Could you run an economy entirely with mutual and cooperative ventures?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 25, 2024, 10:43:50 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Economics (Moderator: Torie)
  Could you run an economy entirely with mutual and cooperative ventures?
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Could you run an economy entirely with mutual and cooperative ventures?  (Read 1701 times)
🦀🎂🦀🎂
CrabCake
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,266
Kiribati


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: August 22, 2018, 05:14:24 PM »

I.e. could you run a large industrial or post industrial country, with sufficient investment to ensure steady growth if all banks are replaced with mutuals and all corporations are profit sharing co-ops?
Logged
parochial boy
parochial_boy
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,117


Political Matrix
E: -8.38, S: -6.78

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: August 22, 2018, 05:39:16 PM »

This would be ideal imo, but the biggest problem I see with it is that if you are shutting down the option  to invest in equity, then you are effectively shutting off one of the two major ways of generating investment.

Of course, there are plenty of examples of co-ops being succesfully without needing to issue equity to third parties - but on the scale of a whole economy it might be trickier? Maybe you could have a requirement for employees to "buy in" to co-ops (which has a load of it's own problems); or you could obfuscate and claim that mutually owned banks can buy shares because they are mutuals after all; or you just have some sort of government investment bank, or allow non-employee/customer ownership up to a certain percentage or something like that...

At the end of the day, I reckon it could work, but would need need happen at a level above the nation state - otherwise you just get the same old story of the parasite sorry, investor class setting up opaque ownership structures through tax havens that let them bend the rules (and the same old race to the bottom story with regards to regulations and that).
Logged
Cassandra
Situationist
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,673


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: August 24, 2018, 06:25:22 PM »

Sure you could in theory, there are plenty of authors one could cite here (Proudhon being the obvious one). In practice? Who knows.

You might find After Capitalism by David Schweickart interesting. I remember back when I was active in DSA (~2014) a lot of their leadership were really into it.
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,859
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: October 04, 2018, 10:29:18 PM »
« Edited: October 05, 2018, 06:46:14 PM by pbrower2a »

There will be a need for corporate behemoths to do metallurgy and vehicle manufacture, generate and distribute power, or operate railroads. I'm not sure that we want cooperatives operating toll roads that are nothing but two-lane blacktop roads.-A country like Tito's Yugoslavia had socialized giant industry and had lots of cooperatives.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,156
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: October 04, 2018, 11:10:32 PM »

No.  A modern economy has some business sectors where a large entity is the most beneficial way of doing things. At that scale, only capitalism and socialism appear to be workable (or some combination of the two) as the foundation of how to organize an economy, tho it certainly is possible to include mutual and/or cooperative ventures within such frameworks.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.029 seconds with 11 queries.