The Summer of Love

[BT]

Stock does not turn raw materials into anything useful. It is an arbitrary financial concept.

So is ownership.

[_JS]

Stock can be an utterly meaningless attribute. Just think of Worldcom.

Besides, by ownership I mean an actual say in how the company works and runs. That is real democracy. Not the used car salesman act and hundreds of millions of dollars that we have every two years.

This would be workers councils and democratically run companies with the workers' control. Despite your next musings, stock does not do this.

[Plane]

Xavier_Onassis
Absolutely not, this view cannot be defended by anything like logic.
Nor is there any benefit from the attempt to enact such law.

===================================================
Why of COURSE there is.
[][][][][]

Heh heh heh...
[][][][][]

A large pile of iron ore and another of coal is of little use to you or anyone.

It is labor that turns it into a car.
[][][][][][][][][][][]
What does the labor make out of nothing?
Labor is one vital component, not the vital component.
The real value of labor depends on its quality and availibility.
Nigeria has plenty of labor availible , can you buy a car built in Nigeria?
[][][][][][][][][][][]

A barrel of oil is of little use to you as it comes from the ground. If you turn it into fuel and plastics, this is done with labor. Labor adds value to raw materials. Labor is the base of industrial society.

[][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]

Only a littlebit- gasoline is not labor intensive, a few guys run the well , a few guys run the pipeline , a few run the refinery , and they produce in large volume.
This labor would be worth nothing no matter how much they produced , if gasoline were not a popular product, the price of oil is determined by auction and the price of gasoline by the willingness of buyers to pay.
[][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]

The labor of the men who invent the machinery, who build the machinery and who run the machinery are absolutely indispensable to the conversion of raw materials to useful products.
[][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
Yes , but no less absolutely indispensable is the contribution of the guy that pays for it.
[][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]

Does the salary of a beer executive add to the taste or refreshment that a beer produces? Would it taste differently without a fancy label on the can or a bazillion dollars spent on ads?
[][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
I do have a favorite brand , do you drink generic beer?
[][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
It is the labor of the farmer, the trucker, the brewers that turn the ingredients into beer.
[][][][][][][][][][][][]
No argument, but someone must be responsible for the process .
Truckers farmers and brewers are free to get together and make co-op beer , so why do they not?
Fact is micro brewers do make some fine beers , and it is a nice hobby , Is there any potential for microbreweries to satisfy the millions of gallons of demand the US market represents?

[][][][][][][][][][][][]

If you fail to see the logic, you are not functioning within reasonable parameters.

[][][][][][][][][][][][][]

I think you see logic where there isn't any really because you have a prejudice.

In this country it is not at all forbidden to operate a co-op and pool talents, resources and labor.

It is even allowed to build financial institutions like credit unions , Freddie mac or Fannie may.

I do drink amateur beer now and then , I did join a credit union, but I wouldn't if the beer were sub standard or the credit union fees wern't lower.

There is no reason in all this to take from anyone a gift for another one and call it fairness.



 

[Plane]

This would be workers councils and democratically run companies with the workers' control. Despite your next musings, stock does not do this.

What is forbidden about this?

Why are such arangements so unpopular?

[BT]

Stock can be an utterly meaningless attribute. Just think of Worldcom.

Besides, by ownership I mean an actual say in how the company works and runs. That is real democracy. Not the used car salesman act and hundreds of millions of dollars that we have every two years.

This would be workers councils and democratically run companies with the workers' control. Despite your next musings, stock does not do this.

What does democracy have to do with business?

[_JS]

Stock can be an utterly meaningless attribute. Just think of Worldcom.

Besides, by ownership I mean an actual say in how the company works and runs. That is real democracy. Not the used car salesman act and hundreds of millions of dollars that we have every two years.

This would be workers councils and democratically run companies with the workers' control. Despite your next musings, stock does not do this.

What does democracy have to do with business?

Nothing...yet.

[Plane]

Stock can be an utterly meaningless attribute. Just think of Worldcom.

Besides, by ownership I mean an actual say in how the company works and runs. That is real democracy. Not the used car salesman act and hundreds of millions of dollars that we have every two years.

This would be workers councils and democratically run companies with the workers' control. Despite your next musings, stock does not do this.

What does democracy have to do with business?

Nothing...yet.

Why not?

Why don't people do this?

Is it because it is the hard way? Or because when it is done it usually gets run poorly and fails?

I attend union meetings now and then, not often .
My union has terribly disorganised meetings , important decisions made in meetings are usually ignored by the national organisation , if it wern't so I think the Union would have been defunct long ago.

