I love co-ops I think the government should do more to Foster them. I would start by waving corporate tax first. Basically the same as a pass-through chapter S Corporation.
Waving salary taxes is a different story though. I don't see why someone working for a regular company should have to pay for Medicare and Roads but someone working at a co-op should get these for free.
I've been on the board of directors for a co-op in the main challenge is Raising funding. If you want to start a housing Co-op or a auto repair Co-op, those both require capital. If folks want to see more co-ops, I would look for ways to make Capital more available.
> I don't see why someone working for a regular company should have to pay for Medicare and Roads but someone working at a co-op should get these for free.
Mostly to send a message that you shouldn't work at a regular company. Unless it pays so much that you are better off even after tax.
> If folks want to see more co-ops, I would look for ways to make Capital more available.
Capital goes to where one can get return on capital. To get more capital to coops you need to make them competitive first.
The capital question is more complex then returns. Co-ops can pay return on Capital Lending and be competitive. The challenge is finding people willing to take on a loan.
Housing is a really good example. If you have a down payment, most people would not want to use it and take on a mortgage to create a housing Co-op. They would prefer to simply buy a house.
A housing Co-op is attractive for people that can't buy a house by themselves. You can band together with other people to make a down payment, but again, this is unattractive for most people because there is no good exit strategy to cash out. This is the downside of co-ops. They still take investment and risk to create.
Regarding your first point, I assume you were talking about worker co-ops. I don't see why society would want to incentivize people to join them beyond the benefits that those people would naturally see from working at one. on the flip side, why punish workers are aren't part of co-ops?
If it is a good deal for the workers, they should do it. If it is a bad deal for the workers they shouldn't.
> You can band together with other people to make a down payment, but again, this is unattractive for most people because there is no good exit strategy to cash out.
Yea. It probably doesn't work if you are wanting to buy something as an investment that you are planning to cash out of. But if you buy to use (to live or to produce something) it is attractive to collectively buy to have larger bargaining power and better credit trustworthiness if the risk is shared.
> I don't see why society would want to incentivize people to join them beyond the benefits that those people would naturally see from working at one.
Another thing is that working conditions and salaries got really ridiculous and a whole class of employed poor rose that borderline can't sustain themselves with their work.
It's hard to regulate this stuff in current ownership model. So I think our best bet is to promote alternate ownership models so we may end up in less insane place than the one towards which we are heading.
> on the flip side, why punish workers are aren't part of co-ops?
It's never actually punishing workers. Ultimately it's the employer who pays for it all. And it makes sense because todays employer on average doesn't invest into the education of the workers, in their health and development, in their safety net. So it's only fair he should be paying for those costs that he externalizes to society.
In case of worker co-ops it's reasonable to assume that workers in them will be taken care of better. So less burden on society from externalized costs.
> If it is a good deal for the workers, they should do it. If it is a bad deal for the workers they shouldn't.
Currently the deck is stacked against coops because being able to fuel your company by burning people is a real advantage so a company that does that more will nearly always win with the one that does that less. And losing company will eventually have to dissolve so workers are pretty much left without a choice.
>Yea. It probably doesn't work if you are wanting to buy something as an investment that you are planning to cash out of. But if you buy to use (to live or to produce something) it is attractive to collectively buy to have larger bargaining power and better credit trustworthiness if the risk is shared.
I think you are missing the point. Im talking about real barriers that prefent people from cooperative agreements, even when they just want to use it.
In the real world, it is rarely attractive to collectively buy, because you are locked in. This is the challenge.
If you want to start a cooperative house, you basically need to be willing to live there forever or walk away from your down payment. The same is true for starting a coop business.
Im not interested in hearing the benefits of coops, Im already a fan of them. I was hoping for an intelegent conversation about how their major limitations can be overcome.
It is much harder to find someone to buy 25% of a house to live in or 25% of an auto shop to work in.
Joint ownership is hard and you need a high level of trust in your cooperative partners.
Imagine what it would take to convince you to buy 1/4 of 4 unit apartment with strangers. You might be putting your financial life's work in their hands.
Waving salary taxes is a different story though. I don't see why someone working for a regular company should have to pay for Medicare and Roads but someone working at a co-op should get these for free.
I've been on the board of directors for a co-op in the main challenge is Raising funding. If you want to start a housing Co-op or a auto repair Co-op, those both require capital. If folks want to see more co-ops, I would look for ways to make Capital more available.