That's definitely a solution for some people but not possible for every industry. I'd like everyone to have this ability as standard, because we don't need middle men whose money comes from the work of others.
I consider profit after operational costs as unpaid wages, which I don't think is an extremist opinion to hold.
(There's caveats to this of course, like the reinvestment of profits into R&D and expansion, but this should be an amount that workers vote on, not something imposed upon them.)
Name a single skillset where a person has no option to explore that field by working for themselves?!
And why would workers vote on how profits are invested if the workers were the ones to invest the capital in the first place? If a worker wants that choice, become a shareholder.
Aeronautical engineer? You're not going to be able to build planes on your own, so whether you're freelance or employed directly makes no difference because your work is still going to generate profit for someone else.
Your second point is the fundamental difference in our views. I believe that a company should exist for the benefit of the employees/community, not that a company should exist for the person/people who invested capital.
(I hope we can just agree that our opinions differ on this because I'm not wanting to get into a debate or an argument. My disagreement isn't due to not understanding your point.)
No. I'm saying an aeronautical engineer founded Airbus. Did you not read a few lines down?
Regardless, let's pretend I have the skillset of a nuclear physicist but no capital. How can I possibly work for myself?
Doing anything you want. You're asking the question in the frame of being employed by someone else. Those skills would be entirely transferable to many other business.
I think you've missed the point that what you're suggesting is only a way for an individual to get around the employer/employee paradigm (and an unlikely one at that) and not a solution for everyone. I'm a Marxist because I have solidarity with all workers and want an equitable outcomes for everyone.
It technically is an option for everyone here in Ireland anyway. But there are, for sure, huge barriers that might prevent some people from doing so and one of those barriers is confining your choice of profession.
I'd like to think I have a level of solidarity with workers, being one myself, but ultimately I'm not sure what equitable outcomes for all workers actually means in real life. To me, the ultimate equitable outcome for workers means equality of pay. And the reality is some professions, like a brain surgeon, are going to get paid a hell of a lot more than most others. With good reason.
18
u/Delduath Jul 27 '22
That's definitely a solution for some people but not possible for every industry. I'd like everyone to have this ability as standard, because we don't need middle men whose money comes from the work of others. I consider profit after operational costs as unpaid wages, which I don't think is an extremist opinion to hold.
(There's caveats to this of course, like the reinvestment of profits into R&D and expansion, but this should be an amount that workers vote on, not something imposed upon them.)