• paholg@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    You’re making a hell of a lot of assumptions, both about me, and about the nature of reality.

    You’re also spouting a lot of nonsense. “The logic of capitalism” is a meaningless phrase. You’re attributing a lot of assumptions onto something that just means “the means of production can be privately owned”.

    The fact of the matter is that there are existing, successful worker co-ops. That alone disproves most of your claims that you take as axioms.

    • CyborgMarx [any, any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ok, there are actual implications and definitions behind the terms you’re throwing around haphazardly, fact of the matter is you don’t know what you’re talking about, that’s fine, you don’t have the relevant knowledge of economics or theory, technical or historical, so a lot of what I said probably went over your head

      So let’s clear up some basics, there is a logic to capitalism; private ownership of the means of production is the framework, profitability is the fuel and commodity production is the output, those aren’t assumptions, that is the “nature of reality” under capitalism

      And finally I didn’t say there are no successful coops, read more carefully, I said they’re only successful to the extent they are profitable and are limited by competing firms that act as regulating capitals, firms compete by cutting costs or increasing productivity, but productivity is tied to technical developments, so that can’t always be relied on, but cutting costs i.e. wages is always the first resort, hence the disadvantage for coops who theoretically value worker compensation over other more common capitalist concerns

      That buddy is a form of systemic logic

      • CarbonScored [any]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’d add also an inherent necessity in Capitalism’s stability is the marriage of concentrated riches with the state’s power and its monopoly on violence. Should worker co-ops ever seriously threaten the wrong bourgeois lot, restrictive laws that only apply to the co-op will appear, unlawful actions will go ignored, state officials will be pressed to harass, legal means will be levied, etc, all until the co-op is tanked. ‘Successful’ worker co-ops are only ever permitted to the point where they don’t meaningfully threaten any bourgeois power, profit is paid no heed in these situations.