• ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    9 months ago

    Wait, so you’re saying the bus drivers should be responsible for maintenance of the bus they drive, and own it, and the company should just take a cut? So, uber but for busses?

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

      No. Sole proprietorships are not Socialist. A more accurate outlook would be a given city’s bus drivers all sharing ownership of the busses, along with the other workers at the bus driving firm like the maintenance employees and coordinators. That industry itself would be collectively owned by the Workers, not at an individual level.

      The distinction would be rather than a dictatorial Capitalist owning the firm, the Workers would share ownership of the firm equally.

    • J Lou@mastodon.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      I was describing a company to produce buses i.e. the actual vehicle. Not for driving buses. The alternative to what I describe as the problem with capitalism is to structure all firms as worker cooperatives. In a worker cooperative, the basic tenet of justice is satisfied i.e. legal and de facto responsibility match @memes