Vaush Discusses the Merits of Socialism vs Social Democracy

[DocWatts]

1 minute ago, Leo Gura said:

Not nearly good enough because that is a tiny island within a capitalist system. That is not the same as replacing the whole capitalist system in which that island survives.

Part of the what makes Market Socialism more workable than some of its proposed alternatives is that it shares much of the framework of the capitalist system. With the exception of Essentials such as Health Care and Education, it still uses a Capitalist market framework to produce and distribute most goods and services.

The key difference is that democracy would be expanded to the workplace (you know, the places we spend half of our waking lives), rather than workplaces being run as an autocracy where workers have little to no say in how their business is run. There's no reason why this couldn't be gradually implemented under a Social Democracy through legislative means, including incentives for worker owned businesses, and labor laws granting workers increased representation in their places of employment. 

As to de-commodification, there is some debate as to what is considered an Essential (transportation? housing? utilities?), but even in its more extensive versions, there's a general understanding that de-commodification should be reserved for things that the market does a poor job of supplying, whether due to market failures or monopolistic business tactics (as anyone stuck forking money over to Comcast can attest to).

If Social Democracy is a humanized version of Capitalism, Market Socialism seems like an eventual extension of Social Democracy (though of course not the only one possible).

[Leo Gura]

@DocWatts Explain how you will replace stock markets and venture capital and banking with worker co-ops.

[DocWatts]

4 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

@DocWatts Explain how you will replace stock markets and venture capital and banking with worker co-ops.

Couldn't institutions like banks (whether worker co-cops or credit unions) provide many of the functions of Venture Capitalists? Is there any reason why investment in a company has to come from individuals with hundreds of millions of dollars, rather than through publicly owned or worker run institutions? Couldn't public grants and low interest loans for pro-social business also cover a portion of that as well? Is the idea of a worker owned business whose model is to invest in other businesses that wildly unrealistic?

As to the stock market, while it does serve an important function under our current system, the resulting legal requirement to prioritize maximizing profit over any other consideration has led to a host of societal problems, of which I'm sure you're well aware.

I would propose that the stock market would still exist, but rather than investors getting to dictate how a company is run when it goes public, they would gain some form of Representation in the decision making process of the company. Perhaps boards of directors might be made up of something like %40 representing the interests of Investors, and %60 representing the workers. Under many Social Democracies, companies have a legal requirement to include worker representation on thier boards of directors. What I propose would simply be an expansion of this. Obviously this would only apply to co-ops that decide to go public under this sytem.

If either of these two ideas are unworkable in your view, I'd be interested to hear why that's the case.

And again I would argue that the system as a whole is an evolution of Capitalism and Social Democracy, rather than a complete restructuring of society. Or you could perhaps think of it as a democratization of the current system.

Edited January 16, 2021 by DocWatts