find ways to strip people of their houses?

>> No.3471890

>>3471887
Well I personally didn't plan on it by now that you mention it I guess I'll have to give it a shot.

>> No.3471908

>>3471850

....so?....thats the point. Its still a marketplace. Its simply capitalism where wealth and power are not concentrated in the corporate board of directors but dispersed among its employees.

- Wealth is power.
- Democracy presumes equality.
- You are not equal to those who get to decided whether or not you will live in two story home or beg for food at a soup kitchen.

>> No.3471915

>>3471908
> Its simply capitalism where wealth and power are not concentrated in the corporate board of directors but dispersed among its employees.
So it's better.

What are you not understanding?

>> No.3471924

>>3471827
democratic capitalism =/= totalitarian communism

>>3471829
I may not know who or where you are but I thank you for bringing a smile to my face. Thank you for your kind words bro :)

>> No.3471935

>>3471915
my good man. I am the OP and the author of that post you are replying to. I am sorry for not having used a proper namefag title. I have corrected this with the hope that we shall avoid further confusion.

>> No.3471958

>/sci/ - Pessimism and Capitalism

There is no point in trying to discuss alternatives to current market economics on this board. Even if you can get them to admit the faults and that things need to change, they have no ideas how to go about doing that except that no matter what you are wrong.

>> No.3471964

>>3471935
Eh. It's probably my fault. I really should have gone to bed by now, and my reading comprehension seems to be the first thing to go when I'm tired.

>> No.3471977

So what about the people in standard businesses that have no problem with the way the business is being run? Your system is different, I just don't see it as Inherently better.

>> No.3471984

>>3471977
>So what about the people in standard businesses that have no problem with the way the business is being run?
Do you even have any reason to believe they exist in significant numbers?

The impression I get is that most people are not particularly satisfied with their job, in large part due to bad bosses and inane rules/regulations.

>> No.3471989

So what role did the state play in this? None? Thought so.

Mondragon is only possible in a free market, in a socialist system it would quickly become corrupted and try to nationalize and generally shitfuck the economy.

>> No.3472002

>>3471984
In small to medium sized businesses its much more common. People being dissatisfied with their job just means they are in the wrong job.

>> No.3472006

>>3471989
>[I] Thought
Your posts seem to suggest otherwise.

>> No.3472013

>>3471958
OP is probably like me, in that even if it's not 100% science related, this is where he goes in hopes of finding a rational discussion.

Which if you're willing/able to parse through the bullshit/aspies/trolls, you can often find just that on this board.

/sci/ & /fit/ are the only boards I ever see relevant information on, even if rare. I can sift through the gay porn on fit and the religious trolls here to get the nuggets of wisdom that sometimes come from here.
>>restofthread

I think cooperatives don't work because the locus in power is decentralized (kind of the point, I know), so if you have a great idea for a business, what would you rather do? Create it, make a few decisions, and collect your money every day with a rake? Or work your ass off and be paid a fair wage? Me, personally, I'd take the "get rich" option initially, surround myself with great people, then transform my businesses into co-ops after my needs/wants are taken care of, I call it the "benevolent bastard" plan. Get mine, then take care of anyone that I can.

That being said - what's to stop a director/CEO with majority stock from genuinely taking care of his employees, and providing a greater-than-fair wage and strong benefits package? What if I ran a successful company and decided to just pull ~150k/yr so I'm wealthy and happy, instead of 25mil/yr on the backs of the employees? Why not pay employees based on company performance to incentivize hard work, without asking a factory worker to make complex, delicate economic policy decisions? This is all mental masturbation at this point, I'll never run a f-500 company, but why isn't it done like this? Treating employees well would engender loyalty and dedication rather than hostility, fewer people jumping ship means lower training costs, and people that would be more likely to make sacrifices to work there if needed...

>why not a benevolent dictatorship?

>> No.3472020

No one doubts that democratic corporations would be the best thing ever, but how would you convince corporations to allow that?

You could argue that the free market gives everyone the freedom to start such a company. Strange that I never heard of it, though. It seems like a very reasonable thing to do. Are those cooperatives perhaps less competitive? (Although I'm not sure why that would be the case)

>> No.3472027
File: 19 KB, 595x497, fullretard.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3472027

>>3471989

>> No.3472048

>>3472020
Workers are poorer than investors, it's not easy to get the initial capital from the workforce. Investors have the cash to start such businesses but don't want to work while the people willing to work don't have the money to offer.

>> No.3472049

The one flaw I see with this, is that you're assuming that the bosses and investors don't contribute anything to the final product. They actually have to work on organizing, and planning so that a company can be successful. There's no reason why the "workers" couldn't collectively do the job of the "capitalist", but I think you'll find that in the real world they aren't as competitive.

I agree with you that cooperation is the way forward. But cooperation to me means the freedom to trade with whomever you please, and that means free markets.

>> No.3472058

>>3472020
democratic nations would be good, but how would you convince nations to allow that?
popular action

>> No.3472061

>>3472049
Free markets can not exist in the real world, they invariably lead to monopoly without intervention at which point they're not free markets any more.

>> No.3472063

>>3472049
Managerial roles are still needed. It's just a question of who controls the capital, who owns the company.

Currently, it's investors. If I understand, the idea is to make sure the employees and the investors are the same people.

>> No.3472066

>>3472061
Well, sure if, there's no government to prevent the use of brute force you just get warlords.

>> No.3472083

>>3472066
Government intervention means you cease to have a free market, free market thus always result in failure.

Further, government intervention always results in the take over of power by the rich.

>> No.3472086

>>3472061
"Free markets cannot exist in the real world"
I've heard this before many times, and don't understand it. Free markets just means that you are not prevented from trading with other people. Coke can't stop you from buying from Pepsi without government intervention. Monopolies can't exist without government intervention either.

>> No.3472097

>>3472066

We have government and we barely have competition as it is. We have oligopoly. Government is used to make entering an industry nearly impossible, thus consolidating market share for present companies. That isn't to say government can't be used to foster competition, but presently governments rarely enforce anti-trust laws.

>> No.3472163

>>3472086

"Monopolies can't exist without government intervention either."

Why?

>> No.3472217

>>3472163
Quite a few reasons. A simple answer is that if a company gains market share, and uses its power to charge higher prices, consumers will switch over to their competitors. If the company tries to buy up their competitors, they'll soon realize that the more of the market they own, the more costly it is to buy up other competitors. Add into this the fact that new enterprises can spring up and you have an environment which isn't very conducive to monopoly formation.

The history of companies trying to form monopolies and cartels without the help of government is pretty long. And the list of failed attempts is equally long.

>> No.3472311

>>3472217

For the most part I'd say you're right, but I think there's the possibility that geographically sheltered areas may be prone to monopolies in industries that require substantial resources. Even in areas without geographically barriers can face monopolies when a foreign business enters a market that has been untapped. I guess the real question is how long a monopoly can last and under what circumstances do they arise.

>> No.3472321

>>3472217
>If the company tries to buy up their competitors, they'll soon realize that the more of the market they own, the more costly it is to buy up other competitors
Are you retarded? The more of the market you own, the more money you get, and it becomes far far easier to crush any competition. Then you start paying criminals or governments to protect you and there goes any freedoms you had.

>> No.3472339

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Co-operative_Group
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lewis_Partnership
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Workers'_self-management#South_America
http://web.gc.cuny.edu/politicalscience/faculty/pranis/pubs/factories.pdf

Learn more.

>> No.3472351

>>3471728

I think you are right, OP.