I co-founded a worker-owned cooperative 4 years ago with 5 members and roughly 15 additional employees. We are now a Sub T corporation, a worker owned cooperative (WOC). We are going strong, increased our revenue significantly with the same amount of employees and have doubled the number who are owners in the 1st 4 years. The same number of people are producing more revenue and sharing the profits with each other. We have a hierarchal structure for day-to-day operations and a board of owners who make larger policy decisions. Profits shared are based upon hours worked. Each member gets one vote. Only members get to vote. This is a successful business model and can be a great way for business owners to retire- The previous owners had a Sub S corp, they mentored their employees (me and others) to help us found the Co-op. We bought the company and converted it to a WOC.
If you have the capital or means to leverage maybe speak to your best employees and prospect about the idea. Maybe not your current business but ask them if they'd be interested in a separate venture.
You could do this but you would have to be prepared, psychologically and materially to relinquish your individual control, because if you stayed in the business, you would be on an equal footing with your workers. That could be a difficult process to undergo for you. It might be easier to propose that your workers buy the business from you at a fair price, and that you step back from any involvement if they purchase it. Introduce them to the various organisations that facilitate the creation of worker cooperatives in your location. If they are willing, able, and can raise the capital, let them buy you out, and let go.
I would like to do something similar not exactly like this..but individual businesses would operate under one roof in similar trades. Also logistically it would be perfect, contracting work to each other in this group..I believe it works this way allready on a small scale, examples like tattoo shops and salons.
Your comment is a few months old, so I don't know how or if you did something *with your idea. Especially during this covid crises. Anyway, I had the same idea *years ago. I dont know if there are any coop information centers in the U.S, iI **live in the Netherlands but found the best direct & practical info in Spain. The *Mondragon coop is one of the biggest coop companies in the world, and.they **have a segment that gives practical advice & help to people allover the world..
Don't forget to unionize, as well. That ensures stability and democratic ownership even after you expand outside of just one facility. You don't want your people competing with each other; Instead, you want them cooperating.
@@bonniesitessolutions7728 The competition would be between collectives or warrens/neighborhoods. The number of workers under a collective determine it's growth and potential profit; though profit would mostly be received in benefits through union membership and land allocation. Collectives that lose all their membership have their assets publicaly sold, unless the collective receives membership again before the remaining asset is sold.
@@bonniesitessolutions7728 Sure, but collectives are the most malleable. Since they allow the most restructuring options, they serve as a good baseline. Unions ensure that if businesses get larger, but still hold a more hierarchical business structure, instead of democratic, that the workers get benefits and protection from shady business practices.
@Orange Apple juice You mean a free market system? Every economic system has markets. It's just a general term for an epicenter of resource exchange. There are plenty of communes that operate now, didn't you know? It's just an issue of zoning. But, no. I was talking about cooperatives, mostly. It could apply to any form of democratic ownership, though.
I helped start a worker coop in Vancouver about 10 years ago. I believe that it is the most ethical and stable business model there is. That being said, they aren’t perfect by any means and there are specific trade offs that many of the Wolff pack here in the comments refuse to address. I would recommend people talk to as many workers from these places to see the variety of pros and cons they have before starting one. I believe a coop is perfect for certain types of business, not so great for others and absolutely disastrous for some.
tassou ouelhazi I would say that any service based industry would benefit the most from cooperative organization, like restaurants, childcare or IT. When every worker has skin in the game, the quality of service benefits and big business decisions are usually less risky. Like any business though, it depends greatly on the quality of the people who are running it. Of course this is one mans humble opinion. Good luck!
@@soulfuzz368 not so much a humble man when you call others pack of someone. Nevertheless interesting point, even though there is no academic study in support of it
Since the mid-19th century, American workers have claimed “those who work in the factories ought to own them.” But such an egalitarian perspective wasn't acceptable to capitalists then, as it isn't acceptable to capitalists today
@@luddechamp your right. To invest into something financially and to reap the rewards of your risk. But that money is a representation of resources, time, and energy spent into obtaining it and thus has value because it is backed by the work put into it. You could call it faith, or perhaps hope, that the value remains. A worker could be seen as the same. Rearing children, producing products, etc. However, it is harder to see such value in people until they are trained or tested, or have a history revealing skills. We are products of our country, families, and culture. *sigh* Here I am going off the crazy train. Have a good one.
@Texan White Panther if that is true, than they can work in the normal capitalist framework. If you set up a company, just set up a plan for the workers to buy you out (say at 3x your investment, so you get compensated for the risk). Then, once that is paid of, link each share of the company to a job there. Many any promotion democratic (the people, who will work under that boss, vote for him). If you, as the founder, are good at your job, nothing will change about your position. This has the advantage of lessening abuse (like CEOs raising their salaries during a crisis), and gives the workers a higher incentive to work hard (because hard work is more directly linked to promotions). It also incentivices a better work atmosphere (you want promotions, and for that, your coworkers must at least tolerate you) Coops work perfectly fine under capitalism, no need to change anything there
@Texan White Panther that is interfering with the property rights of the individuum. I would be strongy against that, as would most people in the US. If the system actually works, ie is as efficient as a normal buissiness (which waste a lot of money on useless CEOs, and better pay should motivate workers), small buissinesses will adopt first, but more and more big companies will follow or be outcompeted eventually. If the solutino requires laws like that (meaning is not competitive on its own), it is not the right solution
I agree with his point about the cycle being no money - no education -no jobs - no money. Being raised in a somewhat rural environment where the only really decent paying jobs were held by the teachers, some construction people and a few business owners I would add no vision to that list. Where as in other families and areas when a teen or person in their 20s said that they were going to school for something professional or beyond what we knew and wanted to aim for a career there was a degree of cynicism that looking back wasn't healthy. Seeing no real examples of people getting an education or training and getting a better job as a result can be very demotivating. I have been living in a large city for a decade now and have a diverse group of friends with a variety of jobs many professionals or academics and I still have not fully overcome the fearful negative and defeatist thinking that can come as a result of environment. I can definitely see how this aspect of poverty could even more deeply affect communities that are much worse off then I was and just how hard it must be to find the courage and faith to overcome that environment. Real opportunity must be paired with voices of encouragement and examples of success so it is not perceived as just another pipe dream.
Poverty is not an error in the capitalist system but the driver of the system. Without poverty there is no competition for employment. Without competition for employment there is no motivation for workers to accept a lowering of their wages and benefits. Without reduction in labor costs there can be no profit growth, because, once all other production costs have hit the wall of diminishing returns on efficiency, reducing labor costs is the only option for cutting costs and thereby increasing profit. Without reducing wages to a point where workers can't actually afford to live, they won't turn to financial companies and go into debt. Without going into debt they won't go into prison, where they can then be forced to work for free for private companies (this is also an option for the unemployed who turn to crime). Finally, once companies can no longer make a profit, the industry collapses and big companies swallow up little companies and accumulate their capital or liquidate it for use in other enterprises. Then the cycle starts over.
The fact is that more people have been lifted out of poverty in China due to globalization in recent decades than any other time in human history. You can choose to call that exploitation if you want but I don’t see how that is helpful.
@@alexxx4434 The reality is that you need the capitalism to pay for socialism and you need some socialism to take care of those who cannot work or don’t have marketable skills. Right now their is not enough capitalism to pay the socialism and the country is unsustainably taking on debt as a result.
Thank you professor Jim Brown. I would like to encourage the formation of cooperatives now before and during the Covid stimulus being given in USA and the island of Jamaica. I think others will follow.
I'm very familiar with topics surrounding economics but this right here was GOLD, not because of it's depth but more so because of it's simple delivery. I can actually share this with the average person and they'll GET IT. We need more people like this bridging the economics knowledge gap for the average American. Economics tends to be intimidating and a difficult concept to grasp for most.
