Why don’t more people start profit-sharing companies or co-ops?

Submitted ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩ by ⁨nifty@lemmy.world⁩ to ⁨[deleted]⁩

I’ve known a few in the U.S., and even worked at one. Maybe people won’t become billionaires doing this, but why wait for a complete overhaul of society to implement more of what are good ideas.

I’d also like to see more childcare co-ops, or community shared pre-k schools. Wheres the movement to build communities and pool resources around these business models in the US? In short, co-ops are the closest socialist/communist business model that’s actually implemented in the U.S., so why are more leftists not doing this?

source

Comments

Sort:hotnew top

BearOfaTime@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
Why do you like chocolate?

If it’s what you want to see, then you should go do that.

source
- nifty@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
  Great point, I’ll take that into consideration
  
  source
Rookwood@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
Companies don’t do profit-sharing because they have no pressure or incentive to do so. In other words, they can get away with not profit-sharing so they do.

Co-ops are community projects. They arise out a strong, educated and engaged community. This does not exist in the US at large. That’s why about the only place with co-ops in the whole country is NYC.

source
FourPacketsOfPeanuts@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
There’s lots and lots of low level community support, bartering and exchange. But once a good natured soul tries to organise that into something… taxes!

source
- nifty@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
  Can you please cite some examples? What does that even mean?
  
  source
  - FourPacketsOfPeanuts@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
    When people trade their time or skills with each other locally there is mutual benefit and all the value of that trade naturally stays in the community (because it often doesn’t involve cash, and even where it does it’s off the books). Once someone spots these kind of good things (unofficial homework club, meal sharing, unofficial community kitchen etc) and tries to make it a more organised co-op so that more people can be involved, the co-op now has to register all its activities and pay taxes, which has the effect of removing some of the value from the community. If it’s an area seeing underinvestment from local government (as many poorer areas are) then there’s a great risk that’s a net-negative for the community even if the co-op is doing a “good thing”. There’s a critical mass at which the local community receives a net benefit and I wonder if many good ideas ever make it that far.
    
    See: tax treatment of co-ops in the UK. I’m sure there are parallels in the US.
    
    source
InternetCitizen2@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

Maybe people won’t become billionaires doing this,

I think the first bit is a big part. Keeping generated wealth is a main selling point for capitalism.

but why wait for a complete overhaul of society to implement more of what are good ideas … I’d also like to see more childcare co-ops, or community shared pre-k schools.

I think this is one part lack of resources. Those who can spare the most for a pool don’t see the need too. Those who need these things the most are still inside a market that does not reward such things. You would need way more low income people to fund the preK and the staff could do better working somewhere else, unless there is an element of altruism to working with low income communities.

A lot of things are market driven in the US and markets are not as good at selecting good ideas as our myths around them suggest. Right to repair is a good example of this. Everyone is better of being able to fix stuff; even if most chose not to. More people would be better with community this or that, but most people do not know about them, or they won’t know how to organize.

It is going to be hard to pick a pragmatic approach that can survive pressures from a for profit market that might have and that people will culturally accept today.

source
Aux@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
That’s what public companies are. You buy their shares to help out with business and they share their profits. How much more of them do you want?

source
- xor@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
  No, public companies and cooperatives are completely different things
  
  source
  - Aux@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
    No, they’re not different. If you’re creating a co-op - your partners are still shareholders and investors. The only difference is that co-op is private, but public company is… Well, public. But the end result is the same.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
- prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
  This is some ignorant shit
  
  source
VanillerGoriller@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
It relies on everyone involved not falling out with each other / losing interest / selling out down the line

source
- nifty@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
  Idk, people are doing it already. Seems like this isn’t really a good reason.
  
  source
  - VanillerGoriller@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
    Personally I wouldn’t risk it. Been burned too many times and I also don’t trust myself to hold up my end of such an agreement. Never can know what the future holds.
    
    source
  - yarr@feddit.nl ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
    
    Idk, people are doing it already. Seems like this isn’t really a good reason.
    
    You seem to be wondering why people aren’t starting an “easy” coop. Have you ever owned and operated a business of any sort? Why not try it yourself instead of speculating how easy it is for people to start and run a cooperative business.
    
    source
oVerde@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
Many of these profits aren’t liquid so they can’t turn into money right away

source