you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]KennyLogins 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (28 children)

Welcome.

What exactly are the issues that make you side leftist? Genuine interest, there will be no gotcha sucker punch.

[–][deleted]  (27 children)

[deleted]

    [–]FuriousPenguin 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

    I know a few companies here that reward longer working members with shares in addition to other benefits. Does this not happen where you are? Or am I understanding incorrectly?

    [–][deleted]  (6 children)

    [deleted]

      [–]FuriousPenguin 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

      True but if they're shareholders won't they also benefit from the profit?

      [–][deleted]  (4 children)

      [deleted]

        [–]theFriendlyDoomer 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

        Well, if it was good enough for Reagan it should be good enough for most people.

        To further play with the idea a bit. . .

        The thing is that a corporation doesn't exist in nature. It only comes into existence with a government charter. Governments could choose to only offer charters to companies that made employees shareholders, diluting shares as new employees come on. This is even compatible with the minarchies that libertarians dream about. If some rich people wanted to make business entities structured so they would reap all the profits -- fine, but they won't be able to have any liability protection that comes with a corporate charter. They would be personally liable for what happens.

        But I think there still would be a route to be a capitalist, however. It costs money to purchase the equipment, land, train people, etc. The companies in question would need to borrow money, if nothing else to start out. I don't see why the people who make good loans shouldn't be able to get rich doing so. Capital allocation is a real skill and it has a real value in society. (It's value is not unlimited, however, and too-big-to-fail institutions should have been broken up by now).

        I'd be worried about securing retirement in this fantasy scenario, however. You don't want everyone just owning shares in the one company where they worked when it comes retirement time. Some will get rich, some will watch their former company fail. Maybe the bond market mentioned above could roll out diversified products. Or maybe there should be the ability to sale you shares when you retire, and those shares form the index funds.

        Don't know. This idea will never happen. It was just fun to kill 10 minutes thinking about it.

        Edit to add some words I omitted.

        [–]FuriousPenguin 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

        Oh.... I'm not quite sure how that would work. You mean like a cooperative?

        [–][deleted]  (1 child)

        [deleted]

          [–]FuriousPenguin 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

          We have one of those here. But it's only one. There are much smaller sort of village and town level cooperatives but those aren't well known companies. They function at a local level and that usually works for them. I didn't think it was possible at a more large scale level! Good to know!

          [–]Yayme 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (17 children)

          I'm curious to know your feelings are on privately owned businesses....

          [–][deleted]  (16 children)

          [deleted]

            [–]bobbobbybob 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (14 children)

            I have a business. If I need help, I'd like to be able to offer someone an amount of money in order for providing me with specific uses of their time. I absolutely 100% do not want to offer them a share in ownership of my business, which I have built up over years with sweat and toil.

            I don't think you've ever owned your own business. Am I right?

            [–][deleted]  (13 children)

            [deleted]

              [–]bobbobbybob 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (12 children)

              That doesn't even make any sense.

              I build a business. Invest time and money into building it up, building a clientele. Investing in plant and buildings and advertising.

              That's called 'working'. My activities, my toil, creates income.

              When I want to expand that business, to make it grow, why should I give half of that away?

              You've never run your own business, have you? Your rhetoric is that of someone who is small and resentful in the face of corporations

              [–][deleted]  (11 children)

              [deleted]

                [–]bobbobbybob 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

                It shows. 'parasite class', you are using to describe me.

                I'm poor, i'm hardworking, but I'm working for MYSELF.

                Am I a parasite? Do I suddenly become one when I want to hire help- a choice the person I am offering money to would make themselves I don't also want to give away a share of my company?

                What share is acceptable? could i just offer 0.001% of profits (and profits are about $10k a year), or would a fixed wage be better?

                Your ignorance and prejudice shows. Marxist, not leftist, and you lied in your introduction.

                [–][deleted]  (4 children)

                [deleted]

                  [–]wecandobetter 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

                  Would you like to explain how you believe new businesses are going to come about? Because it sounds like what you really want is the divvying up of existing pies that someone else baked, and haven't given a thought beyond that.

                  [–][deleted]  (3 children)

                  [deleted]

                    [–]Yayme 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

                    Well, you mentioned shareholders, so I thought maybe you only meant public corporations.

                    [–]Chipit 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

                    The Communists tried that. Turns out, that's a really dumb idea. Putting the workers in charge is disastrous. What do they know about running a company?

                    You need specialized executives for that. Plus, there's the class issue. Keep the deplorables down, everyone despises them. Upper middle class is where it's at, they're the good people.