@@jamescooper3204 it literally is, socialism is worker ownership and democratic control of their work along with the abolition of commodity production.
@@Nyaaani lmao got'em. It's crazy how the US went from exploitation, to unions and then all the way back around to exploitation. The propaganda against anything remotely socialist and the historical evils of "communist" nations like maoist china and stalinist russia have poisoned the well.
The problem with socialism is that historically any country has tried their version of "socialism" has failed. The Scandinavian countries aren't socialism but capitalism (or market economy) with high level of social programs. Coops aren't "socialism" in the sense that resources and labour are not centrally controlled/relocated by the government's central planning, which is quintessentially the definition of socialism. Coops are just another way for worker-owner relationship and profit distribution. And even in Coops, not all employees are owners, and during economic down turns, even owners are voted to be laid off.
@@smdanny1 call it whatever you want and qualify as much as you want, it's still a better way to do things than what we have now in the states. you're completely wrong about the quintessence of socialism, btw. it's not about government; it's about the people.
Free enterprise has been SEVERELY warped and diseased by Wall Street and the banker class. The constant clamor for a higher stock price and "share holder value" has changed the idea of running a business into running a short term cash cow for the select few board members. James Sinegal, the former CEO of Costco in an article said that he was constantly being haranged by Wall Street to raise prices for their benefit.
Check out Noam Chomsky on this and Mondragon cooperatives in Spain. Over 150 years old with its own banks and university for cooperatives. This is democracy in the workplace!
One simple rule: workers' first right of refusal. Before a business owner is permitted to sell out to a competitor or shutter his/her business they must put a reasonable offer to the employees of their business. Who better to know how to make the business go than the people who have been making it go? If the business really is as good as dead then workers could easily say "no, thank you".
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass
Why did he not say the word "socialism" even once? He even said it would be "making our system of capitalism more inclusive." He's advocating for a change in ownership of the means of production from private owners to workers. That's socialism. Why does nobody get this? Why isn't he presenting himself as a revolutionary? It's tragic.
My brother-in-law has a family business where he and his son and wife worked. They owned it and worked it. No one would dare call them socialists. Many businesses are partnerships and if all the partners work it, how could that be a bad thing? It is common and should be supported more. Owners can be workers. No boss treating you like a slave or paying you like a slave, that sounds pretty good. The key is equality of ownership and risk taking to benefit equally in the surplus the company produces. The "revolution" happens when you vote out the politicians that are doing only for their richer patrons.
Wayne P it's not a bad thing. It's a good thing. I am saying that any business without a boss that is owned democratically by the workers is socialist in structure and should this happen on a broader scale and happen everywhere in an economy, it would be a socialist transformation. While voting can be a useful tool to advance a revolutionary struggle it is not itself revolution. I do not put that in scare quotes. I mean it literally. I advocate for the economic system of capitalism to be overthrown by way of popular revolt and mass resistance. Voting alone is merely parliamentary and reformist. You may not realize it, but worker ownership of industry on a mass scale is what socialism is. And contrary to your understanding of my comment, I am aware of that, and I fully support it.
Jeremy Einbinder Yes sorry, typo. In spain there are 18k workers cooperatives employing 300k. Is a long tradition but is also a way to survive the crisis/crunches.
@@transon6655 capitalism is not about owning stuff. It is a production mode and legal framework regarding production, and allocation of surplus. It is about who takes the profit, and who takes the decisions the firm. Capitalism infact is about "not owning the fruit of your work", or "not owning stuff"!
@@shaahin6818 not really, the definition of capitalism is the enforcement of private property. If I go to a company and accept a job, the fruit of my work is my salary, I didn't ask for any share of the profits and I don't want to. Because if I have a right to the profit I will automatically have a responsibility for its loses. And for me, a steady income is better than hoping the company makes profits. I don't think socialist understand the role of the entrepreneur, his job is not only to manage his company, it is also taking risk. He has to anticipate what to produce how to produce and if the consumers don't want the product then his company will fail.
@@shaahin6818 I'm not defending Communism at all, but if you look up the definition of Capitalism it's "the private ownership of INDUSTRY and BUSINESSES", not ownership of just anything. So entrepreneurs are Capitalists, but not employees like you or me. Cooperatives (from what they describe here) are still capitalist businesses where the employees are also the entrepreneurs*. Obviously, the economy would benefit hugely if more people started businesses. While there are absolutely risks and stresses of entrepreneurship, people take these risks because there are clear benefits. And many non-entrepreneurs *would* take that risk, if they had the option. *So it makes no sense why everyone in the comments is framing this as a Communism vs Capitalism thing, including the top comment.
@@LowestofheDead capitalist mode of production has a more precise definition than what you have presented. "Private ownership of means of production" is not precise enough. Private ownership by whom? If a few shareholders, i.e. employers, are the owners, and they have the right to claim profit, to keep information, and to take decisions, we have a capitalist firm. Worker coop is different from this fact that "all" workers have the aforementioned rights, so they are called worker-owners. No shareholder from outside of the corporation can take the profit, or decide for the firm. Capitalism is the legal framework of employer-employee, and worker coop abolishes such relation. Wcoop has been long history in left, and now is considered as the viable alternative to capitalism. I am a researcher on this topic indeed Ps. Communism is about communes. It is a different story comparing to worker coops. In general, all cmunist regimes have been owners of means of production, this is why they are also called "state capitalism/socialism". Wcoop is a third way, no state socialism, no private capitalism
Love, love, love this talk. Why is common sense so unavailable! We should have been doing worker coops years ago. The thing that Jim Brown doesn't seem to realize is that it's not capitalism per se, it's money. Money that is issued by banks. This is why we weren't able to have nice things like worker coops. But we can now because he told us about it and so let's get rolling shall we?
@@xxxxxx-zq5yh some examples of what would it be to live in a distributism economy can be seen in Mondragon (Spain) and the Emilia Romagna ( Italy), check some bibliography about those cases, I intend to travel to see firsthand those places.
LiterallyAhipsterYT if a collection of ccooperations were all owned by a communist party, one that didn’t exploit the workers just held the deed to maintain cooperation, then this is actually a very plausible path to revolution and funding a revolution . Unions giving workers extra money is how communism first got big , if we can do it in a directed manner, it could happen again.
Any thoughts on the best way to find people to start a worker co-op? And especially how to vet people? My concerns are power grabs & in-fighting (e.g. cliques forming, destructive ways of discussing, etc), very different vision (e.g. steering away from ethical, sustainable vision), handling turnover of members. I have these concerns as I'm just a group of one person at the moment and am interested to start a worker co-op for something in engineering or tech, a space that seems to have a lot of competitive type working models which people may be overly used to... In general, I'm struggling to find good resources to handle these nuts & bolts type questions... Any suggestions would be helpful
You never experienced poverty in Southern California? Moving to Los Angeles from North Georgia was a culture shock to me. I can only imagine the bubble you lived in.
What's the best way to handle hiring a cleaning person or accountant for your co-op? They shouldn't gain a say in the direction of your business unless they're involved in more ways than just that, right?
@@JtheCritic I'm told the solution is you don't hire a cleaning person specifically, but everyone who already has other useful skills spend part of their time doing the cleaning as well. This way everyone will feel like every member of the team contributes necessary skill equally, basically.
It is cooperatism not socialism. The workers own and operate it. It isn't owned by the public. It isn't managed by people who don't have a stake in the outcomes.
Socialism is when workers own and control the means of production. Plain and simple. Therefore, state ownership can NEVER be socialism, and Cooperatives are the textbook example of it. State ownership is just the state taking the role of the capitalist, no difference to employees.
