Truth To Power wrote:An example would be the 19th century American frontier economy of family farms.
Family farms? Did they compete with each other for sales? Hardly what could reasonably be called "an economy".
No, others have wrongly disputed our correct use of dictionary definitions of the term.
What was the origin of that meaning of "socialism"?
Marx was wrong, it is not advantageous but useless, as bitter historical experience has shown, and it is not inevitable but infeasible; Marx is not the arbiter of word usage; and Marxism != socialism.
What the heck. I'll let you hold that opinion if it suits you.
Wrong. Socialism is collective ownership, not worker control.
And state ownership is not "collective ownership".
Not really. It can sometimes survive, but rarely thrives.
Given the degree of practical implementation of socialist theory, which is admittedly very low, I'll let you hold that opinion too.
Mondragon is a VOLUNTARY cooperative corporation, not a compulsory socialist society.
Who says it has to be compulsory to be socialism?
Voluntary cooperatives can of course work, such as the Israeli kibbutzim or traditional family farms of the American frontier.
Yes, and they can be socialism.
That's just false, as the recent collapse of Mondragon's Fagor electrical appliance manufacturing subsidiary proves.
The loss of a battle is not the loss of the war. They remain successful.
Mondragon owns land. If it had not bought land decades ago, it could not have survived.
Not being on the Mondragon team, I couldn't say, but I can say that it is very common for capitalist businesses to own the land they occupy too. But even if you are correct here, it certainly doesn't reflect on the viability of Mondragon or socialism. It's just something you think you can use to make a negative comment about them.
Socialism can work as a voluntary cooperative institution like Mondragon, the kibbutzim, or the traditional family farm. It cannot work as the basis for an entire economy, and has never done so.
And what are you going to offer as "proof"? Venezuela? LOL!!!
Venezuela is just the latest example of socialism's failure: even with the advantage of immense oil rents, it only lasted a couple of decades before collapsing.
LOL!!! Venezuela was constantly under various kinds of attack from the U.S. and other capitalist countries. In addition, they failed to diversify the economy but kept it focused on oil, thinking it would always provide for a good economy. Then the price of world oil crashed.
Given those conditions it strikes me as a bit premature to make your claim socialism's failure. Capitalism struggled for about 100 years to figure out what worked. Should we say capitalism failed too? No, capitalism persisted as socialism will and will eventually figure it out too.
But aside from that, the thread is about democracy and capitalism. And if we limit "democracy" to voting every few years, then the two have shown they can coexist. But "compatible"? Not really. At least not without successful brainwashing propaganda. Most people will eventually reject any proposal of neglect and undermining of rights and freedoms in order to allow capitalist businesses to continue to make bigger and bigger profits. And most capitalist businesses will not be able to survive without growing profits. But Worker Self-Directed Enterprises (WSDEs)? That's different. They don't require such continual growth.
Sens. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., and Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., along with freshman New Hampshire Democrat Maggie Hassan, introduced two bills late last week aimed at expanding the number of small employee-owned ventures.
From The Vermont Digger:
“By expanding employee ownership and participation, we can create stronger companies in Vermont and throughout this country, prevent job losses and improve working conditions for struggling employees,” Sanders said in a statement. “Simply put, when employees have an ownership stake in their company, they will not ship their own jobs to China to increase their profits, they will be more productive, and they will earn a better living.”
In a statement, Leahy agreed with Sanders, saying “growth and good-paying jobs in these high-performing companies have benefited employee owners, their companies and our communities.”
One of the bills — dubbed the Work Act — borrows the model of the Vermont Employee Ownership Center, a nonprofit that helps businesses facilitate the transfer of ownership to their employees. In 2016, the center helped two companies become employee-owned, while three others became worker cooperatives.
The newly introduced legislation would provide $45 million in federal funding to help states create and expand employee ownership centers.
A second bill introduced last week would create a U.S. Employee Ownership Bank, which would be allocated $500 million to offer low-interest loans and assistance to help workers purchase businesses through stock purchases or plans to form a cooperative.
Employee-owned businesses have higher productivity, morale, sales and wages, according to analysts. Rutgers University, which has studied the topic extensively, has found that employee ownership boosted company productivity by an average of 4 percent, while profits went up 14 percent.
https://vtdigger.org/2017/05/17/senator ... ationwide/
Government is properly for people, and money is not a form of speech.