Why are capitalists so afraid of worker cooperatives?

crimsonwolf20 said:Nah, you’ve totally mixed things up with that classic socialist excuse about why socialism fails everywhere and every single time.

You socialists are always the ones claiming that "true" socialism has never actually existed—arguing that those socialist sociopaths and dictators weren't the "real" deal—so then you retreat into these tired clichés about an American conspiracy, sanctions, Western saboteurs, or bad actors being at the top of the socialist power pyramid every time. It's the go-to move, right? Because otherwise, there's no other way to explain why your centrally planned paradise on earth consistently turns out to be a literal hellscape that impoverishes and ruins billions of unlucky souls who just happened to be born into these unnatural social experiments under the boot of socialist totalitarianism.

At the end of the day, people are people. American "capitalists" (whatever that even means—capitalism isn't some mystical cult, it's just the natural, voluntary exchange of value for value) and socialists are all humans. Everyone is greedy, selfish, good, bad, kind, cruel, or whatever else you want to throw at them. There's no such thing as "real" capitalists; there's just a rule of law that sets up the framework where a free market can actually function—a state that punishes crime and protects private property.

In America, that often doesn't exist, which is a massive failure by politicians—people are going to exploit any gap in the system for their own gain, whether they call themselves "capitalists" or socialists. People are people! If there's an opportunity, they'll grab it. And if the government is incompetent, sluggish, and meddling in the market in a million different ways—hey, that's great for them! It just gives them way more room to maneuver and pull shady deals compared to a minimal government with limited authority.

..

And let's not forget the USA—which, after a period of crisis that wasn't nearly as apocalyptic as today's right-wingers try to paint it, was actually on a solid path toward economic recovery by 1989. But instead, it all got derailed by this irrational nationalism rooted in deep historical grievances. From 1991 onward, that irrationality just became a playground for criminal, cancer-like structures of corrupt elites in power.

Quincy:

There is no such thing as "true" capitalists; there is only a rule-of-law state that establishes the legal framework for a free market to function—a state that punishes crime and protects private property. ...In America, that often doesn't exist, which is a failure of the politicians...

Well, obviously it's a failure—that's why we need people in charge who actually know how to do their jobs. How small the government should be, who runs it, and what its actual purpose is—well, that should be decided by the citizens. You get the kind of government you deserve based on the kind of citizens you are.

nimblemarlin6 said:..

And let's not forget the USA—which, after a period of crisis that wasn't nearly as apocalyptic as today's right-wingers try to paint it, was actually on a solid path toward economic recovery by 1989. But instead, it all got derailed by this irrational nationalism rooted in deep historical grievances. From 1991 onward, that irrationality just became a playground for criminal, cancer-like structures of corrupt elites in power.

Quincy:

There is no such thing as "true" capitalists; there is only a rule-of-law state that establishes the legal framework for a free market to function—a state that punishes crime and protects private property. ...In America, that often doesn't exist, which is a failure of the politicians...

Well, obviously it's a failure—that's why we need people in charge who actually know how to do their jobs. How small the government should be, who runs it, and what its actual purpose is—well, that should be decided by the citizens. You get the kind of government you deserve based on the kind of citizens you are.

So who’s the one actually tearing us apart here? 😂

Man, stop talking nonsense—back in '89, everything was already heading for a total meltdown, we're talking triple-digit inflation and basically every other socialist system falling apart. This whole thing is just historical revisionism being used as a convenient excuse for why central planning failed miserably. It's Socialism 101, folks! 🤦

Well, obviously—what's missing is leadership at the top. We need people who actually know what they're doing running the show.

Oh, so you mean we need the "right kind" of socialists. 😂

How big the state should be, who gets to run it, and what kind of government it should be—that should all be decided by the citizens. A state is just a reflection of its people.

That's the core issue right there—you seem to think it's perfectly fine for the citizens to decide which rights and freedoms the government is allowed to strip away, simply because the majority votes for it.

But what happens if those citizens—say, like German National Socialists—decide that capitalists and Jewish people should be sent to gas chambers? Does that capitalist or that Jewish person still have a right to freedom, regardless of what the regime or the majority of citizens wants to take from them?

Seriously, nobody in the socialist camp ever gives a straight answer to this one. Come on, be the first to step up.
☕

Benjamin Taylor6 said:Sure, maybe some ultra-successful American tycoon is thrilled by the idea. But let’s be honest about how things work here in the States—local capitalists aren't exactly jumping for joy at the prospect, because once you introduce real accountability, there’s suddenly nothing left to skim off the top.
In principle, those companies that actually managed to pull off employee stock ownership programs only did so after the "new money" bosses had finished bleeding them dry and brought everything down to a mediocre baseline. It was basically a desperate move by the workers to save their own jobs from being gutted.
A few examples:
An electrode plant in a town like Columbus
Zaprešić

Do you even understand what the concept of competition actually means?

crimsonwolf20 said:Nah, you’ve totally mixed things up with that classic socialist excuse about why socialism fails everywhere and every single time.

You socialists are always the ones claiming that "true" socialism has never actually existed—arguing that those socialist sociopaths and dictators weren't the "real" deal—so then you retreat into these tired clichés about an American conspiracy, sanctions, Western saboteurs, or bad actors being at the top of the socialist power pyramid every time. It's the go-to move, right? Because otherwise, there's no other way to explain why your centrally planned paradise on earth consistently turns out to be a literal hellscape that impoverishes and ruins billions of unlucky souls who just happened to be born into these unnatural social experiments under the boot of socialist totalitarianism.

At the end of the day, people are people. American "capitalists" (whatever that even means—capitalism isn't some mystical cult, it's just the natural, voluntary exchange of value for value) and socialists are all humans. Everyone is greedy, selfish, good, bad, kind, cruel, or whatever else you want to throw at them. There's no such thing as "real" capitalists; there's just a rule of law that sets up the framework where a free market can actually function—a state that punishes crime and protects private property.

In America, that often doesn't exist, which is a massive failure by politicians—people are going to exploit any gap in the system for their own gain, whether they call themselves "capitalists" or socialists. People are people! If there's an opportunity, they'll grab it. And if the government is incompetent, sluggish, and meddling in the market in a million different ways—hey, that's great for them! It just gives them way more room to maneuver and pull shady deals compared to a minimal government with limited authority.

The problem is, that ideal version of a rule-of-law state simply doesn't exist in the Beautiful Coast. What we have here is a small group of individuals who somehow ended up with massive ownership over the means of production. And most of these owners couldn't care less about actual production. Their only concern is figuring out how to squeeze the most profit out of properties that were practically handed to them on a silver platter.

That's why we have this "screw it all" version of capitalism!
It’s no wonder these rejected ideas from twenty-five years ago are resurfacing again.

rustywalker32 said:Do you even understand what the concept of competition actually means?

Given what I read in the papers the other day regarding the General Electric plant in Newark, it seems "competition" might have come at a very high price.
Basically, the workers caught on in time that certain foreign "partners" were looking to "acquire" them—but only so they could shut the plant down and eliminate the competition. In professional terms, that’s called a HOSTILE TAKEOVER.😲 😂 😲
So yeah, competition is a real "screw it all" concept too!