1863 as the North of England Co-operative Society 60,000 £5.4 billion ($8.64 billion)(2001) 445110 Supermarkets and Other Grocery (Except Convenience) Stores; 445120 Convenience Stores; 447110 Gasoline Stations with Convenience Stores; 522110 Commercial Banking; 522120 Savings Institutions; 524128 Other Direct Insurance (Except Life, Health, and Medical) Carriers; 812210 Funeral Homes and Funeral Services
It feels crazy to know that there are millions of people in the world who know that our economic system is fundamentally flawed and yet we can't do a thing
Exactly. We can’t just “incorporate more cooperative aspects”, we need to dismantle and replace the whole economy to be democratically owned and run! Democratize production, Democratize land, Democratize the State! Otherwise, freedom is just asthetic.
Yeah I think about that too. I'm all for people creating worker co-ops, in fact they sound like an intoxicating idea. If I had the means I'd probably try to form one. But, I'm not for government trying to force already existing companies like Walmart or Amazon to become worker co-ops. They're too big anyway.
Well, climate change is reaching its zenith, private military companies and other businesses that profit off of war don't care about the consequences of their endless war mongering, and private banks that only care about profit lead to the great depression, the great recession, and practically most economic disasters. Forcing them into cooperatives is a way to shrink their size, power,and influence, and the average people are less likely to destroy their own environment, push for endless war, and risk their savings in reckless finance.
It's not easy to form one. It takes effort and good people who won't sell out to capital or private interests and have unions to back the Cooperatives.
actually no they're not. those same lovely companies you talk about passed laws to make it illegal for cooperatives to get credit from credit unions and banks try to destroy them any chance they get. also why should the CEO who does no work get the choice and not the workers?
I've tried looking for information regarding your first statement but found nothing. Maybe you could provide sources that back it up? You're very wrong to assume CEOs don't work; it's a difficult & complex role. If workers aren't happy, they're free to leave and join (or start) a company that aligns with their ideology. Seizing private property is wrong and has had disastrous consequences across societies that attempted to go down that path.
One thing I don’t see eye to eye with is the part where he mentions as a worker cooperative; “you don’t need to move production overseas to increase shareowner profit”. While this might be true, it’s not viable in today’s economy. People will simply buy the cheaper alternative which is “made in china”. Cheap to produce, cheap to buy. Worker cooperatives will only work if the economy itself is strong enough OR smart enough to support locally owned and operated business consumerism.
+Gladys Rodriguez There are several groups that help people start cooperative businesses. Here is one link to useful information on this subject. www.american.coop/startup
Gladys Rodriguez - Here is another source for help in setting up cooperatives and employee owned enterprises. The United States Federation of Worker Cooperatives (usworker.coop/home/)
This guy is 100% correct America! So, what are we going to do about it? 1st, elect Bernie Sanders as our next president...then Bernie needs to hire Richard Wolff as his economic advsor.....and finally, we the people need to get out in the streets and help push forward Bernie's agenda through nonviolent protesting. If we do this like our existence depends on it, we will change this country for us all. If not, we're done!
Cooperatives have been operating in India since independence and are efficient too. But we had to adopt the capitalist systen bcoz the cooperatives didn't generate enough jobs.
I have a small business and have tried countless times to try and inspire and even educate some of my employees on worker owned co-operative businesses. It's that nobody seems to be interested in this design, so much so they will not even remember what I would have told them about this. In my opinion, it is a lot of work for the benefit of others who clearly show that they won't even appreciate in the first place. It doesn't happen more often because people are the way that they are, and unless people change for the better, to think selflessly. There will not be a more solidarity in our futures at least not with business practice.
Then why does Mondragon Corporation in Spain have $12 billion in revenue annually? I think this has to do more with your workers and less to do with the idea.
The problem is that you are going about it wrong. Start by finding people in your area who want to own the same type of business you own. Then open a small cooperative business together and instead of competing with each other for a portion of the market, you cooperate and split the entire market fairly. It doesn't work by starting it yourself and then hiring workers and trying to convert to a coop. You have to be a coop from the start. As you grow and expand, workers can be hired and trade work time for fractional ownership status.
tell that to mondragon, cooperative run and has about 15 billion in sales a year. also a cooperative doesn't mean everyone votes on every decision ... you get that right, because right now you're making the same argument people made against democracy. why do you just assume what we have now is working? the economy sh**s the bed every 5-10 years (if we're lucky) and massively catastrophically implodes about every 30-50. we got people who can't afford to live working 60 hours and other people who buy yachts without working at all. even if it weren't true that cooperatives have a proven track record of astounding success how could anything be worse than what we got now
@@afgor1088 Mondragon rejects communities/businesses from its cooperative, when a cooperative mentality is absent. I do not believe a single DEM City has a "cooperative citizenry" for inclusion.
@@michaelwojcicki3624 why are you talking about democrats? you know they're pro capitalist right... also America isn't the world... some countries are actually civilized
Just for all you tankies and breadtubers it isn't socialism. Cooperatives are not about giving over ownership to the state nor to the community at large. Rather it is a way of working for personal gain in union and cooperation with others who share in that ownership. You wouldn't have outsiders making decisions about the running of the cooperative like you would in either a capitalist or socialist system. The state doesn't own the means of production and neither do outside investors. The people own the company and share in the gains. Not pure capitalism and not pure socialism. The difference between cooperatives and communist countries is that the former is bottom-up, the latter is top-down. That alone explains the starking difference between the outcomes.
@@nickplays2022 But I believe it's simply a stock share of company from which the workers get dividents. They themselves don't participate (correct me if I'm wrong) in the decision making, which is the sole privilege of board of directors or CEO. Workers can appoint a representative who would push their interests in the board bur that very rarely succeeds, that's why I believe that the bigger enterprise is the harder it's to unionize and cooperate it.
Sorry, the start is too slow. 7 minutes in and still didn't get to anything solidarity economy related. I'm informed and passionate about the subject though, perhaps people should skip ahead.
Many people don't know that President Eisenhower and I have something in common. We both worked for a Co-op and as managers. This was a job for me and apparently too for Ike but both of us were anxious to find greener pastures. I should also point out to those comments that follow that Socialism without Capitalism is generally (by definition) considered a form of Communism. As to Communism ending poverty we have North Korea as one example and China as another. But it seems to me that Industrialization and Economic Growth is what raises people out of poverty as is a good Conservative work ethic, education and a desire to succeed. And if you like my comments, send money!
@@uniquesensitivesnowflake7366 I think he's referring to a place where I come from. Cooperatives are common for small businesses in the Philippines. My school (public) canteen has that and they're very good. However, very hard to compete against. My parents couldn't enter the School in the canteen for their own business.
No this will not work! Exploitation is only way of succes. You need to maximize profit for the shareholders and give as little as possible to your workers. Shareholders are the most important person so you need to protect their interests. If the profit is down, dont accept it!. Cut the wages of your workers instead to maintain the happinness of shareholders. Cooperatives is weak, Corporation is strong thanks to wealthy shareholders. Cooperative workers are lazy Corporation workers are Hardworking and Obedient.
I literally can't tell if you're actually in favour of corporations, or just memeing. The amount of reactionary propaganda I experienced took away my ability to detect irony.
End poverty is nearly impossible in reality is not because it’s theoretically impossible, it’s because of the opportunity cost. If the gov separate all the money to all people, the it immediately ended poverty. Yet the cost is the economy will collapse. Start worker owned coors does not solve poverty, the diminishing of private companies probably will. But the coors would never be as competitive and efficient as private companies.
I'd like to ask if you ever researched the competitiveness and efficiency of worker cooperatives, or if you're just guessing that? Of course coops cannot compete with multinationals, but they can with private businesses of comparable size.
