If I got it right here, isn't he saying that you wouldn't have to stop private corporations and businesses from existing? So what the hell is the problem then? If you don't like cooperatives, then go work for or found a private business. Isn't the point that you can CHOOSE which one you want? Not to overthrow the other. And isn't that what's already happening? All you need is more cooperatives so that people will know about that possibility and have it in their community.
oh, does this guy mean SOCIALISM? Like........voting yourself your neighbors wealth? Yea, lets see how long that system lasts and just how successful it is. fucking morons
@AroundSun No. Firstly, socialism isn't like that. Secondly, what he talks about is NOT socialism. He's talking about an alternative to both socialism and the current form of capitalism. In fact this is more like another form of capitalism. I'd say "new form of capitalism" but in fact it's not new at all, it's been used for decades in many places in the world. Search Google for cooperatives and you'll find how it works. And check out North Dakota for an example of a successful state bank.
Economic democracy is the core value of socialism. A better word for economic democracy is workers' self-management. Economic democracy or self-management requires that those who work in a workplace own it--i.e. collective ownership.
Workers can save money only if they already receive a sufficient share of total income, which is happening less and less.
And anyway, that's not the point: making an investment as an anonymous investor doesn't grant you control over the means of production, it just makes you an investor whose sole benefit is to grab the largest part of income you can, thereby repeating the scheme of exploitation, externalization of costs and overexploitation of the environment.
@rrutherford69 workers can already own the 'means of production' today. Workers can save money and make investments thereby making them capitalists. What all this discussion of economic democracy leads to is the violent expropriation of wealth from the productive class by the State.
His last point about the limits to economic growth and the problems of the excessive U.S. neoliberal economic lifestyle. Cooperatives are far more democratically legitimate than business corporations - but it will take time for them to be put into place. North America is very hesitant to any major change in economics, Europe has the most potential to develop cooperatives. Canada and the U.S. will be extremely slow in changing because left-wing politics is very taboo in North America.
This is the best compromise I've come across so far as far as something socialists and pro-market types can both agree on as a drastic improvement. Something like Parecon may be possible yet, this just seems a little more acceptable to most people as of now. However, post-scarcity economics may still see the end of markets and the state.
Because it's essentially anarchism in an economic sense. Similar systems have worked in anarchist revolutions in Spain and Russia. Often they happened without any intellectual interference and workers didn't even have a name for what they were doing. In Argentina workers are doing this right now and it's improving living conditions. But obviously no one in a position of power in the US would ever want anything like this to happen.
Thank God they finally are. Thanks so much for this, Dr. Dorrien. For details about Economic Democracy, I would refer interested parties to David Schweickart's "After Capitalism". Wikipedia also has some good information, and I also hope to hear a lot more from Dr. Dorrien in terms of "transition". This is the sort of informative guidance we need. Thanks again.
Because basically it is another version (with a different name) of the same old command economy of communism. Some yahoo wants to spend money on what he thinks will improve what he thinks is important and he wishes to do it with our money OR by the sweat of OUR brow. Put this profressor in a ditch digging trenches or a construction job for a few weeks or months and he would see things from a working man's point of view.
Buzz, I disagree. Check out his comments in the other part to this video - The Crisis and Too Many... And anyone digging ditches and/or working construction would tell you how the labor they are providing is not squarely met with equivalent cash. The working class's pov is that their labor is underpaid, and instead contributing to someone else's profit, something I would guess Professor Dorrien shares in common with the working men and women of any profession.
Have you ever paid $1000 for a bottle of water? Of course not. Why? Because it is abundant. It's called supply and demand. Have you ever dug a ditch for a living or performed construction work? is it hard? Hell Yeah and I should know. But ditch diggers and construction workers come a dime a dozen. So you improve your knowledge and skills that are short in supply and you command a higher wage. You don't take from someone who has strove to climb out of the ditch and give to the one who..
is in the ditch. Why? Because the one who climbed out will climb back in cause that is what pays. The result is no incentive to strive and achieve and then society pays the price. That is why socialism and communism failed around the world. To change the name to economic demacracy and push it again is just plain dumb unless you plan to be the ditch digger foreman. Talking from experience, I would climb in a ditch any day of the week if I had the hope of climbing out and making more.
The phrase "some yahoo wants to spend money on what he thinks is important and he wishes to do it with our money" describes any and all politicians and ideologues and is therefore irrelevant as an argument in favour of one ideology against another. Also, only the marxist-leninist branches of communism (stalinism, Trotskyism, Maoism) expound a command economy. Economic democracy is about making sure that a worker gets an amount of buying power equal to what the work he puts out.
There is a HUGE difference between a small government and limited purse strings of politicians for things we need a small federal government to provide and a huge federal government with a blank check to provide the things they want to provide so as to gain more control at the expense of our freedom. The second never works because WE WILL JUST SLOW DOWN or stop working and so the system severely declines or collapses and no one gains. We've seen your economic democracy before
You didn't listen to me... what I said was the phrase "some yahoo wants to spend money on what he thinks is important and he wishes to do it with our money" can be said of any politician ever.
