• AItoothbrush@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Still think something between communism and capitalism would be the best. Both show a lot of problems but both have benefits. A well regulated and equal competition with linear growth(not like capitalism with its exponential growth that produces musks and bezos’) sounds right to me. I think UBI would be exploited so just give them the basics in food, shelter, internet access, etc. But of course in the hellscape called modern politics everyone has to be an extremist so only hardcore capitalism, hardcore communism, genocide, etc are represented.

      • throwwyacc@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        Isn’t market socialism literally just a form of capitalism? Like if you still have markets and a profit incentive then you’re not really socialist

        Not saying that’s bad, just thinking really it has always seemed to me like capitalism with a strong social safety net. Which to me seems ideal, just want to know if I’m missing something?

        • areyouevenreal@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          I think you’re confusing social democracy with market socialism.

          In market socialism the working class owns the businesses they work for, possibly in conjunction with the government or their customers. There are no people who became shareholders by buying shares, and starting a business doesn’t mean you get to own all of it. It’s essentially a society where all businesses are worker co-ops.

          It has nothing to do with a social safety net. In practice one would probably exist anyway, but it’s not a strict requirement of this sort of system like it is in social democracy. Technically you wouldn’t have to have free universal healthcare either.

          It helps to know that the definition of socialism I am using is based on the marxist one: a society where the workers own the means of production.

          Edit: Profit still exists in this system but it’s shared more or less equally between the workers of that business. This means workers actually have a concrete incentive to work well, not just the vague possibility of a promotion. It also means you will probably see less short term profit making and less overwork hopefully.

          • throwwyacc@lemmynsfw.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            8 months ago

            How do you get your initial capital to start the co-op? Like you can’t have investors, so is every worker required to buy in the the initial venture?

            By the way you are entirely free to structure companies this way under a social democracy

            • areyouevenreal@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              By the way you are entirely free to structure companies this way under a social democracy

              You can set that up in any capitalist society, not just social democracy. It even happens in the US. That’s one of the major advantages of worker co-ops. It’s not true socialism though unless every business is run that way. I don’t really want social democracy. I want real socialism.

              As for funding I am not sure. Real worker co-ops must get funding from somewhere I would look into that. In a full market socialist economy the government could have a role in that. After all the current scheme of needing Capital to start a business isn’t fair at all.