I believe worker coops will rise like right now in this time of pandemic to spread the risk and reward. The poor right now is taking the toll for the top millionaires and billionaires minding just their self-interest. This will be a slow transition to a new type of economy. At first, worker coops will rise and challenge the small businesses until it hits the top corporations. I believe if the government sees the potential of worker coop companies rising, they will support towards the change resulting to the abolishment of private corporations as we know it.
really why? why would the economy "collapse" if more people were able to improve their lives and consume goods and services. cooperatives are actually MORE efficient and innovative, see mondragon for an example. also doesn't the current system actually collapse every 5-10 years? even if that were true for if we got rid of poverty (it completely isn't) we'd be no worse off than we are now AND we'd have ended poverty
@@alrizo1115 I'm afraid if coops become more popular, big corps would feel the threat and would try to force the state to opress them. This is why when coop sector grows it has to become more political to survive.
@@drewm3996 so you think employees should be forced to have the business they built and payed for sold out from under them but not be allowed to pay to keep it... Also what does force have to do with socialism? This could be perfectly well achieved by opening the bidding process up to employees first which is sort of how stock options already work No matter how you make a cooperative it's socialism
@@drewm3996 Congratulations! If you think that's a good idea then you're Socialist. There is no need to force anything, if you're really sparked up by idea why not open the co-op yourself. That's the beauty of it no need for government and forceful expropriation, simply create new co-ops or transition the ownership of existing ones i.e. workers should be able to buy out the company from the Capitalist. It would benefit the Amazon workers to own the company, and Bezos to finally have 100B. Bezos is billionaire but a poor one actually, cause he can't spend the money he owns.
He is not an advocate for cooperatives. He's an advocate for socialism. Cooperatives are still businesses and lazy people who don't want to work are not going to be responsible people who will manage that business. No, everyone who is living in poverty is not lazy but there are plenty of people who would rather get "free," supplemental income than work.
Cooperatives still employ freelancers, but anyone who starts as an employee can become a working member if they are committed to the business. Voice actors, for instance, would be employed by cooperatives making video games, movies, and animations, but be a member of none of them. Businesses run as democracies rather than a dictatorship. Everyone should be in favor of giving people a vote in the place they work. Sure, there will be people that don't want to work. This is just free will and individual liberty. This has nothing to do with cooperatives vs corporations. The only thing corparations are better at is making a profit, at the cost of the workers that make the goods.
Making economic decisions is a gift thet only the 1% has. Workers cannot do than that work or else ther would be thousands and thousands of Ford, GM, and other firms. Anybody has a right to become a millionaire, in Cuba nobody has. However, how many millionaires are in the US? The famous 1%. Workers must be protected with laws, lime F.D Roosevelt did in his time. If you think workers can form comitees to run a factory like GM, you are dreaming ...
they do it in spain... cooperative called Mondragon, 12 billion in sales and i'm so happy you said specifically GM because GM send their executives to mondragon and PAY THEM to learn from how they manage things because they're just that efficient and innovative
Poverty is a curse. It's very clear in the Bible it is a curse from God. What you say? Yes! Read about the blessings and cursings FROM THE LORD! If you are not doing what you are supposed to, in order for God to bless you? Then you will not be in the position to RECEIVE A BLESSING! So he will not and can not pour out very much in the way of blessings! Deuteronomy chapter 27-30 talks about what causes blessing to come upon you. And what behaviors bring about curses! Just apply them AND the principal's! I did! And I went from losing everything and 15,000 in credit card debt! When I started applying his principal's everything turned around! And in six months I went from loosing my home and 15,000 in debt to 15,000 in the bank! And a newer vehicle, 5 raises and favor at the job. 2 promotions and 2 years later 2 houses paid for! Sometimes I didn't even know where the checks were coming from!!! Favor is what it's called. Its requires a change in the way you think! And putting God's principal's into action against what society teaches! Society teaches people to be poor and secluded and unconnected. That's also poverty. 😁Just thought people would like to see the other side of the coin of success.
I co-founded a worker-owned cooperative 4 years ago with 5 members and roughly 15 additional employees. We are now a Sub T corporation, a worker owned cooperative (WOC). We are going strong, increased our revenue significantly with the same amount of employees and have doubled the number who are owners in the 1st 4 years. The same number of people are producing more revenue and sharing the profits with each other. We have a hierarchal structure for day-to-day operations and a board of owners who make larger policy decisions. Profits shared are based upon hours worked. Each member gets one vote. Only members get to vote. This is a successful business model and can be a great way for business owners to retire- The previous owners had a Sub S corp, they mentored their employees (me and others) to help us found the Co-op. We bought the company and converted it to a WOC.
whats the name of the company you are reffering
@@trackingthecoreofstuffandm2310
"Pyramid Schematics"
As a business owner this is something I wanted to do for a very long time did not know that this is what it was called till this moment
If you have the capital or means to leverage maybe speak to your best employees and prospect about the idea. Maybe not your current business but ask them if they'd be interested in a separate venture.
You could do this but you would have to be prepared, psychologically and materially to relinquish your individual control, because if you stayed in the business, you would be on an equal footing with your workers. That could be a difficult process to undergo for you. It might be easier to propose that your workers buy the business from you at a fair price, and that you step back from any involvement if they purchase it. Introduce them to the various organisations that facilitate the creation of worker cooperatives in your location. If they are willing, able, and can raise the capital, let them buy you out, and let go.
I would like to do something similar not exactly like this..but individual businesses would operate under one roof in similar trades. Also logistically it would be perfect, contracting work to each other in this group..I believe it works this way allready on a small scale, examples like tattoo shops and salons.
Your comment is a few months old, so I don't know how or if you did something *with your idea. Especially during this covid crises. Anyway, I had the same idea *years ago. I dont know if there are any coop information centers in the U.S, iI **live in the Netherlands but found the best direct & practical info in Spain. The *Mondragon coop is one of the biggest coop companies in the world, and.they **have a segment that gives practical advice & help to people allover the world..
David, want to talk? I’ve an idea.
Don't forget to unionize, as well. That ensures stability and democratic ownership even after you expand outside of just one facility. You don't want your people competing with each other; Instead, you want them cooperating.
How would competition start if the whole company is governed by all the workers?
@@bonniesitessolutions7728 The competition would be between collectives or warrens/neighborhoods. The number of workers under a collective determine it's growth and potential profit; though profit would mostly be received in benefits through union membership and land allocation. Collectives that lose all their membership have their assets publicaly sold, unless the collective receives membership again before the remaining asset is sold.
@@ComradeCorwin That sounds like one way to work it, but there are other business plans beside that one.
@@bonniesitessolutions7728 Sure, but collectives are the most malleable. Since they allow the most restructuring options, they serve as a good baseline. Unions ensure that if businesses get larger, but still hold a more hierarchical business structure, instead of democratic, that the workers get benefits and protection from shady business practices.
@Orange Apple juice You mean a free market system? Every economic system has markets. It's just a general term for an epicenter of resource exchange.
There are plenty of communes that operate now, didn't you know? It's just an issue of zoning.
But, no. I was talking about cooperatives, mostly. It could apply to any form of democratic ownership, though.
If you like what you heard please listen to Dr. Richard Wolff.
Yes indeed. Richard Wolff is extraordinary. Let's start workers coops everywhere!
One of the greatest economist of our time
No read kropotkin’s bread book instead
We need Wolff on Joe Rogan
I hear Richard Wolff every week, this guy here is a nice change! He he.
If you are in general agreement with this speaker you owe it to yourself to listen/watch Richard D Wolff.
Duh108 and Noam Chomsky
My two favorite people.
