You mean in communism? I’m no expert but I believe it’s the workers, even though “owning” doesn’t mean quite the same as we use it now.
Comment on The FTC isn’t too happy with Microsoft’s Activision Blizzard layoffs
MxM111@kbin.social 9 months agoIn any place where state ownership of means of manufacturing was implemented it lead to dictatorship or dictatorship like state. So, one can see how one can confuse them. But no, I do not confuse them, for one is economic system, and another is political.
So, let me ask, in that model that you describe, who owns the means of manufacturing?
bartolomeo@suppo.fi 9 months ago
MxM111@kbin.social 9 months ago
“Workers” is too abstract. Which workers? How is it handled? How do you start new business? Who/how it is paid? Who gets the profit? In what proportions? The natural solution is to have state ownership and saying “the state is the people”, but this is exactly what was done in, say USSR. And it does not work well.
Ookami38@sh.itjust.works 9 months ago
Why must the state own anything, for it to be a more equitable situation? The people who do the work should own the work, all getting a say in what happens, in terms of what they’re doing, where they’re going, and who’s getting fired. The closest thing to “owning” an individual would have is a person, or likely a team, functioning as spokespersons for negotiating with the state or other companies, but only to communicate how the workers have chosen to conduct business, the only real power they have being communication.
MxM111@kbin.social 9 months ago
So Unions under capitalism?
Ookami38@sh.itjust.works 9 months ago
This is, yes, one of the options my post allows for.
MxM111@kbin.social 9 months ago
So, we have it now, then? Or are you advocating for forced Unionization?
corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 9 months ago
Healthcare.
Ookami38@sh.itjust.works 9 months ago
Why must the state own anything -with regards to the conpany-…