-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
if socialism is a superior system, what is stopping people from joining cooperatives?
- Thread starter Reverend Rick
- Start date
Anyone who's interested, this is a good place to start: Intentional Communities Directory - ecovillages communes cohousing
painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
Cool resource.
This has the land trust community we are looking into, as well as one of the farms we work with in our area.
wa:do
Well Rick, I'll tell you: after being involved in a few communes/co-ops/collectives and observing the processes involved I think the problem is human nature and the resultant discrepancies between the ideology and the actuallity.
What I mean is this:
The problem: 6 people need 6 pianos moved up 2 flights of stairs. Now, naturally, if each individual attempted to move his own piano by himself, at the end of the day all they'd have to show for their efforts would be a cpl hernias, a few broken pianos, and 6 frustrated and exhausted people.
So,
The ideology:
If all 6 people decided to tackle each piano, one at a time, together as a team---say 3 pushing'/pulling the piano up the stairs, 2 helping guide/lift from above with ropes---and one supervising and getting ready to jump in if anything goes amiss, they could get all 6 pianos moved in an afternoon without anyone getting hurt or even having to work all that hard.
Great! Operating via this arrangement there are no limits: the more people who show up, the easier and more efficient the work will be for everyone, in spite of the fact that more people also means more pianos.
Great!...in theory anyway.
But...
The actuality:
The 6 people discuss it and decide to work together to get all 6 pianos moved up the stairs. Unfortunately, 3 of these people suddenly remember they have bad backs. One more person decides that he's not really any good at physical labor and that he'd just be in the way anyway so he decides that the best way to make himself useful is by making a beer run (thinking that if he's lucky and he takes his time most of the pianos will have been moved by the time he gets back).
When the beer-run guy gets back he sees that 5 of the pianos are just where they were when he left and the remaining one is a little less than halfway up the first flight of steps with one of the 2 remaining members (the 2 determined to make this co-operative thing work no matter what) struggling on either side of the piano, while the other 3 members (the guys with spontaneous back trouble) offer advise and cheer them on.
Once the 2 determined guys have (finally) successfully moved the first piano, the other 4 decide it's time to celebrate (and since there's beer now it was obviously meant to be) and that's pretty much it for these 4 for the rest of the day other than the fact that their advise and encouragment is now louder and less intelligible.
At the end of the day 1 piano has been successfully moved and one more piano is just short of the second landing and likely to stay there indefinitely because the 2 guys that were actually trying to get something done actually have bad backs now.
It doesn't always turn out this way---and in those instances where everybody is willing to pitch in and try to make things work it's like magic---but, probably more often than not, the actuality scenario is what you wind up with.
KnightOwl
Member
This is a little story about four people named Everybody, Somebody, Anybody, and Nobody.
There was an important job to be done and Everybody was sure that Somebody would do it.
Anybody could have done it, but Nobody did it.
Somebody got angry about that because it was Everybody's job.
Everybody thought that Anybody could do it, but Nobody realized that Everybody wouldn't do it.
It ended up that Everybody blamed Somebody when Nobody did what Anybody could have done
Seriously though...
People are motivated by self-interest and in a small communal living situation, it CAN work because everyone pretty much knows everyone else but I think Quagmire's scenario might explain why they aren't forming everywhere.
I do have to say, I know someone who belongs to a co-housing community and it seems to be thriving. I've used their common house facility a number of times with his blessing to throw some events. It's in Sacramento's downtown area and each person buys their own house and they co-own common area things. The thing I know the most about is their meal plan. Each household takes a turn at preparing a communal meal and they charge enough to cover the cost of groceries. Their common house has two stoves, two sinks, two refrig... well you get the idea. They also are very green with a community garden, recycling, a minimum of paper and plastic products etc. Anyway, it works for them.
I like stuff like that co-housing community and I think it works because like Revoltingist said, it is voluntary AND it is part of a larger free enterprise system. They don't have someone at the Capital telling them they have to do this and that to the level they would in a communist country.
Even China... look at what they're doing. They are participating in the global economy in a huge way and part of that is they are doing a lot to increase entrepreneurism. It isn't anything like the U.S. but they are making some changes.
I also think there are some things that the government does poorly, but better for some reasons than the private sector -- defense and justice would be two. Some safety concerns like the CDC and fire departments also, but after that it starts to become hard to argue for government control. Central banking has delivered us a nightmare. The SEC wouldn't know a Madoff if it came into their office and talked to them face to face.
And here's maybe the number one reason why I want as little government as possible -- they love paperwork and I hate it.
