agitatedpotato

Being able to choose either of those myself is unarguably the freest. The real question is the conflicting rights. If the right to own guns is conflicting with the right to life liberty and the persuit of happiness then we need to find a resolution. Legally speaking when two rights collide like this the they typically try and preserve as much of both rights as possible. Thats not what every gun control advocate wants though. Everyone has a different version of how it should shake out.

So the Department of Defense tells the elected leaders of the country that the Department of Defense is keeping secrets from them and will continue to do so, therefore the people who are actually in charge are . . . The aliens? Not the DoD?

Google Mondragon corporation and you can see a co op scaling up over history. You dont have to imagine, it's already happened and you can read about it.

Edit: and here's all their industrial co-ops under the one large Mondragon co-op. https://www.mondragon-corporation.com/en/we-do#negocioIndustria

Id imagine friction between sock and shoe plays a bigger part there than friction can play with genitals and underwear. At least I hope so, I pity the poor bastards who got just as much friction there on a dialy basis lol.

Co ops directly reward increased production, increased production would lead to increased surplus, and the surplus is democratically allocated, weather that's bonuses or investments, raises even if they see the increase is surplus as permanent. All of thats extra money that everyone gets to decide what to do with. Thats more incentive than ive seen more than most workers in top down systems get.

All I said was 10 workers produce 100 dollars of surplus. Nowhere does that imply each produced 10 dollars. Only that their voting power commands 10 dollars of surplus. Read it again.

Really weird to carpet bomb a country BEFORE doing anything about hostages that were taken there especially when the country is smaller than the state of Rhode Island by almost a factor of 10. Other countries have already gotten people freed, Israel was busy putting the hostages in danger.

Based on the drama around antiwork after the fox news spot I believe it. I've seen admins install mods into already moderated subreddits simply because they weren't as reddit would like them, profitable.

This is a proof of theory, the same way capitalist economists show what options and game theory incentives exist. Its quite literally a textbook example. What I said about co ops is not a new claim, and im not gonna research the exact financials of the mondragon co op to make an example on lemmy lmfao. Also nowhere does my post suggest each worker is paid the same, thats not what surplus means. Nowhere do I assume the number of workers effects the market either, it effects production. Wow you really went out of your way to misread that.

This problem could be solved with a co-op structure even within a free market. If ten workers in a co op produce $100 bucks of extra money, they all get voting power over ten buck, and as long as any new hires can carry their weight so everyone still gets ten bucks surplus to command, they will hire them if you follow the game theory incentives. Once companies get big enough to have diminishing returns, like a new employee could only produce 5 bucks of surplus, then hiring that person would make everyone have a smaller piece of the pie (adding him to our first ten means the share drops to 105/11 or 9.5 dollars.) If the pie(surplus) all goes to one person they can keep adding workers until the worker doesn't produce any surplus over the cost, bloating the departments. Because of this co ops tend to expand to peak productivity, (surplus per worker), rather that peak output (produce as much as we can until it becomes unprofitable to produce)

So either you suck at forecasting your own production, or you suck at production enough to not hit your forecast? And you want other people to pay you more because you don't have a good handle on your buisness?