"Market Socialism is an economic system in which the means of production are owned by the workers in each company (meaning in general that "profits" in each company are distributed between them: profit sharing) and the production is not centrally planned but mediated through the market . Its central idea is that the market is not a mechanism exclusive to capitalism and that it is fully compatible with collective worker ownership over the means of production — which is one of the fundamental principles of socialism.
A worker cooperative, is a cooperative that is owned and self-managed by its workers. This control may be exercised in a number of ways. A cooperative enterprise may mean a firm where every worker-owner participates in decision-making in a democratic fashion, or it may refer to one in which management is elected by every worker-owner, and it can refer to a situation in which managers are considered, and treated as, workers of the firm. In traditional forms of worker cooperative, all shares are held by the workforce with no outside or consumer owners, and each member has one voting share. In practice, control by worker-owners may be exercised through individual, collective, or majority ownership by the workforce; or the retention of individual, collective, or majority voting rights (exercised on a one-member one-vote basis). A worker cooperative, therefore, has the characteristic that each of its workers owns one share, and all shares are owned by the workers.
By what measure has market socialism historically been more successful than socialism with central planning? Do I need to remind you that Yugoslavia had a bunch of different problems and stopped existing, just like the rest of the eastern bloc?
Market socialism needs to filtered to "peoples capitalism".
Michael Allen
...
Wyatt Phillips
If Yugoslavia was ever better off than the Warsaw Pact, it was because it played nice with the Western powers, and it saw what that gets you when it got royally fucked by the IMF.
Angel Martin
pick one.
Christopher Walker
Damn, why didn't Marx think of this?
Jace Cook
...
Parker Richardson
Yep, they even fail develop nuclear weapons and literally get assraped by NATO.
Anthony Bailey
Yugoslavia was not market socialist but only had some elements of it. There was large scale state intervention and regulation and the government mishandled their finances. And the reason why there is no Yugoslavia anymore was not economic but nationalism and civil war between different ethnic groups.
It's been almost half a century since Cybersyn and Glushkov and you drooling retards still think cybernetic socialism is not viable? It's been possible for the longest time.
The main advantage of Yugoslavia was that it allowed more social liberalism than most ML states. Economically it was totally doomed though, as soon as the West couldn't use it as a buffer against THE EMPIRE OF EVIL they could fuck it up.
But we can throw him in ""CYBER GULAG"" for reeducation.
Oliver Jackson
...
Matthew Murphy
(different marksucc from OP) Look dude I love cybernetics as much as the next guy but there's exactly no reason why artists and small-time artisans can't produce for exchange value in addition to their main work administrated by a cybernetic planned economy. Planning the production and distribution of artisanal items is borderline autistic at best and horrifically dictatorial at worst.
Ethan Adams
Bruv if youre worries about artists you can just set up a one man coop that people can donate time to and which pays the normal rate of work (max 24 hours a day or less). That way digital painters can subsist on donations and produce their non-scarce goods, programmers can program shit, etc. And physical art ought not to be sold anyway. Other than that, physical art commisions are just a service just like a manicure and thus will be handled in that exact same manner. You shouldnt allow an arbitrary part of society to produce for exchange, this just opens up so many loopholes for no real reason. Or to give an example: There is no fucking reason Dalí should be able to sell paintings for thousands annual wages just because he is famous. Artistry is work just like anything else.
Also if you havent noticed you dont have to plan litterally everything in a planned economy, despite what the name makes you think.
Christopher Phillips
Except this shit can be organised easily through a cybernetic system with labour vouchers: you contact the relevant artist/artisan syndicate and commission the artwork, you are charged a certain amount of labour credit and the artist in question receives a pre-determined quantity of credit as pay.
Adam Perry
Market Socialism is revisionism, and Revisionism leads to the restoration of Capitalism.
People can have hobbies and create shit in there hobbies, they just can’t sell that shit. Besides copywright is gay.
But one of the main justifications for those reforms was the serious problems they were having with consumer goods.
Carter Taylor
goddamn can you mouthbreathers shut the fuck up is your only argument "uhhh you want to centrally plan ART" and do you uphold your snowflake version of socialism just cause of "muh small-time artisans"? get a fucking grip, goddamn
Lucas Williams
It's pretty typical petite bourgeois ideology really. It seems to be the basis of most reactionary movements. It's no coincidence that the nazi party was full of the fuckers.