THIS
But they won't, because "oooh, Wolff is a socialist, evilness!" and hold out crosses and garlic...
@@bonniesitessolutions7728 I'd prefer a socialist over a Neoliberalist any day of the week.
Thank you Professor Brown for your talk. I hope a spark that can lead to more worker/new age cooperatives.
14:07 legal complications across states
14:45 lack of eco-system
15:15 skills argument
16:35 lack of knowledge
I have to echo that becoming familiar with Richard Wolff's work is an absolutely must for anyone remotely interested/heartened by this presentation.
You are 100% right. The fact that I hear many people talking about Richard D Wolff makes me feel like his work is gaining traction in this country.
I helped start a worker coop in Vancouver about 10 years ago. I believe that it is the most ethical and stable business model there is. That being said, they aren’t perfect by any means and there are specific trade offs that many of the Wolff pack here in the comments refuse to address. I would recommend people talk to as many workers from these places to see the variety of pros and cons they have before starting one. I believe a coop is perfect for certain types of business, not so great for others and absolutely disastrous for some.
interesting perspective!
i'm in the IT field and interested in starting one, can you elaborate please? what are the types of business where co-ops work best?
tassou ouelhazi I would say that any service based industry would benefit the most from cooperative organization, like restaurants, childcare or IT. When every worker has skin in the game, the quality of service benefits and big business decisions are usually less risky. Like any business though, it depends greatly on the quality of the people who are running it. Of course this is one mans humble opinion. Good luck!
@@soulfuzz368 thanks man.
@@soulfuzz368 not so much a humble man when you call others pack of someone. Nevertheless interesting point, even though there is no academic study in support of it
Since the mid-19th century, American workers have claimed “those who work in the factories ought to own them.” But such an egalitarian perspective wasn't acceptable to capitalists then, as it isn't acceptable to capitalists today
Nop, those who invest should own them.
@@luddechamp YES! and the workers invest all their lives... Why they dont just start investing moneyy
@@luddechamp your right. To invest into something financially and to reap the rewards of your risk. But that money is a representation of resources, time, and energy spent into obtaining it and thus has value because it is backed by the work put into it. You could call it faith, or perhaps hope, that the value remains. A worker could be seen as the same. Rearing children, producing products, etc. However, it is harder to see such value in people until they are trained or tested, or have a history revealing skills. We are products of our country, families, and culture. *sigh* Here I am going off the crazy train. Have a good one.
@Texan White Panther if that is true, than they can work in the normal capitalist framework.
If you set up a company, just set up a plan for the workers to buy you out (say at 3x your investment, so you get compensated for the risk).
Then, once that is paid of, link each share of the company to a job there. Many any promotion democratic (the people, who will work under that boss, vote for him).
If you, as the founder, are good at your job, nothing will change about your position.
This has the advantage of lessening abuse (like CEOs raising their salaries during a crisis), and gives the workers a higher incentive to work hard (because hard work is more directly linked to promotions). It also incentivices a better work atmosphere (you want promotions, and for that, your coworkers must at least tolerate you)
Coops work perfectly fine under capitalism, no need to change anything there
@Texan White Panther that is interfering with the property rights of the individuum. I would be strongy against that, as would most people in the US.
If the system actually works, ie is as efficient as a normal buissiness (which waste a lot of money on useless CEOs, and better pay should motivate workers), small buissinesses will adopt first, but more and more big companies will follow or be outcompeted eventually.
If the solutino requires laws like that (meaning is not competitive on its own), it is not the right solution
I agree with his point about the cycle being no money - no education -no jobs - no money. Being raised in a somewhat rural environment where the only really decent paying jobs were held by the teachers, some construction people and a few business owners I would add no vision to that list. Where as in other families and areas when a teen or person in their 20s said that they were going to school for something professional or beyond what we knew and wanted to aim for a career there was a degree of cynicism that looking back wasn't healthy. Seeing no real examples of people getting an education or training and getting a better job as a result can be very demotivating. I have been living in a large city for a decade now and have a diverse group of friends with a variety of jobs many professionals or academics and I still have not fully overcome the fearful negative and defeatist thinking that can come as a result of environment. I can definitely see how this aspect of poverty could even more deeply affect communities that are much worse off then I was and just how hard it must be to find the courage and faith to overcome that environment. Real opportunity must be paired with voices of encouragement and examples of success so it is not perceived as just another pipe dream.
Poverty is not an error in the capitalist system but the driver of the system. Without poverty there is no competition for employment. Without competition for employment there is no motivation for workers to accept a lowering of their wages and benefits. Without reduction in labor costs there can be no profit growth, because, once all other production costs have hit the wall of diminishing returns on efficiency, reducing labor costs is the only option for cutting costs and thereby increasing profit. Without reducing wages to a point where workers can't actually afford to live, they won't turn to financial companies and go into debt. Without going into debt they won't go into prison, where they can then be forced to work for free for private companies (this is also an option for the unemployed who turn to crime). Finally, once companies can no longer make a profit, the industry collapses and big companies swallow up little companies and accumulate their capital or liquidate it for use in other enterprises. Then the cycle starts over.
Great breakdown, sir!
One day I hope to understand Marxist theory as well as this man
The fact is that more people have been lifted out of poverty in China due to globalization in recent decades than any other time in human history. You can choose to call that exploitation if you want but I don’t see how that is helpful.
@@genotriana3882 Capitalist system is progressive up to a certain point. But everything has its limits.
@@alexxx4434 The reality is that you need the capitalism to pay for socialism and you need some socialism to take care of those who cannot work or don’t have marketable skills.
Right now their is not enough capitalism to pay the socialism and the country is unsustainably taking on debt as a result.
Thank you professor Jim Brown. I would like to encourage the formation of cooperatives now before and during the Covid stimulus being given in USA and the island of Jamaica. I think others will follow.
I'm very familiar with topics surrounding economics but this right here was GOLD, not because of it's depth but more so because of it's simple delivery. I can actually share this with the average person and they'll GET IT. We need more people like this bridging the economics knowledge gap for the average American. Economics tends to be intimidating and a difficult concept to grasp for most.
I'm so glad to see this.
This is the future.
Richard Wolff should get up on stage here ;)
I've never heard of Richard Wolf talking about worker owned Cooperatives
Describe socialism without telling your audience what it is.
That's not socialism.
@@jamescooper3204 it literally is, socialism is worker ownership and democratic control of their work along with the abolition of commodity production.
@@Nyaaani lmao got'em. It's crazy how the US went from exploitation, to unions and then all the way back around to exploitation. The propaganda against anything remotely socialist and the historical evils of "communist" nations like maoist china and stalinist russia have poisoned the well.
The problem with socialism is that historically any country has tried their version of "socialism" has failed. The Scandinavian countries aren't socialism but capitalism (or market economy) with high level of social programs.
Coops aren't "socialism" in the sense that resources and labour are not centrally controlled/relocated by the government's central planning, which is quintessentially the definition of socialism. Coops are just another way for worker-owner relationship and profit distribution. And even in Coops, not all employees are owners, and during economic down turns, even owners are voted to be laid off.
@@smdanny1 call it whatever you want and qualify as much as you want, it's still a better way to do things than what we have now in the states.
you're completely wrong about the quintessence of socialism, btw. it's not about government; it's about the people.
Free enterprise has been SEVERELY warped and diseased by Wall Street and the banker class. The constant clamor for a higher stock price and "share holder value" has changed the idea of running a business into running a short term cash cow for the select few board members. James Sinegal, the former CEO of Costco in an article said that he was constantly being haranged by Wall Street to raise prices for their benefit.
It's their capital
If you don't want short term profit
Invest your own
CostCo was / is not publically traded ... but this guy is a great CEO/founder anyway
I think this is a great idea.