Example - "some yahoo (named obama) wants to spend money on what he thinks is important (helthcare) and he wishes to do it with our money"
or
"some yahoo (Stephen Harper) wants to spend money on what he thinks is important (get rid of the long-form census) and he wishes to do it with our money"
"some yahoo (Michael Ignatieff) wants to spend money on what he thinks is important (have Quebec recognized as a distinct society in the Canadian Constitution) and he wishes to do it with our money"
or
"some yahoo (George W. Bush) wants to spend money on what he thinks is important (invade Iraq) and he wishes to do it with our money"
Get it?
Since that statement can be used to attack ANY ideologue it is entirely meaningless and has no argumentative weight.
@HeistSpaggiari You just proved my point except you left out one little thing. Those you quoted and the ones I refer to don't want to just spend money. They want to SPEND OUR MONEY! And it's about damn time we tell them stop unless you admit to being dumb and don't know how to spend your own money. Or maybe you favor spending someone else's money (work). My comments go for both Democrat and Republicans. I DON"T CARE CAUSE I am neither and will vote for and support whoever stops them!
@gendertrouble because a free market IS a democracy. millions of people vote on the quality and prices of goods and services EVERYDAY. this guy doesn't really explain anything new.
@gendertrouble Plenty of people are talking and writing about Economic Democracy. You simply aren't paying much attention.The greatest break-through for Economic Democracy would be for people like us to wake up and take responsibility for ourselves and our communities. Get over yourself. The American Dream and the American middle-class are predictable casualties of American capitalism. If we want economic stability, we will begin now to create new jobs for our American neighbors.
If I got it right here, isn't he saying that you wouldn't have to stop private corporations and businesses from existing? So what the hell is the problem then? If you don't like cooperatives, then go work for or found a private business. Isn't the point that you can CHOOSE which one you want? Not to overthrow the other. And isn't that what's already happening? All you need is more cooperatives so that people will know about that possibility and have it in their community.
Tuuliska 4 months ago
oh, does this guy mean SOCIALISM? Like........voting yourself your neighbors wealth? Yea, lets see how long that system lasts and just how successful it is. fucking morons
AroundSun 6 months ago
@AroundSun No. Firstly, socialism isn't like that. Secondly, what he talks about is NOT socialism. He's talking about an alternative to both socialism and the current form of capitalism. In fact this is more like another form of capitalism. I'd say "new form of capitalism" but in fact it's not new at all, it's been used for decades in many places in the world. Search Google for cooperatives and you'll find how it works. And check out North Dakota for an example of a successful state bank.
Tuuliska 4 months ago
@Tuuliska "No. Firstly, socialism isn't like that."
Yes it is
"He's talking about an alternative to both socialism and the current form of capitalism"
there isn't one. you either have a free market or you don't
Co-ops can exist in free markets. If you are talking about Noam Chomsky economics then look the other way. Chomsky is a drone.
AroundSun 4 months ago
@Tuuliska
Economic democracy is the core value of socialism. A better word for economic democracy is workers' self-management. Economic democracy or self-management requires that those who work in a workplace own it--i.e. collective ownership.
Cooperatives were the first socialist movement.
GodOfTheInternets 1 month ago
@AroundSun
st, st, st, strawmaaaan.
GodOfTheInternets 1 month ago
@truevoice08
Workers can save money only if they already receive a sufficient share of total income, which is happening less and less.
And anyway, that's not the point: making an investment as an anonymous investor doesn't grant you control over the means of production, it just makes you an investor whose sole benefit is to grab the largest part of income you can, thereby repeating the scheme of exploitation, externalization of costs and overexploitation of the environment.
bouligab 8 months ago
superb, anarchistic ideals are the way to go...workers owning the means of production...more creative control and less coercion
rrutherford69 10 months ago
@rrutherford69 workers can already own the 'means of production' today. Workers can save money and make investments thereby making them capitalists. What all this discussion of economic democracy leads to is the violent expropriation of wealth from the productive class by the State.
truevoice08 9 months ago
You know Economic Democracy is socialism
And, that is why I am a socialist.
DinodudeEpic 11 months ago
@DinodudeEpic I know. And that's why I'm a capitalist.
truevoice08 9 months ago
@nc2399 I haven't watched the video yet, but is this in any way connected to David Schweikert's theory of Economic Democracy?
dhameeraa 1 year ago
His last point about the limits to economic growth and the problems of the excessive U.S. neoliberal economic lifestyle. Cooperatives are far more democratically legitimate than business corporations - but it will take time for them to be put into place. North America is very hesitant to any major change in economics, Europe has the most potential to develop cooperatives. Canada and the U.S. will be extremely slow in changing because left-wing politics is very taboo in North America.
rfavro 2 years ago 3
This is the best compromise I've come across so far as far as something socialists and pro-market types can both agree on as a drastic improvement. Something like Parecon may be possible yet, this just seems a little more acceptable to most people as of now. However, post-scarcity economics may still see the end of markets and the state.
wcropp1 2 years ago 2
Because it's essentially anarchism in an economic sense. Similar systems have worked in anarchist revolutions in Spain and Russia. Often they happened without any intellectual interference and workers didn't even have a name for what they were doing. In Argentina workers are doing this right now and it's improving living conditions. But obviously no one in a position of power in the US would ever want anything like this to happen.
