[Cd9JfGHR]

Originally posted by Space05us
In all seriousness (disregard that I am posting drunk), what is the benefit of workers owning the means of production? Good question, but it was never done in praxis, so nobody really knows.....

[Amfdaaandhaq]

Oh and what does this mean:

i.e. have union workers and nonunion workers working the same job side by side. That's pretty much how it is. At least here in Hermania. Not in the US? I mean, do you have to join a union for a certain job

[Hmntezmb]

It's a state by state thing; some states permit closed shops (ie, essentially requiring union membership), some do not. It is (in theory) to prevent 'free riders' from benefiting from the union without paying dues.

[arreskslarlig]

Originally posted by Space05us
In all seriousness (disregard that I am posting drunk), what is the benefit of workers owning the means of production? Well for starters, it takes money out of the top tier- which mainly puts it into estate building- and spreads it out across a broader base. This creates a better SoL for more people, allowing for more leisure time, which in turn allows for more creativity. It also enhances an economy that's consumer based, which would further enrich every social strata. One can argue that stock options and 401(k) do this to a lesser extent, but it's not available to all workers.

Environmentally it'd be a disaster, as the consumer spending rose dramatically it'd impact already strained resources. Like we're seeing today with middle-class growth in 3rd world nations.

[ruforumczspam]

pretty much.

[S.T.D.]

IMHO: Any stock or stock option given as compensation or bonus to officers or employees should then not be transferrable for at least 10 years. That's the way to ensure long-term growth of the company (as opposed to short-term plundering).

[Jerwittdergut]

"Pwning" = "owning" usually having the connotation of "triumphing over" or "controlling."