Check out Noam Chomsky on this and Mondragon cooperatives in Spain. Over 150 years old with its own banks and university for cooperatives.
This is democracy in the workplace!
One simple rule: workers' first right of refusal.
Before a business owner is permitted to sell out to a competitor or shutter his/her business they must put a reasonable offer to the employees of their business. Who better to know how to make the business go than the people who have been making it go? If the business really is as good as dead then workers could easily say "no, thank you".
I'm pretty sure they actually have such a system in place in Italy or France, and it's working pretty well.
I am adt too and he brings a very inspiring idea
FANTASTIC VIDEO!!!
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass
Why did he not say the word "socialism" even once? He even said it would be "making our system of capitalism more inclusive." He's advocating for a change in ownership of the means of production from private owners to workers. That's socialism. Why does nobody get this? Why isn't he presenting himself as a revolutionary? It's tragic.
My brother-in-law has a family business where he and his son and wife worked. They owned it and worked it. No one would dare call them socialists. Many businesses are partnerships and if all the partners work it, how could that be a bad thing? It is common and should be supported more. Owners can be workers. No boss treating you like a slave or paying you like a slave, that sounds pretty good. The key is equality of ownership and risk taking to benefit equally in the surplus the company produces. The "revolution" happens when you vote out the politicians that are doing only for their richer patrons.
Wayne P it's not a bad thing. It's a good thing. I am saying that any business without a boss that is owned democratically by the workers is socialist in structure and should this happen on a broader scale and happen everywhere in an economy, it would be a socialist transformation. While voting can be a useful tool to advance a revolutionary struggle it is not itself revolution. I do not put that in scare quotes. I mean it literally. I advocate for the economic system of capitalism to be overthrown by way of popular revolt and mass resistance. Voting alone is merely parliamentary and reformist. You may not realize it, but worker ownership of industry on a mass scale is what socialism is. And contrary to your understanding of my comment, I am aware of that, and I fully support it.
Because "socialism" is a cursed word. If he would say it, people would stop listening no matter how good his advices are. That's why brother.
Karl Pala You mean stop listening? You have a point but still, society has gotta get past that.
Jeremy Einbinder Yes sorry, typo. In spain there are 18k workers cooperatives employing 300k. Is a long tradition but is also a way to survive the crisis/crunches.
24 capitalists and capital-lover serfs disliked the talked
yes, I'm a capitalist even though I'm poor. And yes you can be poor and like the idea of owning stuffs.
@@transon6655 capitalism is not about owning stuff. It is a production mode and legal framework regarding production, and allocation of surplus.
It is about who takes the profit, and who takes the decisions the firm.
Capitalism infact is about "not owning the fruit of your work", or "not owning stuff"!
@@shaahin6818 not really, the definition of capitalism is the enforcement of private property. If I go to a company and accept a job, the fruit of my work is my salary, I didn't ask for any share of the profits and I don't want to. Because if I have a right to the profit I will automatically have a responsibility for its loses. And for me, a steady income is better than hoping the company makes profits.
I don't think socialist understand the role of the entrepreneur, his job is not only to manage his company, it is also taking risk. He has to anticipate what to produce how to produce and if the consumers don't want the product then his company will fail.
@@shaahin6818 I'm not defending Communism at all, but if you look up the definition of Capitalism it's "the private ownership of INDUSTRY and BUSINESSES", not ownership of just anything. So entrepreneurs are Capitalists, but not employees like you or me.
Cooperatives (from what they describe here) are still capitalist businesses where the employees are also the entrepreneurs*. Obviously, the economy would benefit hugely if more people started businesses. While there are absolutely risks and stresses of entrepreneurship, people take these risks because there are clear benefits. And many non-entrepreneurs *would* take that risk, if they had the option.
*So it makes no sense why everyone in the comments is framing this as a Communism vs Capitalism thing, including the top comment.
@@LowestofheDead capitalist mode of production has a more precise definition than what you have presented. "Private ownership of means of production" is not precise enough. Private ownership by whom? If a few shareholders, i.e. employers, are the owners, and they have the right to claim profit, to keep information, and to take decisions, we have a capitalist firm. Worker coop is different from this fact that "all" workers have the aforementioned rights, so they are called worker-owners. No shareholder from outside of the corporation can take the profit, or decide for the firm. Capitalism is the legal framework of employer-employee, and worker coop abolishes such relation. Wcoop has been long history in left, and now is considered as the viable alternative to capitalism. I am a researcher on this topic indeed
Ps. Communism is about communes. It is a different story comparing to worker coops. In general, all cmunist regimes have been owners of means of production, this is why they are also called "state capitalism/socialism". Wcoop is a third way, no state socialism, no private capitalism
Thank you for continuing inspiration
Thank you for sharing your lifestory Mr Jim Brown, you definetely contributed to my research
Love, love, love this talk. Why is common sense so unavailable! We should have been doing worker coops years ago. The thing that Jim Brown doesn't seem to realize is that it's not capitalism per se, it's money. Money that is issued by banks. This is why we weren't able to have nice things like worker coops. But we can now because he told us about it and so let's get rolling shall we?
Excelente!
This fits well into the Distributist belief that the individual should have control of their own labor.
@@xxxxxx-zq5yh some examples of what would it be to live in a distributism economy can be seen in Mondragon (Spain) and the Emilia Romagna ( Italy), check some bibliography about those cases, I intend to travel to see firsthand those places.
xxx xxx they live in capitalist nations but adhere to the principles of distributism
xxx xxx what do you mean by luxury
LiterallyAhipsterYT if a collection of ccooperations were all owned by a communist party, one that didn’t exploit the workers just held the deed to maintain cooperation, then this is actually a very plausible path to revolution and funding a revolution . Unions giving workers extra money is how communism first got big , if we can do it in a directed manner, it could happen again.
Interesting Talk
Good efforts to thinks about people goodwell.
Brilliant
Yes comrades
Any thoughts on the best way to find people to start a worker co-op? And especially how to vet people? My concerns are power grabs & in-fighting (e.g. cliques forming, destructive ways of discussing, etc), very different vision (e.g. steering away from ethical, sustainable vision), handling turnover of members. I have these concerns as I'm just a group of one person at the moment and am interested to start a worker co-op for something in engineering or tech, a space that seems to have a lot of competitive type working models which people may be overly used to...
In general, I'm struggling to find good resources to handle these nuts & bolts type questions... Any suggestions would be helpful
You never experienced poverty in Southern California? Moving to Los Angeles from North Georgia was a culture shock to me. I can only imagine the bubble you lived in.
He worked his way through college driving a tow truck.
He's in my age range. Poverty when we were growing up was much less in general and almost invisible in So Cal
Convoluted
What's the best way to handle hiring a cleaning person or accountant for your co-op? They shouldn't gain a say in the direction of your business unless they're involved in more ways than just that, right?
Maybe have a time limit. Like if they work with the cooperative for a month or a few, than they get the right to vote in it?
@@JtheCritic I'm told the solution is you don't hire a cleaning person specifically, but everyone who already has other useful skills spend part of their time doing the cleaning as well. This way everyone will feel like every member of the team contributes necessary skill equally, basically.
@@SolarpunkJackal rotational roles are nice too.
It is cooperatism not socialism. The workers own and operate it. It isn't owned by the public. It isn't managed by people who don't have a stake in the outcomes.
It is almost like private socialism rather than state controlled socialism.
It's the same.
Lenin said that cooperatives were the way to achieve socialism and also communism.
Socialism is when workers own and control the means of production. Plain and simple. Therefore, state ownership can NEVER be socialism, and Cooperatives are the textbook example of it. State ownership is just the state taking the role of the capitalist, no difference to employees.
