• sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    12 hours ago

    Democracy is “owned” by stakeholders, and those stakeholders are the people. So it makes sense for them to have a say in how government works.

    A company is owned by shareholders, and they take all of the risk for the company. An employee shows up and gets paid, with none of the downside risk (their paycheck won’t go negative), so the employee isn’t a stakeholder. Therefore, shareholders make the decisions, not employees.

    In some structures, employees are the share holders and thus help make the decisions.

    • ALostInquirer@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 hour ago

      An employee shows up and gets paid, with none of the downside risk (their paycheck won’t go negative), so the employee isn’t a stakeholder. Therefore, shareholders make the decisions, not employees.

      This depends on where the employee works, both in terms of business and nation. If they work in a nation that doesn’t provide some services, they may be dependent on their employer to some degree for some of those services. In that circumstance they’re no longer “just” showing up and getting paid, nor are they as mobile in their ability to switch businesses/employers.

      Should those employees in that circumstance still have essentially no say?

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        19 minutes ago

        Could you be a little more specific? Because that sounds extremely hypothetical.

        Let’s say you’re working on a crab ship or something where your life is literally at risk. You should absolutely have a say because:

        • your income depends on your catch (could be zero, could be huge)
        • you can’t leave
        • you are wholly dependent on the ship for food and lodging
        • will be at sea for weeks and maybe months at a time
        • work ends at the end of the season

        So yeah, in that case, something like a coop would make a lot of sense, with the captain (i.e. owner of the ship) having a larger say because they have more at risk. If the crab company goes under, they won’t get paid and they’ll be really hard pressed to find another job between crab seasons.

        But something like a cruise ship isn’t a great fit because employees can be offered a fixed salary/wage, the risk is a lot lower, and trip times are a lot shorter. The expense of starting a cruise line is immense, so the owners have a lot more risk than the average employee. If the cruise line goes under, they can just join a competitor or even another business entirely, and they’ll likely still get their paycheck.

        Whether you should have a say depends a lot on what you’re risking, the more you risk, the more say you should have.