Kialo requires cookies to work correctly.
Should all companies be entirely owned by their workers?
All companies should be entirely owned by their workers.
The worker cooperative promotes democratic participation and education in running a business for the workers.
Worker ownership encourages innovation.
Worker owned companies tend to be
more economically prosperous
than other enterprises.
Worker-owned businesses are less likely to cause negative externalities in the communities they exist in, because the owners have to live in those communities as well.
An economy based on worker cooperatives will spread wealth more evenly, equitably, and justly because those who are doing the work get to decide how they should be paid for their work. There are no absentee stock holders, uninvolved in the business, who need to be paid.
If all companies were entirely owned by their workers, there would no longer be a stock market in which to invest in companies. The absence of a stock market would have serious consequences.
A state enforcing worker ownership of companies would be a violation of economic freedom.
Businesses that can't sell equity would struggle to raise capital and thus it would be harder to start a new business in an economy based only on worker cooperatives.
Shareholder-owned companies are more transparent than companies that are not publicly traded like worker cooperatives. Therefore, the latter company structure makes it easier to commit fraud.
Worker cooperatives are less efficient because they place a premium on job security.
Should there be a law determining how domestic companies should treat their workers in developing countries?
Should All Human Interaction be Voluntary?
Should politicians and public servants be required to be entirely transparent?