Interesting
1863 as the North of England Co-operative Society
60,000
£5.4 billion ($8.64 billion)(2001)
445110 Supermarkets and Other Grocery (Except Convenience)
Stores; 445120 Convenience Stores; 447110 Gasoline Stations with
Convenience Stores; 522110 Commercial Banking; 522120 Savings
Institutions; 524128 Other Direct Insurance (Except Life, Health, and
Medical) Carriers; 812210 Funeral Homes and Funeral Services
It feels crazy to know that there are millions of people in the world who know that our economic system is fundamentally flawed and yet we can't do a thing
yes ... you can
Worker cooperatives + credit unions = economic liberation
What is credit union? Is it when a group of people take a loan which they all must repay? If that's the case I would have to note that.
Does anyone have a link reference to the research paper he talked about at 12:25?
Comrade, yes!
Unfortunately this doesn't cure the source of the problem; Expecially when the system favours traditional capitalist businesses.
Exactly. We can’t just “incorporate more cooperative aspects”, we need to dismantle and replace the whole economy to be democratically owned and run! Democratize production, Democratize land, Democratize the State! Otherwise, freedom is just asthetic.
Nevertheless it's an improvement, a step in right direction.
People are free to form a cooperative, I don't get why some believe every company must be coerced into one.
Yeah I think about that too.
I'm all for people creating worker co-ops, in fact they sound like an intoxicating idea. If I had the means I'd probably try to form one.
But, I'm not for government trying to force already existing companies like Walmart or Amazon to become worker co-ops.
They're too big anyway.
Well, climate change is reaching its zenith, private military companies and other businesses that profit off of war don't care about the consequences of their endless war mongering, and private banks that only care about profit lead to the great depression, the great recession, and practically most economic disasters. Forcing them into cooperatives is a way to shrink their size, power,and influence, and the average people are less likely to destroy their own environment, push for endless war, and risk their savings in reckless finance.
It's not easy to form one. It takes effort and good people who won't sell out to capital or private interests and have unions to back the Cooperatives.
actually no they're not. those same lovely companies you talk about passed laws to make it illegal for cooperatives to get credit from credit unions and banks try to destroy them any chance they get.
also why should the CEO who does no work get the choice and not the workers?
I've tried looking for information regarding your first statement but found nothing. Maybe you could provide sources that back it up?
You're very wrong to assume CEOs don't work; it's a difficult & complex role. If workers aren't happy, they're free to leave and join (or start) a company that aligns with their ideology. Seizing private property is wrong and has had disastrous consequences across societies that attempted to go down that path.
Omg!! I had a different tab open and thought RUclips had auto-played a Martin Cabello video.
One thing I don’t see eye to eye with is the part where he mentions as a worker cooperative; “you don’t need to move production overseas to increase shareowner profit”. While this might be true, it’s not viable in today’s economy. People will simply buy the cheaper alternative which is “made in china”. Cheap to produce, cheap to buy. Worker cooperatives will only work if the economy itself is strong enough OR smart enough to support locally owned and operated business consumerism.
Amazing idea. Now... where can you find a lawyer to help you set it up?
+Gladys Rodriguez
There are several groups that help people start cooperative businesses. Here is one link to useful information on this subject.
www.american.coop/startup
Gladys Rodriguez - Here is another source for help in setting up cooperatives and employee owned enterprises. The United States Federation of Worker Cooperatives (usworker.coop/home/)
You don't, you need a revolution.
funny how most lawyers are employees of a firm, helping setup worker ownership of their own company. LOL
This guy is 100% correct America! So, what are we going to do about it? 1st, elect Bernie Sanders as our next president...then Bernie needs to hire Richard Wolff as his economic advsor.....and finally, we the people need to get out in the streets and help push forward Bernie's agenda through nonviolent protesting. If we do this like our existence depends on it, we will change this country for us all. If not, we're done!
looks like we need a new plan lol
Bernie is a soc-dem, which means pro-capitalism.
we should make loan to cooperatives and allow workers purchase of ownership
Cooperatives have been operating in India since independence and are efficient too. But we had to adopt the capitalist systen bcoz the cooperatives didn't generate enough jobs.
that's not strictly true, it was more down to the """not coups""" you were put through
And Chris Hedges
I have a small business and have tried countless times to try and inspire and even educate some of my employees on worker owned co-operative businesses.
It's that nobody seems to be interested in this design, so much so they will not even remember what I would have told them about this.
In my opinion, it is a lot of work for the benefit of others who clearly show that they won't even appreciate in the first place.
It doesn't happen more often because people are the way that they are, and unless people change for the better, to think selflessly.
There will not be a more solidarity in our futures at least not with business practice.
Then why does Mondragon Corporation in Spain have $12 billion in revenue annually? I think this has to do more with your workers and less to do with the idea.
The problem is that you are going about it wrong. Start by finding people in your area who want to own the same type of business you own. Then open a small cooperative business together and instead of competing with each other for a portion of the market, you cooperate and split the entire market fairly. It doesn't work by starting it yourself and then hiring workers and trying to convert to a coop. You have to be a coop from the start. As you grow and expand, workers can be hired and trade work time for fractional ownership status.
@@oggyreidmore and what business do you (or, should I say, your workers) run and operate?
@@deanbean2106 that logic can literally apply for anything...
@@erniereyes1994 I'm a graphic artist. I do commission work and don't have employees.
In order for capitalism to exist, poverty needs to exist. It's just that simple Karl Marx discovered this in 1840.
Haha! I didn't know that others have had that no-pants dream too!
Do humans have a blockchain encrypted app to coordinate propositions, ranking, and voting yet?
New to the area.
Check out Richard D. Wolff
If you think managing a business, by committee, is preferable to objective management, your business acumen is lacking.
tell that to mondragon, cooperative run and has about 15 billion in sales a year. also a cooperative doesn't mean everyone votes on every decision ... you get that right, because right now you're making the same argument people made against democracy.
why do you just assume what we have now is working? the economy sh**s the bed every 5-10 years (if we're lucky) and massively catastrophically implodes about every 30-50. we got people who can't afford to live working 60 hours and other people who buy yachts without working at all.
even if it weren't true that cooperatives have a proven track record of astounding success how could anything be worse than what we got now
@@afgor1088 Mondragon rejects communities/businesses from its cooperative, when a cooperative mentality is absent. I do not believe a single DEM City has a "cooperative citizenry" for inclusion.
@@michaelwojcicki3624 good why would it let innefient capitalist buisnesses into it's structure
@@afgor1088 Not about capitalism, it is about "giving your all" and "showing up" for cooperative to work. DEMs embrace the excuse.
@@michaelwojcicki3624 why are you talking about democrats? you know they're pro capitalist right... also America isn't the world... some countries are actually civilized
If anyone haven't watched Dr. Richard Wolff , now's your time
Google blocks The Moses Project in searches
Just for all you tankies and breadtubers it isn't socialism. Cooperatives are not about giving over ownership to the state nor to the community at large. Rather it is a way of working for personal gain in union and cooperation with others who share in that ownership. You wouldn't have outsiders making decisions about the running of the cooperative like you would in either a capitalist or socialist system. The state doesn't own the means of production and neither do outside investors. The people own the company and share in the gains. Not pure capitalism and not pure socialism. The difference between cooperatives and communist countries is that the former is bottom-up, the latter is top-down. That alone explains the starking difference between the outcomes.
It's in market so it is capitalist.
it's not that that isn't socialism, it's command economies that aen't socialist.
Socialists have been explaining this for decades.
"The only prerequisite for participation in capitalism is ... capital, which oddly excludes most would-be participants."
Reversing any factor? ANY factor? okay- isolation!
tesla should take the same experimental idea
I've read that many western companies offer some stock shares to their employees. Maybe Tesla does too.
