Socialist Wins Buffalo Mayoral Primary

Albion · Jun 24, 2021

gaara4158 said:
To be fair, I do see some inaccurate definitions of socialism being provided here, so I’ll clarify. I’m referring to @morningstar2651 and myself, who have both defined socialism as worker ownership of the means of production.

But surely you know that's true only in theory. It's like saying that you and I each own a part of the city park. Well, we do not. The government, or the governors, own it and control it. With Socialism, however, it's not just park space that they own (in the name of the people, of course) but the "means of production, " the factories, mines, transportation, etc. etc.

I described earlier how we might achieve socialism organically, as opposed to a top-down state-imposed socialism. It included the nationalization of basic vital services, something we’ve already done to a degree, and we would just expand on that.

This is generally what self-described socialists advocate for in the current term, since it’s the first viable step in the direction of widespread worker-owned production. It’s not the direct implementation of socialism, but it’s on the socialist agenda.

But this only verifies what I was saying about Socialism. If you want to talk about a government that is committed to Socialism but isn't entirely there yet (as perhaps that mayoral candidate in Buffalo will find herself in) then Socialism remains what I said...but the particular governing unit just hasn't completed its takeover at the moment.

gaara4158 · Jun 24, 2021

Albion said:
But surely you know that's true only in theory. It's like saying that you and I each own a part of the city park. Well, we do not. The government, or the governors, own it and control it. With Socialism, however, it's not just park space that they own (in the name of the people, of course) but the "means of production, " the factories, mines, transportation, etc. etc.

You seem to be suggesting that the only possible implementation of socialism is total ownership of industry and infrastructure by the government, and anything short of that is either not socialism or doomed to become it. Is this your position?

morningstar2651 · Jul 7, 2021

98cwitr said:
Then help me understand a bit more, because it seems, semantically, they already do (I'm a worker). I do things that produce things, if I don't do things then things aren't produced by me, therefore I control the means of production to some degree. What do you consider "control"?

Banks have workers
Governments have workers
Investors provide funds to pay those workers

So I'm failing to see how workers are getting a rotten deal here. It's voluntary contract between employer and employee. I am compensated well, and I have zero issue making ends meet. What's the issue? Under capitalism, and in a free society, there's literally nothing stopping you from starting your own business and being your own boss.

Control is the ability to make the decisions about what gets made, and how the profits get distributed. This control is typically given to the officers or the board of directors of a company, which rewards themselves heavily and minimizes the rewards given to the people who do the actual work.

For example, the CEO of Activision laid off 200 people and paid himself a $200,000,000 bonus in the same week. Imagine if you were a worker at that company...now imagine that you are given the power to vote on these kinds of decisions. Would you vote to lay yourself off? Would you vote to give $200 million to one of your co-workers?

How many workers would vote to lay themselves off to outsource the factory to China?

My alternative is this: Every worker is a member of the board. There is no more employer/employee relationship - every employee is also the employer. The workers collectively decide what to work on and how to distribute the revenue. We've had the idea of self-organizing teams in software development for a while. It's a similar concept.

You should look into worker cooperatives - they're a different way of structuring a company so everyone that works at the company is a co-owner of the company.

morningstar2651 · Jul 7, 2021

98cwitr said:
Under capitalism, and in a free society, there's literally nothing stopping you from starting your own business and being your own boss.

How many people do you think can afford to quit their jobs to launch a startup?

It's not feasible if they're living paycheck-to-paycheck.

Within capitalism, we have two classes of people. We have the working class that lives by exchanging their labor for wages, and we have the owning class that makes money by owning things. They don't need to work. They live off the surplus value they extract from the labor of the working class. These are the slumlords and robber barons. It's the landlord whose mortgage you pay in return for temporary accommodations. It's the business owner that steals their employee's wages and tips.

In the pandemic, we have a new term for the working class - the "essential workers"

If the owning class doesn't show up to the office, everything can still function just fine...but if the essential workers stop showing up, then the work doesn't get done. A lot of people are starting to realize that the owning class are just leeches that don't contribute to a business's success.

ArmenianJohn · Jul 7, 2021

hislegacy said:
Yep - there is a whole lot of people NOT in favor of "Democratic Socialized Leanings".

It just doesn't work.

Actually there is a whole lot of us who ARE in favor of "Democratic Socialist Leanings". It does, in fact, work - and works very well for certain things we need. And that's why she won the election.

