Cooperative individualism(pro) versus your choice of economics(con)

Thinking about it, I think many of my arguments in the previous round would apply to cooperative individualism in general, since cooperative individualism literally is just worker coops being the majority type of business in society. I'll add some more arguments now however:A cooperative economy would provide more jobsAs you can see here, the average number of positions or employees a worker co-op has is 10[10] and comparing it to the average for the traditional business, it is greater, where the traditional business has an average of around 5-6[11]. Since worker-cooperatives generally do what is in best interest of the workers, they always try to offer more jobs than traditional businesses would. Traditional businesses would employ the minimum amount of people necessary to get the job done, while worker co-ops, on the otherhand, would have more interest in employing people for the sake of employing them. This, in turn, would increase the amount of jobs if worker co-ops were to be the majority in a society.Cooperative economics could help alleviate or end poverty, especially among the working class Surprisingly, there are still people in America which live in poverty, yet work full-time. 3% of full-time workers are living in poverty, while 16% of part-time workers live in poverty[12]. As was established in the previous round, worker cooperatives can employ more individuals as well as pay the individuals a higher wage. Since worker cooperatives have the interests of the worker at heart, they are generally more likely to hire more workers to help people, which can be seen with how worker coops tend to have more employees than the average traditional business. If there were more co-ops, there would be more jobs, and this would help the unemployed come out of poverty. The fact that the workers do earn more under a worker co-op than in a traditional business also means the poverty rate among the working class would decrease if we had more worker co-ops. Rebuttals to my opponent's main argument:It seems my opponent doesn't have a direct objection to cooperative individualism, and in fact states that their preferred economic system is a "transitory stage" to a better economy. I would argue that such a transitory stage that my opponent argues for is not necessary, at least not for going to a cooperative individualist society. The transition to a cooperative individualist society that is needed would literally deal with slowly expanding how many worker co-ops there are in the society. One way this could be done by is though educating people on worker co-ops(as I brought up, a vast majority of people do not even know what a cooperative is, let alone a worker cooperative). A second means of promoting worker co-ops could be to end the many government regulations on businesses. This would likely result in people seeking an alternative(since the regulations are there to prevent the evils of capitalism). I mean, the regulations are there because capitalists wouldn't make their company safe for the workers to begin with(as everyone should know since we were taught about working conditions in the 1800s, where wages were terrible, conditions terrible, and worker safety wasn't a concern for capitalists). Thus, if we go back to how it was in the 1800s, we would likely get people to seek for an alternative, and the alternative could be worker cooperatives.A third means of promoting worker co-ops is for the government to stop bailing out "too big too fail" traditional businesses. If the people see traditional businesses fail as much as they are supposed to, they may want to have a safer alternative that doesn't fail as much, such as worker cooperatives. As established before, worker cooperatives fail at almost half the rate of traditional businesses.And finally, this one I'm a little reluctant to fully support, but nonetheless it would help: we could make it that the federal reserve could give incentives to banks for loaning out to worker cooperatives. As mentioned before, banks rarely lend to worker co-ops, which is part of the problem. If more banks loaned to them, we would get more worker co-ops. All of this could be done in order to transition to this economy. I don't see the need for the economy my opponent suggests. Sources:[10] http://institute.coop...[11] http://www.incontext.indiana.edu... [12] http://poverty.ucdavis.edu...