There is no such thing as economic democracy because democracy isn’t economics. It is politics. Socialism originally was a theory that capitalism was blocked by the use of money. To replace money, you need socialism to be centrally plan how and what people will work. Otherwise, who will take up jobs that are least pleasing, such as taking out the trash. What people claim to be socialism today is an idea of accessing resources at the expense of others. These are government programs with socialist traits, for example, how the Baby Boomers enjoyed the benefits of entitlement programs while generations afterward are going to foot the bill. That is a Ponzi scheme, which how socialism works, in reality, to be pleasing for people. It is a system that requires suckers who do most of the work.
Democracy is the idea that positive control rights over an organization should be assigned to the party governed in or by that organization. This concept is applicable in an economic context. For example, the workers in a firm are governed by management, so democracy implies that the managers be ultimately accountable to the entire body of workers in that firm making the firm a worker co-op.
Capitalism has workers do 100% of the work, but employers receive 100% of the whole product
The problem with capitalism is the non-cooperative firms that exist. A democratic economy is an economy where all firms are mandated to be worker cooperatives
Cooperatives operate on equal votes, not equity, which is a potential problem in itself. Equal votes over who has the bigger stake. Liberal economics is better. Trying to impose a system instead of simply giving economic agents the freedom, and make suggestions themselves on how best to form and run business. Equality isn’t a economic good.
The arguments for worker coops are based on liberal economics (https://www.ellerman.org/inalienable-rights-part-i-the-basic-argument/). To summarize, the workers are jointly de facto responsible for using up inputs to produce outputs, so by the norm that legal and de facto responsibility should match, they should be assigned the whole product of the firm. Anything else would be unjust.
Equal votes doesn’t mean equal pay. Workers can divide the pie however they prefer. In existing worker coops, not everyone gets paid the same.
There is only capitalism and socialism. Socialism, communism, and Marxism are anti-capitalist. Communism is a form of socialism.
There are other alternatives like economic democracy. Capitalism vs socialism is a false dichotomy
@economy
There is no such thing as economic democracy because democracy isn’t economics. It is politics. Socialism originally was a theory that capitalism was blocked by the use of money. To replace money, you need socialism to be centrally plan how and what people will work. Otherwise, who will take up jobs that are least pleasing, such as taking out the trash. What people claim to be socialism today is an idea of accessing resources at the expense of others. These are government programs with socialist traits, for example, how the Baby Boomers enjoyed the benefits of entitlement programs while generations afterward are going to foot the bill. That is a Ponzi scheme, which how socialism works, in reality, to be pleasing for people. It is a system that requires suckers who do most of the work.
Democracy is the idea that positive control rights over an organization should be assigned to the party governed in or by that organization. This concept is applicable in an economic context. For example, the workers in a firm are governed by management, so democracy implies that the managers be ultimately accountable to the entire body of workers in that firm making the firm a worker co-op.
Capitalism has workers do 100% of the work, but employers receive 100% of the whole product
@economy
You mean a cooperative? Those already exist. No need for “democratic economy”.
The problem with capitalism is the non-cooperative firms that exist. A democratic economy is an economy where all firms are mandated to be worker cooperatives
@economy
Cooperatives operate on equal votes, not equity, which is a potential problem in itself. Equal votes over who has the bigger stake. Liberal economics is better. Trying to impose a system instead of simply giving economic agents the freedom, and make suggestions themselves on how best to form and run business. Equality isn’t a economic good.
The arguments for worker coops are based on liberal economics (https://www.ellerman.org/inalienable-rights-part-i-the-basic-argument/). To summarize, the workers are jointly de facto responsible for using up inputs to produce outputs, so by the norm that legal and de facto responsibility should match, they should be assigned the whole product of the firm. Anything else would be unjust.
Equal votes doesn’t mean equal pay. Workers can divide the pie however they prefer. In existing worker coops, not everyone gets paid the same.
@economy
You wanna vote on who owns what?
Democratic economy. :p
CC: @jlou@mastodon.social
Absolute nonsense.