If a gang like that ran a workplace it wouldn't be a work place.

[BT]

Nothing...yet.

Perhaps because it isn't necessary.

[_JS]

Stock can be an utterly meaningless attribute. Just think of Worldcom.

Besides, by ownership I mean an actual say in how the company works and runs. That is real democracy. Not the used car salesman act and hundreds of millions of dollars that we have every two years.

This would be workers councils and democratically run companies with the workers' control. Despite your next musings, stock does not do this.

What does democracy have to do with business?

Nothing...yet.

Why not?

Why don't people do this?

Is it because it is the hard way? Or because when it is done it usually gets run poorly and fails?

I attend union meetings now and then, not often .
My union has terribly disorganised meetings , important decisions made in meetings are usually ignored by the national organisation , if it wern't so I think the Union would have been defunct long ago.

If a gang like that ran a workplace it wouldn't be a work place.

Wal-Mart spends many millions of dollars to prevent their employees from unionizing. Just a rumor of organizing will have a corporate team take over a store from a store manager and install expensive equipment to spy on employees and single out possible union sympathisers. From there a number of possibilities occur ranging from outright bullying to anti-union propaganda campaigns and freezing wages.

So there are many reasons why "this" doesn't happen. Primarily because the proletariat is not class conscious. They do not understand the power that they actually have. If you wish to discuss org theory, we certainly can. Lord help me, I actually took a graduate course on that very topic. But, the means of production are in the hands of the bourgeoisie and therefore they have no vested interest in allowing the workers to run the company.

If you're actually interested (and no, I don't think you are) there are successful businesses owned by the employees.

[_JS]

Nothing...yet.

Perhaps because it isn't necessary.

Perhaps because enough people are wrapped up in their cheap trinkets from China.

Keeping the peasants from revolting is an old art form.

[BT]

Perhaps because enough people are wrapped up in their cheap trinkets from China.

Keeping the peasants from revolting is an old art form.

Have you revolted yet?

If not, why not?

[_JS]

Perhaps because enough people are wrapped up in their cheap trinkets from China.

Keeping the peasants from revolting is an old art form.

Have you revolted yet?

If not, why not?

Why? I'm as bourgeoisie as you. Plus, there is no revolution before class consciousness is achieved. Capitalism has to do both its good and its ill beforehand.

[Plane]

Stock can be an utterly meaningless attribute. Just think of Worldcom.

Besides, by ownership I mean an actual say in how the company works and runs. That is real democracy. Not the used car salesman act and hundreds of millions of dollars that we have every two years.

This would be workers councils and democratically run companies with the workers' control. Despite your next musings, stock does not do this.

What does democracy have to do with business?

Nothing...yet.

Why not?

Why don't people do this?

Is it because it is the hard way? Or because when it is done it usually gets run poorly and fails?

I attend union meetings now and then, not often .
My union has terribly disorganised meetings , important decisions made in meetings are usually ignored by the national organisation , if it wern't so I think the Union would have been defunct long ago.

If a gang like that ran a workplace it wouldn't be a work place.

Wal-Mart spends many millions of dollars to prevent their employees from unionizing. Just a rumor of organizing will have a corporate team take over a store from a store manager and install expensive equipment to spy on employees and single out possible union sympathisers. From there a number of possibilities occur ranging from outright bullying to anti-union propaganda campaigns and freezing wages.

So there are many reasons why "this" doesn't happen. Primarily because the proletariat is not class conscious. They do not understand the power that they actually have. If you wish to discuss org theory, we certainly can. Lord help me, I actually took a graduate course on that very topic. But, the means of production are in the hands of the bourgeoisie and therefore they have no vested interest in allowing the workers to run the company.

If you're actually interested (and no, I don't think you are) there are successful businesses owned by the employees.

I am in the Union already and I would not want the workplace run the way the union is run ,no one could work .

I have heard of sucessfull Employee owned businesses , but I don't see many , what is the advantage they offer?

[BT]

Why? I'm as bourgeoisie as you. Plus, there is no revolution before class consciousness is achieved. Capitalism has to do both its good and its ill beforehand.

Hmmm. Those trinkets made in China are made by folks who own the means of production, no?

[_JS]

Why? I'm as bourgeoisie as you. Plus, there is no revolution before class consciousness is achieved. Capitalism has to do both its good and its ill beforehand.

Hmmm. Those trinkets made in China are made by folks who own the means of production, no?

No.