Comments by "seneca983" (@seneca983) on "" video.

37:00 "They find that when facing lower demand or recessions, worker co-ops are much less likely to fire employees, instead opting to reduce wages across the board. Co-ops therefore protect the employment of their members while capitalist firms are happy to shed them to remain profitable." Shouldn't we consider that capitalist firms can also be prevented from lowering wages across the board by employment contracts, collective agreements, or labor laws? They may choose firing over wage cuts simply because they're prevented from choosing the latter option.
6
@emylily8266 "It is in fact a very valuable protection for employees" But it should be noted that not becoming unemployed can, depending on situation, have more value for at least some employees. At any rate, I mainly wanted to point out that this particular disadvantage of capitalist firms relative to co-ops might not be an inherent feature of that type of structure for the firm but rather artificially imposed on it. Whatever one's policy preferences might be, that aspect (if true) should be considered when comparing conventional firms and co-ops.
3
@emylily8266 "Problem is..." Problem for what?
2
@emylily8266 My original comment only said that (perhaps) capitalist businesses are simply not allowed wage cuts over firing. I did not (yet) offer any policy prescriptions.
2
@emylily8266 "for why we don't allow those types of wage cuts by privately owned corporations in the first place?" If it's a problem for that (as I asked) then should that policy be discontinued?
1