Richard Wolff's talk on worker coops

Final Rebuttals "Why should those versions of capitalism be separated from capitalism? They are in fact versions of capitalism." Very important distinction, when the state screws up capitalism, but the state is not blamed. The major problem with capitalism is the state. Time stamps where Wolff identifies a problem caused by government influence: Video 2 has the most examples: 0:23 Collapse of capitalist system, which both 1929 and 2008 were caused by government. [1][2][3] 2:00 - 5:07 Inequality, which the immoral source of income is from government special programs and Cantillon effects of currency inflation. [5][6] 12:15 Lack of mass political commitment Then video 2 at 19:00, Wolff clearly states "the government... ought to be bankrolling worker co-ops on a massive scale". That is a call for government intervention. Government intervention (initiation of force) is against the principles of "libertarian" anything including socialism. Jamestown is an important lesson about the failures of collective ownership. From CATO "The problem was the lack of private property. As Tom Bethell writes in his book The Noblest Triumph: Property and Prosperity through the Ages, 'The colonists were indolent because most of them were indentured servants, expected to toil for seven years and contribute the fruits of their labor to the common store.' Understandably, men who don"t benefit from their hard work tend not to work very hard.Over the first two years, more colonists arrived from England, including women. By 1609, there were 500 settlers. And within six months fewer than 100 were still alive. People were desperate. They ate dogs and cats, then rats and mice. They apparently ate their deceased neighbors. And some said that one man murdered and ate his pregnant wife." Common ownership is a recipe for disaster, with the solution being private property. RE: worker coops are doomed for failure The post source from U.K. Coops miss quotes it's source of Office of National Statistics. The original source does not list co-op survival rate. The 80% number is most likely pulled from the sky. Point valid. RE: Risk and reward "How does cooperative ownership get rid of that system of risk and reward?" Employees are not supplying enough capital to be in fear of loosing it. The worker only has a job at stake, while those that supply capital have much more at stake. Point valid. RE: attracting talent Not about productivity, this is about attracting the best possible talent to grow a business. Point Valid RE: property rights The conjecture is valid, if worker co-ops became mandatory. Here is an example at a normal company from 2013 "When the company commissioned a network-security audit, they belatedly discovered that 'Bob' had outsourced his own job to a Chinese software company for a fifth of his pay. Relieved of his workload, Bob would spend his entire office day on the internet, flicking from eBay to Facebook to cat videos, before writing a progress-report email for his bosses and knocking off at 5pm."[4] Currently, the most creative people are not attracted to worker co-ops. Point valid. RE: Entrepreneurs The entrepreneur is not just another employee, and not a role that anyone can occupy. Point Valid Re: Palatable socialism Agreement, Wolff is attempting to make socialism acceptable in American. Socialism might start as voluntary, but no form can last without becoming a forceful association. Wolff's call for government funding demonstrates this. Re: inequality and moral/immoral means of gaining income "And what is voluntary about a system of capitalism where you have no other choice but to work for a capitalist business? Capitalism is immoral for this sole purpose...I would argue that the capitalist way of earning income is theft." An employee is compensated by the terms of a voluntary contract, nearly immediately for services rendered. There are many other payment option that are less popular, like profit sharing, stock options, and commissions which are only chosen by the best workers in an industry. "What other choice is there? They don"t have other options." People's options are limited by governments. I live in an area where local people can engage in unlicensed small time commerce, thus allow them to attempt new products with lower capital requirements or just allow them to put food on the table. Special favors from government Agreement that firms should not be bailed out. That would be immoral. Then a completely wrong statement "It seems for capitalism to exist, some government involvement is necessary. Otherwise you have terrible depressions like that of the great depression, or perhaps a worse crash". Recessions and depressions are caused not prevented by government actions.[1][2][3] A reason why are there not more worker co-ops is government. Governments have an interest in keeping people in an income earning job for the tax or on benefits for votes. The harder it is for people to start new businesses or earn income in non-tradition methods it is better for government. New entrepreneurs are the most critical of government created barriers to entry, and considered a threat to political power. Government funded worker co-ops would be a jackpot for control of businesses purchased in that method. Since, public money is used then workers must follow government rules. In conclusion, workers and entrepreneurs should be able to enter any agreement that both parties enter without coercion. Yet, Wolff clearly calls for government funding to increase the number of worker co-ops, which government funding will mean government control. Free-market capitalism is the fairest not violence system ever accidentally created. 1. http://www.riosmauricio.com... 2. https://mises.org... 3. https://mises.org... 4. https://www.theguardian.com... 5. http://www.incrementum.li... 6. http://www.zerohedge.com... 7. https://www.cato.org...