Ken-1122 · Jul 7, 2021

morningstar2651 said:
How many people do you think can afford to quit their jobs to launch a startup?

It's not feasible if they're living paycheck-to-paycheck.

Not many. But who is gonna invest their time and capital to start a company, just to give it to the laborers? I wouldn't do that; would you?

morningstar2651 said:
Within capitalism, we have two classes of people. We have the working class that lives by exchanging their labor for wages, and we have the owning class that makes money by owning things. They don't need to work. They live off the surplus value they extract from the labor of the working class.

What happens when the company has a bad year and there is no surplus? The owning class does not get paid; do you think the workers would agree to such an arrangement?

Ken-1122 · Jul 7, 2021

morningstar2651 said:
My alternative is this: Every worker is a member of the board. There is no more employer/employee relationship - every employee is also the employer. The workers collectively decide what to work on and how to distribute the revenue. We've had the idea of self-organizing teams in software development for a while. It's a similar concept.

If such an idea worked, more people would actually do it. Perhaps there is a reason this rarely happens. Nobody should be forced to run their business this way.

cow451 · Jul 7, 2021

Albion said:
But surely you know that's true only in theory. It's like saying that you and I each own a part of the city park. Well, we do not. The government, or the governors, own it and control it. With Socialism, however, it's not just park space that they own (in the name of the people, of course) but the "means of production, " the factories, mines, transportation, etc. etc.
But this only verifies what I was saying about Socialism. If you want to talk about a government that is committed to Socialism but isn't entirely there yet (as perhaps that mayoral candidate in Buffalo will find herself in) then Socialism remains what I said...but the particular governing unit just hasn't completed its takeover at the moment.

Let me know when Buffalo takes over some industry (assuming their are any).

Judging by the recent history, the Buffalo Bills football team may have the right name, but wrong mascot.

iluvatar5150 · Jul 7, 2021

Ken-1122 said:
Not many. But who is gonna invest their time and capital to start a company, just to give it to the laborers? I wouldn't do that; would you?

List of employee-owned companies - Wikipedia

Perusing the list of US companies (which is a small subset of the 4,000 they claim at the top of the page), I know several people who've gone to work at Certain Affinity over the last few years and from everything I hear, they love it.

What happens when the company has a bad year and there is no surplus? The owning class does not get paid; do you think the workers would agree to such an arrangement?

The owning class can absolutely get paid during a bad year. But either way, it doesn't seem like you understand how these arrangements are structured. The employees still work and earn wages.

Ken-1122 · Jul 7, 2021

iluvatar5150 said:
List of employee-owned companies - Wikipedia

Perusing the list of US companies (which is a small subset of the 4,000 they claim at the top of the page), I know several people who've gone to work at Certain Affinity over the last few years and from everything I hear, they love it.

The owning class can absolutely get paid during a bad year. But either way, it doesn't seem like you understand how these arrangements are structured. The employees still work and earn wages.

My responses were not directed at Employee owned companies, I was commenting on "morningstar's" idea where every employee is a member of the board, and have actual control of the company.

hislegacy · Jul 7, 2021

morningstar2651 said:
My alternative is this: Every worker is a member of the board. There is no more employer/employee relationship - every employee is also the employer. The workers collectively decide what to work on and how to distribute the revenue.

Help me understand - call you illustrate your thought with a medium or large US corporation operating like that. Thank you.

Bradskii · Jul 7, 2021

Ken-1122 said:
Not many. But who is gonna invest their time and capital to start a company, just to give it to the laborers? I wouldn't do that; would you?

What happens when the company has a bad year and there is no surplus? The owning class does not get paid; do you think the workers would agree to such an arrangement?

I worked for a small company a few years ago. Run by a young guy that held 90% of the shares. The other 10% were held by two associates. I was always trying to persuade him to release a few percent and offer them to those workers who were instrumental in the company being a success (and that was going to include me obviously). I told him that if you had shares in the business then you'd feel part of the business rather than just a 9 - 5 worker earning a pay cheque.

Fat chance. And he sold the company a couple of years after I left and made an absolute fortune. If it had been me I'd be writing this in my 50' yacht in Monaco right now. But he started another company and is still working 80+ hours a week. Go figure.

