This video misses one of the main points of critique that can be leveled at the capitalist system. That is, the highly imbalanced power dynamic between owners and laborers on the shop floor. The hierarchical structure that defines capitalism is, in my opinion, its fundamental problem. Once workers are able to own the businesses that they enable to keep running through their toil, and therefore have a real stake in them, that imbalance will be abolished.
That's making the assumption that the market is perpetually the same and they'll never lose workers. While they do have a stake they may not be willing to share it with other workers making it difficult to hire and fire.
@@emmanuelomego7080 These assurances you talk about were put in place by the workers fighting for it and the government then mandating it. There is no inherent protection for the workers in the capitalist system, and why should it, purely from a theoretical perspective. The owner of the company is in to make money, they make the decision to hire and pay people to do the work required and then the owner makes profit. If they mismanage the company or for some external factor the company fails, the risk of failure you talked about, then they may not have the money to pay the workers or provide these assurances. Even if they are indeed responsible and don't mismanage the company, it is in the nature of risk to sometimes not pay out, and then we are back in square one. Therefore the risk of failure is not taken by a single individual (or a board of directors) but the whole company
This video misses one of the main points of critique that can be leveled at the capitalist system. That is, the highly imbalanced power dynamic between owners and laborers on the shop floor. The hierarchical structure that defines capitalism is, in my opinion, its fundamental problem. Once workers are able to own the businesses that they enable to keep running through their toil, and therefore have a real stake in them, that imbalance will be abolished.
That's making the assumption that the market is perpetually the same and they'll never lose workers. While they do have a stake they may not be willing to share it with other workers making it difficult to hire and fire.
@@emmanuelomego7080 These assurances you talk about were put in place by the workers fighting for it and the government then mandating it. There is no inherent protection for the workers in the capitalist system, and why should it, purely from a theoretical perspective. The owner of the company is in to make money, they make the decision to hire and pay people to do the work required and then the owner makes profit. If they mismanage the company or for some external factor the company fails, the risk of failure you talked about, then they may not have the money to pay the workers or provide these assurances. Even if they are indeed responsible and don't mismanage the company, it is in the nature of risk to sometimes not pay out, and then we are back in square one. Therefore the risk of failure is not taken by a single individual (or a board of directors) but the whole company
First