Ril74 2 years ago
Thank God they finally are. Thanks so much for this, Dr. Dorrien. For details about Economic Democracy, I would refer interested parties to David Schweickart's "After Capitalism". Wikipedia also has some good information, and I also hope to hear a lot more from Dr. Dorrien in terms of "transition". This is the sort of informative guidance we need. Thanks again.
davidlkendall 2 years ago
Why aren't more people talking about this as a real alternative?
gendertrouble 2 years ago 19
Because basically it is another version (with a different name) of the same old command economy of communism. Some yahoo wants to spend money on what he thinks will improve what he thinks is important and he wishes to do it with our money OR by the sweat of OUR brow. Put this profressor in a ditch digging trenches or a construction job for a few weeks or months and he would see things from a working man's point of view.
Buzzz46 2 years ago
Buzz, I disagree. Check out his comments in the other part to this video - The Crisis and Too Many... And anyone digging ditches and/or working construction would tell you how the labor they are providing is not squarely met with equivalent cash. The working class's pov is that their labor is underpaid, and instead contributing to someone else's profit, something I would guess Professor Dorrien shares in common with the working men and women of any profession.
nc2399 2 years ago 5
Have you ever paid $1000 for a bottle of water? Of course not. Why? Because it is abundant. It's called supply and demand. Have you ever dug a ditch for a living or performed construction work? is it hard? Hell Yeah and I should know. But ditch diggers and construction workers come a dime a dozen. So you improve your knowledge and skills that are short in supply and you command a higher wage. You don't take from someone who has strove to climb out of the ditch and give to the one who..
Buzzz46 2 years ago
is in the ditch. Why? Because the one who climbed out will climb back in cause that is what pays. The result is no incentive to strive and achieve and then society pays the price. That is why socialism and communism failed around the world. To change the name to economic demacracy and push it again is just plain dumb unless you plan to be the ditch digger foreman. Talking from experience, I would climb in a ditch any day of the week if I had the hope of climbing out and making more.
Buzzz46 2 years ago
@Buzzz46
The phrase "some yahoo wants to spend money on what he thinks is important and he wishes to do it with our money" describes any and all politicians and ideologues and is therefore irrelevant as an argument in favour of one ideology against another. Also, only the marxist-leninist branches of communism (stalinism, Trotskyism, Maoism) expound a command economy. Economic democracy is about making sure that a worker gets an amount of buying power equal to what the work he puts out.
HeistSpaggiari 1 year ago
@HeistSpaggiari
There is a HUGE difference between a small government and limited purse strings of politicians for things we need a small federal government to provide and a huge federal government with a blank check to provide the things they want to provide so as to gain more control at the expense of our freedom. The second never works because WE WILL JUST SLOW DOWN or stop working and so the system severely declines or collapses and no one gains. We've seen your economic democracy before
Buzzz46 1 year ago
@Buzzz46
You didn't listen to me... what I said was the phrase "some yahoo wants to spend money on what he thinks is important and he wishes to do it with our money" can be said of any politician ever.
Example - "some yahoo (named obama) wants to spend money on what he thinks is important (helthcare) and he wishes to do it with our money"
or
"some yahoo (Stephen Harper) wants to spend money on what he thinks is important (get rid of the long-form census) and he wishes to do it with our money"
HeistSpaggiari 1 year ago
@Buzzz46
(con't) ...
or
"some yahoo (Michael Ignatieff) wants to spend money on what he thinks is important (have Quebec recognized as a distinct society in the Canadian Constitution) and he wishes to do it with our money"
or
"some yahoo (George W. Bush) wants to spend money on what he thinks is important (invade Iraq) and he wishes to do it with our money"
Get it?
Since that statement can be used to attack ANY ideologue it is entirely meaningless and has no argumentative weight.
HeistSpaggiari 1 year ago
@HeistSpaggiari You just proved my point except you left out one little thing. Those you quoted and the ones I refer to don't want to just spend money. They want to SPEND OUR MONEY! And it's about damn time we tell them stop unless you admit to being dumb and don't know how to spend your own money. Or maybe you favor spending someone else's money (work). My comments go for both Democrat and Republicans. I DON"T CARE CAUSE I am neither and will vote for and support whoever stops them!
Buzzz46 1 year ago
@gendertrouble because a free market IS a democracy. millions of people vote on the quality and prices of goods and services EVERYDAY. this guy doesn't really explain anything new.
AroundSun 6 months ago
@gendertrouble Plenty of people are talking and writing about Economic Democracy. You simply aren't paying much attention.The greatest break-through for Economic Democracy would be for people like us to wake up and take responsibility for ourselves and our communities. Get over yourself. The American Dream and the American middle-class are predictable casualties of American capitalism. If we want economic stability, we will begin now to create new jobs for our American neighbors.
davidlkendall 2 months ago 2