@@nickplays2022 But I believe it's simply a stock share of company from which the workers get dividents. They themselves don't participate (correct me if I'm wrong) in the decision making, which is the sole privilege of board of directors or CEO. Workers can appoint a representative who would push their interests in the board bur that very rarely succeeds, that's why I believe that the bigger enterprise is the harder it's to unionize and cooperate it.
Sorry, the start is too slow. 7 minutes in and still didn't get to anything solidarity economy related. I'm informed and passionate about the subject though, perhaps people should skip ahead.
it's not the speakers fault you have the attention span of a small fish...
4:10
Many people don't know that President Eisenhower and I have something in common. We both worked for a Co-op and as managers. This was a job for me and apparently too for Ike but both of us were anxious to find greener pastures. I should also point out to those comments that follow that Socialism without Capitalism is generally (by definition) considered a form of Communism. As to Communism ending poverty we have North Korea as one example and China as another. But it seems to me that Industrialization and Economic Growth is what raises people out of poverty as is a good Conservative work ethic, education and a desire to succeed. And if you like my comments, send money!
manila cooperative
Why did you mention this
Please tell me, Im curious
@@uniquesensitivesnowflake7366 I think he's referring to a place where I come from.
Cooperatives are common for small businesses in the Philippines.
My school (public) canteen has that and they're very good. However, very hard to compete against. My parents couldn't enter the School in the canteen for their own business.
No this will not work!
Exploitation is only way of succes.
You need to maximize profit for the shareholders and give as little as possible to your workers. Shareholders are the most important person so you need to protect their interests. If the profit is down, dont accept it!. Cut the wages of your workers instead to maintain the happinness of shareholders. Cooperatives is weak, Corporation is strong thanks to wealthy shareholders.
Cooperative workers are lazy
Corporation workers are Hardworking and Obedient.
Haha, reverse psychology😂
I literally can't tell if you're actually in favour of corporations, or just memeing. The amount of reactionary propaganda I experienced took away my ability to detect irony.
How to talk about how socialism works (because works) without say that is socialism :D
Yes.
End poverty is nearly impossible in reality is not because it’s theoretically impossible, it’s because of the opportunity cost. If the gov separate all the money to all people, the it immediately ended poverty. Yet the cost is the economy will collapse. Start worker owned coors does not solve poverty, the diminishing of private companies probably will. But the coors would never be as competitive and efficient as private companies.
I'd like to ask if you ever researched the competitiveness and efficiency of worker cooperatives, or if you're just guessing that? Of course coops cannot compete with multinationals, but they can with private businesses of comparable size.
I believe worker coops will rise like right now in this time of pandemic to spread the risk and reward. The poor right now is taking the toll for the top millionaires and billionaires minding just their self-interest. This will be a slow transition to a new type of economy. At first, worker coops will rise and challenge the small businesses until it hits the top corporations. I believe if the government sees the potential of worker coop companies rising, they will support towards the change resulting to the abolishment of private corporations as we know it.
really why? why would the economy "collapse" if more people were able to improve their lives and consume goods and services. cooperatives are actually MORE efficient and innovative, see mondragon for an example.
also doesn't the current system actually collapse every 5-10 years? even if that were true for if we got rid of poverty (it completely isn't) we'd be no worse off than we are now AND we'd have ended poverty
@@alrizo1115 I'm afraid if coops become more popular, big corps would feel the threat and would try to force the state to opress them. This is why when coop sector grows it has to become more political to survive.
Appently I’m a socialist for think this isn’t that bad
correct and i say that as a compliment. worker ownership of the means of production... cooperatives are literally socialism
@@afgor1088 ehhh nah I don’t think it should be forced
@@drewm3996 so you think employees should be forced to have the business they built and payed for sold out from under them but not be allowed to pay to keep it...
Also what does force have to do with socialism? This could be perfectly well achieved by opening the bidding process up to employees first which is sort of how stock options already work
No matter how you make a cooperative it's socialism
@@drewm3996 Congratulations! If you think that's a good idea then you're Socialist. There is no need to force anything, if you're really sparked up by idea why not open the co-op yourself. That's the beauty of it no need for government and forceful expropriation, simply create new co-ops or transition the ownership of existing ones i.e. workers should be able to buy out the company from the Capitalist. It would benefit the Amazon workers to own the company, and Bezos to finally have 100B. Bezos is billionaire but a poor one actually, cause he can't spend the money he owns.
@@afgor1088 yes I do believe that
I think people should be able to measure if the risks-heavy losses outweighs the gains-increased wages and control
He is not an advocate for cooperatives. He's an advocate for socialism. Cooperatives are still businesses and lazy people who don't want to work are not going to be responsible people who will manage that business. No, everyone who is living in poverty is not lazy but there are plenty of people who would rather get "free," supplemental income than work.
CJ Zanders what in the world are you saying??? Lazy people? Jesus man, what rhetoric have you been eating.
Antony Arango - there will always be ppl who just want to be told what to do, and there will always be ppl that don’t want to work.
Cooperatives still employ freelancers, but anyone who starts as an employee can become a working member if they are committed to the business. Voice actors, for instance, would be employed by cooperatives making video games, movies, and animations, but be a member of none of them.
Businesses run as democracies rather than a dictatorship. Everyone should be in favor of giving people a vote in the place they work.
Sure, there will be people that don't want to work. This is just free will and individual liberty. This has nothing to do with cooperatives vs corporations.
The only thing corparations are better at is making a profit, at the cost of the workers that make the goods.
To join a cooperative, you need money, to have money means you have to work or to have a very productive idea that will produce money.
how to fix capitalism: socialism
fibonacci. The 13th Order is on our way. ;)
Making economic decisions is a gift thet only the 1% has. Workers cannot do than that work or else ther would be thousands and thousands of Ford, GM, and other firms. Anybody has a right to become a millionaire, in Cuba nobody has. However, how many millionaires are in the US? The famous 1%. Workers must be protected with laws, lime F.D Roosevelt did in his time. If you think workers can form comitees to run a factory like GM, you are dreaming ...
they do it in spain... cooperative called Mondragon, 12 billion in sales
and i'm so happy you said specifically GM because GM send their executives to mondragon and PAY THEM to learn from how they manage things because they're just that efficient and innovative
Poverty is a curse. It's very clear in the Bible it is a curse from God. What you say? Yes! Read about the blessings and cursings FROM THE LORD! If you are not doing what you are supposed to, in order for God to bless you? Then you will not be in the position to RECEIVE A BLESSING! So he will not and can not pour out very much in the way of blessings! Deuteronomy chapter 27-30 talks about what causes blessing to come upon you. And what behaviors bring about curses! Just apply them AND the principal's! I did! And I went from losing everything and 15,000 in credit card debt! When I started applying his principal's everything turned around! And in six months I went from loosing my home and 15,000 in debt to 15,000 in the bank! And a newer vehicle, 5 raises and favor at the job. 2 promotions and 2 years later 2 houses paid for! Sometimes I didn't even know where the checks were coming from!!! Favor is what it's called. Its requires a change in the way you think! And putting God's principal's into action against what society teaches! Society teaches people to be poor and secluded and unconnected. That's also poverty. 😁Just thought people would like to see the other side of the coin of success.
Lefties have congregated here lmao
Breakshit ads.😈😠
So,whats in it for the capitalist, if the ownership is with workers??
nothing... that's the point. clearly we don't need them they're middlemen
tedx talks are so bad
If you are in general agreement with this speaker you owe it to yourself to listen/watch Richard D Wolff.
Its odd that they didn't have Richard Wolff do this Ted Talk, since he is the most prominent and prolific advocate for worker co-ops at the moment