Angel Parker
Excuse me while I execute this well-accomplished medical researcher for hitting on the same girl I like. Don't worry, it's just socialism, no market!
Are market "socialists" just schizos with no actual refutation of economic planning? I can understand critiquing ML but this just seems childish and your argument against ML is that it's not capitalist enough.
Brayden Scott
fixed pricing will inevitable lead to a situation like in venezuela am, where subsidized products are smuggled en masse out of the country. venezuela is also an example that whether or not the economy is centrally planned is NOT a defining factor whether an economy is socialist or not, socialism = collective ownership of the means production (which is only true with some parts of the economy in venezuela) and thats it.
and other repeating your stupid mantras bring some fucking arguments why marked socialism ain't superior, it is supposed to be a scientific world-view and not a religion you fucking faggots.
Jordan Diaz
...
Aaron Richardson
way to deflect… besides venezuela calling itself socialist and is considered such by some, central planning always comes with fixed prices, at least that was the case in every centrally planned economy that yet existed.
and fixed prices mean there will be smuggling on the borders (unless you hermetically close the borders, which is an expensive undertaking - e.g. venezuela appearently wasn't able to prevent smuggling).
don't want to sound trotzkyist here, but unless you have a world revolution, or at least enough other socialist trade-partners, which was the case for COMECON countries, your centrally planned economy is a pipe dream.
Caleb Davis
I'm not cosigning the nebulous concept of market socialism, but I will defend the utility of co-ops. Over the time period since 2013 to 2016 unionization in the US private sector was below 10%, and falling by a paltry amount of around 0.1%yearly (to be honest at this point, it is hard to fall precipitously with how low it is).
Over the same time period, worker's co-ops grew by about 13%. A small amount, but I think co-ops are still an unknown in most people's minds, and it is important to note that it is growing. In addition, their growth can be constrained by norms, laws and regulatory structures in different states that hamper unique business models, but this has been changing as the political impetus to create more co-ops has resulted in bemused state legislators signing off on what seem to them like interesting "pro-business" legislation.
Given their opportunity for growth, I think irrespective of the goals of market socialism co-ops represent a way to expand worker organizing at a time when unions are being decimated.
Robert Bailey
wow… so this is the power of market socialist rhetoric
Austin Butler
No, it's just shit. And it failed just like Titoism, even more if you consider the fact that MLs had more than one try to do their experiment.
And I was talking about George Eliava btw, whose work went on to save the lives of hundreds of thousands of soviet soldiers in WW2 and was killed by Beria.
Lucas Sullivan
But not before being anally raped by Stalin. And afterwards his body was consumed by Molotov. How can people support ML after such horrors
Jayden James
How about a political party that subsidizes credit unions and workers coops. t.Boring centrist
Market socialism is just capitalism, but for people who sexually identify as leftists.
Isaiah Brooks
Meanwhile, in the real world, worker cooperatives and credit unions are sponsered by large corporations.
Lucas Allen
What we need is a political movement that would socialize the capital goods market. It would be a proper leftist reform if anyone would actually go for it.
Nicholas Bell
NOICE
Lucas Perry
never said that, fucktard
name me one (actually) socialist country that existed that hasn't had fixed prices
Asher Ward
(except yugoslavia ofc.)
Gavin Martin
Hungary.
Jason Phillips
don't know much about hungary, just some vague things that it adopted marked socialism … so if you refer to that … just lol
Venezuela's problems are due to a lack of economic diversification, itself the result of decades of neglecting investment. It has the same problems today that it had back in the 80s. Other petro states have also suffered similar problems at times of low oil prices.
Export fueled welfare states aren't a substitute for proper economic autarchy.
As opposed to the Soviet Union, which didn't collapse, experiance ethnic cleansing, nor lead to western occupations.
Benjamin Russell
Gorby & Co dismantled the Soviet state, then surrendered it to corrupt mobsters. It was fine - if stagnant (due to exorbitant military spending and slow adoption of new western technology) - up until that time.
Benjamin Powell
Lolnop, the Soviet state mechanism was pretty shagged before Gorby's time: Andropov's reform plans wouldn't have been enough to deal with the debt crisis that would come due to the oil price collapse. Add to that the domino stagnation across the eastern bloc (which caused a mutual slowdown) and the lack of investments in improving production the command economy that existed under Brezhnev would need to change to something. Cockshott does a pretty good deconstruction in the intro to TRANS (contrasting it with western social democracy).
