• Toine@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    It could be owned by, like, multiple people? Also, a lot of companies in the world, and especially the ones managing costly infrastructure assets, are owned by states (which are a form of “multiple people”).

    • Tankton@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      10 months ago

      Multiple people working together with 1 goal? Like a … Company?

        • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          So a company whose ownership is open to the public, with that ownership divided into “shares”. And all the “share” holders can cooperate to decide the direction of the company…what would one call this novel form of organizing a venture…a “cooperation”?

          • TengoDosVacas@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            10 months ago

            Not open to the public. Open to those who actually contribute to it’s operations.

            And in none of your objections can you justify the CEO pay and the political power they weild. 40x the lowest paid worker, and no more.

            • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              10 months ago

              Ok so. Shares of ownership are open only to employees. How does this company get external investment? I suppose outside entities are allowed to invest with an expectation of a return on investment?

              • TengoDosVacas@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                9 months ago

                Stock is used to raise money for investment. When that investment has been covered and profit acheived, the stock should immediately drop in value or be bought back AS OPPOSED to being used for government manipulation and golden parachutes for CEOs who did very little work in making the company successful. If the CEO fails, the company fails. Paying multiple millions to CEOs who were not involved in the building of the company but were only brought in after the company failed is a gross misappropriation of shareholder funds. The new guy should get a salary of not more than 40 times what the lowest employee gets and then get stock options only after the stock and the company has been saved.

                • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  When that investment has been covered and profit acheived

                  What do you mean by this?

                  Sorry, I swear I’m not doing that Just Asking Questions thing where I keep asking questions until you get tired and leave, I’m legitimately curious. Because the way stock works now is, there’s an initial offering of a company’s stock, at say $1 a share. Then anyone who has a share can re-sell it to people who think the value of the company is going to go up, say someone who thinks it will be worth $1.50 a share. Anyone who buys shares hopes to re-sell them at a greater value, so as a whole, this market of investors is, in aggregate, demanding ever-increasing value from every share of every company.

                  There’s no one particular target where a company can say “we did it!” and settle the permanent value at like $3 a share or something. So I’m wondering how you would define “profit achieved” in this context, and what should happen to those shares at that point. Does the company buy them back? If the company is buying them back at $3 a share and someone just bought a share for $3.10, why would they sell it back to the company for $3? Will they be forced to sell?

                  • TengoDosVacas@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    9 months ago

                    The stock market has repeatedly proven that it is driven by inflated and imaginary “values”. Any argument in favor of unregulated stocks falls flat in the face of that evidence. At some point the company has to pick utself up by it’s bootstraps and start paying it’s own way instead of putting the public at risk over hyped “value”. It’s an entirely fraudulent system designed to crash on the reg and allow a tiny percentage of people to gather and hoard devalued property.

                    Stocks were originally about getting businesses started and people employed. They are the opposite of that now. Some stocks are actually managed to make businesses fold and put people put of work. This is the job of hedge fund managers (a business that should not exist) and was the entire point behind the GameStop rally.

              • TengoDosVacas@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                9 months ago

                My question to you then would be why would you continue to defend an entity that is controlling your government but is entirely immune of any consequences and answerable to no one?

                  • TengoDosVacas@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    9 months ago

                    Are you saying that corporations do not buy politicians and use money to coerce legislation in their favor against the wishes of the American people?

          • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Only open to the Workers, not the public, and it’s a Worker Co-operative. An existing Socialist organizational structure, not new.

          • TengoDosVacas@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Do you think shareholders want their money going to extravagent buildings, Italian desks, and billions in hoarded cash?

            Your view of “shareholders” is that they are just cash cows to be milked and not financial participants. As a shareholder I gained fourteen cents this year; how much did the CEO gain?