In the end, this topic caught my interest because I used to tell people all the time, if they like communism so much, they should start a commune. If it was a good commune and competed well with other communes, it would thrive.
There was an important job to be done and Everybody was sure that Somebody would do it.
Anybody could have done it, but Nobody did it.
Somebody got angry about that because it was Everybody's job.
Everybody thought that Anybody could do it, but Nobody realized that Everybody wouldn't do it.
It ended up that Everybody blamed Somebody when Nobody did what Anybody could have done
Seriously though...
People are motivated by self-interest and in a small communal living situation, it CAN work because everyone pretty much knows everyone else but I think Quagmire's scenario might explain why they aren't forming everywhere.
I do have to say, I know someone who belongs to a co-housing community and it seems to be thriving. I've used their common house facility a number of times with his blessing to throw some events. It's in Sacramento's downtown area and each person buys their own house and they co-own common area things. The thing I know the most about is their meal plan. Each household takes a turn at preparing a communal meal and they charge enough to cover the cost of groceries. Their common house has two stoves, two sinks, two refrig... well you get the idea. They also are very green with a community garden, recycling, a minimum of paper and plastic products etc. Anyway, it works for them.
I like stuff like that co-housing community and I think it works because like Revoltingist said, it is voluntary AND it is part of a larger free enterprise system. They don't have someone at the Capital telling them they have to do this and that to the level they would in a communist country.
Even China... look at what they're doing. They are participating in the global economy in a huge way and part of that is they are doing a lot to increase entrepreneurism. It isn't anything like the U.S. but they are making some changes.
I also think there are some things that the government does poorly, but better for some reasons than the private sector -- defense and justice would be two. Some safety concerns like the CDC and fire departments also, but after that it starts to become hard to argue for government control. Central banking has delivered us a nightmare. The SEC wouldn't know a Madoff if it came into their office and talked to them face to face.
And here's maybe the number one reason why I want as little government as possible -- they love paperwork and I hate it.
In the end, this topic caught my interest because I used to tell people all the time, if they like communism so much, they should start a commune. If it was a good commune and competed well with other communes, it would thrive.
In some ways, I think employees should focus on buying stock in their own company. The shareholders and the employees would overlap significantly.
The issue is that upon comparing market capitalization to number of employees, it is apparent that each employee would have to invest hundreds of thousands of dollars for a typical corporation to be majority owned by the employees. This is not unfeasible, considering that people who diligently build their 401(k) typically have this much money after a long time at work. Older, longer-working, more experienced employees would likely be larger shareholders. The downside is that for this to be feasible, employees have to really lack diversification in their portfolios, and put most of their eggs into the single basket of their company.
I've seen some companies that prohibit employees from buying company stock. I don't think this should be legal.
The issue is that upon comparing market capitalization to number of employees, it is apparent that each employee would have to invest hundreds of thousands of dollars for a typical corporation to be majority owned by the employees. This is not unfeasible, considering that people who diligently build their 401(k) typically have this much money after a long time at work. Older, longer-working, more experienced employees would likely be larger shareholders. The downside is that for this to be feasible, employees have to really lack diversification in their portfolios, and put most of their eggs into the single basket of their company.
I've seen some companies that prohibit employees from buying company stock. I don't think this should be legal.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
I live near a lot that a farmer's co-op uses to store farming equipment. And it isn't hard to find other co-ops here and there.
Every company I've worked for since graduation has been employee-owned.
In one case, I suppose it was quasi-employee-owned... the President owned the majority of shares (it was a small company) and made sure it stayed that way, but others could buy shares as they became available, either through company growth or when other shares became available as left the company.
In all the others, they've been fully employee-owned: every employee is eligible to buy shares, and every share gets a vote at the AGM.
I think it depends on the type of company, too. For some reason, it seems like architecture and engineering firms tend to have a high proportion of employee ownership. I don't think that the average shareholder at most of them holds hundreds of thousands of dollars in shares.
Yeah... that's one of the big things that's kept me from buying shares in a company I've worked for: it can be extra risky. If things go bad in your industry, not only is your job on the line, but so are your savings. Employee ownership is kinda like the "anti-hedge" for job insecurity.
I've never heard of that before. That makes no sense to me.
I've seen plenty of companies where employees are prohibited from buying stock of competitors, but never the company itself.
Some of us in Michigan have a loose association which could be described as a cooperative.
Money is so scarce, that we barter. Of course, we keep track of labor & material debits &
credits in dollars.
Money is so scarce, that we barter. Of course, we keep track of labor & material debits &
credits in dollars.
painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
Mathematician
Reason, and reason again
Corporations are endowed with legal protections that are sky high.
Coops could incorporate.