Ken-1122 · Jul 7, 2021

Bradskii said:
I worked for a small company a few years ago. Run by a young guy that held 90% of the shares. The other 10% were held by two associates. I was always trying to persuade him to release a few percent and offer them to those workers who were instrumental in the company being a success (and that was going to include me obviously). I told him that if you had shares in the business then you'd feel part of the business rather than just a 9 - 5 worker earning a pay cheque.

Fat chance. And he sold the company a couple of years after I left and made an absolute fortune. If it had been me I'd be writing this in my 50' yacht in Monaco right now. But he started another company and is still working 80+ hours a week. Go figure.

I worked for a company that had a profit sharing system set up, when the company did good we got a yearly bonus; but when the company did poorly, we got no bonus at all. The pay was lower than our competitors because the bonus we got was supposed to balance everything out to the pay being equal. After 2 years in a row with no bonus due to poor sales, but dealing with the lower pay, I quit and went to work for the competitor because I preferred the predictable higher salary over the unpredictable profit sharing system

Gene2memE · Jul 7, 2021

Ken-1122 said:
What happens when the company has a bad year and there is no surplus? The owning class does not get paid;

Except that's not what happens in reality.

In all bar very, very basic enterprise examples - or bankruptcy - the owners of capital continue to extract value from the company regardless of whether a profit has been achieved. Protection for the ownership class is baked into the structures of modern companies - it's enshrined in regulation AND reinforced by convention and practice.

Look at, for instance, where the economic burden of the COVID-19 crisis fell. It was disproportionately on workers - and even more disproportionately on workers outside the traditional salaried 9-5, five day per week structure. Meanwhile, the ownership class (business owners & shareholders) have seen their returns on investment increase.

morningstar2651 · Jul 7, 2021

hislegacy said:
Help me understand - call you illustrate your thought with a medium or large US corporation operating like that. Thank you.

Let me google that for you.

Member Directory – U.S. Federation of Worker Cooperatives

morningstar2651 · Jul 7, 2021

The board of directors for CD Projekt Red overworked their employees, lied to their investors, tanked the company's stock prices (29% drop), and rewarded themselves with $4-6 million bonuses per board member.

The former CEO of WeWork tanked the company's IPO, ran the company into the ground, and was paid $1.7 billion to step down as CEO. They paid him over a billion dollars for destroying the company, which also laid off 2,400 employees, none of which received billions in compensation for the work they did to keep the company running in spite of management.

Putting a handful of people at the top in charge of the major decisions results in the employers exploiting the employees.

Ken-1122 · Jul 7, 2021

Gene2memE said:
Except that's not what happens in reality.

In all bar very, very basic enterprise examples - or bankruptcy - the owners of capital continue to extract value from the company regardless of whether a profit has been achieved. Protection for the ownership class is baked into the structures of modern companies - it's enshrined in regulation AND reinforced by convention and practice.

Look at, for instance, where the economic burden of the COVID-19 crisis fell. It was disproportionately on workers - and even more disproportionately on workers outside the traditional salaried 9-5, five day per week structure. Meanwhile, the ownership class (business owners & shareholders) have seen their returns on investment increase.

50% of all new business fail within the first 5 years. Care to answer my question?
50% of Businesses Fail Within the First Five Years. Here Are The Top Reasons Why.

morningstar2651 · Jul 7, 2021

Ken-1122 said:
50% of all new business fail within the first 5 years. Care to answer my question?
50% of Businesses Fail Within the First Five Years. Here Are The Top Reasons Why.

Wow, it sounds like capitalism isn't terribly successful for most people. Maybe we should look for some alternative.

Pommer · Jul 8, 2021

The Lords of the land* used to have pitched battles with their serfs and peasants and that was fun for a while but now they fight with money and business.

At least back-in-the-day they actually had skin in the game.

The peons get what they always get.

*Middle Ages

morningstar2651 · Jul 8, 2021

Ken-1122 said:
If such an idea worked, more people would actually do it.

Yeah. That's my goal. That's why I'm explaining how it works to more people. It works really well and the success rate is on-par or better than the conventional firms you're probably used to in Capitalism.

Socialist Wins Buffalo Mayoral Primary

Facilitator

Gen Alpha Dad

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Politically Liberal Christian Fundamentalist

Newbie

Newbie

Standing with Ukraine.

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Memories pre 2021

Can you tell a green field from a cold steel rail?

Newbie

Newbie

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Newbie

Senior Veteran

CoPacEtiC SkEpTic

Senior Veteran

Similar threads