How come half of American businesses are still small businesses...

How come half of American businesses are still small businesses? Shouldn't the big businesses ate them up proving worker cooperatives will never work because the the market is unfair and not because marx's milk cooperative was shit.

It actually seems like the number of small businesses are lower in countries where temporary worker dictatorship was tried too, which would mean the best way to achieve communism would just be a peaceful cooperative organizing movement instead of an edgy failed violence movement that apologizes for dictators and moves general opinion towards state capitalism

Why should I be happy that my exploiter owns less shit than someone else who will exploit my labor as well?

That's some optimistic, reformist thinking comrade. You think porky is going kindly surrender the MoP after some "peaceful cooperative organizing? We had this discussion before comrade. Blood will need to be shed.

Small business =/= co-op

The small business owners (petit bourgeois) have too much ideology about being an entrepreneur will over-value their business and are unlikely to ever get an offer they'd consider high enough.

they're small because they operate in areas the large corps don't care to bother with, most of America is small towns, plus corps don't want to over-extend their footprint. You have to include the cost-benefit ratio, for most large businesses, adding some mom&pop under their wing wouldn't be worth what little money they make.
The only exception is some proprietary thing that they believe they can market for much more money, whether it's a consumable like food/drink, or IP of some kind like software or a machine.

Context, please. What is a "small business" and a "big business"? Sourcing your knowledge would also be helpful.

If you have a hundred of 1000 worker-big business and a hundred of 10 worker-small business, you have less than 1% of small businesses.

That pretty much counts as "ate 'em up", leaving only few niche ones to fight for scraps.

Oh, wait. You are a complete moron. Nevermind then.

yep, just like all bunkerfags. I wish leftypol users that dont use the irc could somehow detect the bunkerfags so that they can spare time not engaging them.
They are worse than Holla Forumsacks in many cases

A major part of marx's theory is that all capital will coalesce into one exploitative entity so cooperatives will never work, but cooperatives do work and marx probably would no have wrote all that shit if his did

Leftist every where right now could just make cooperatives - literally workers owning the means of production - but they don't give a shit and just vote in favor of state capitalism

But that's right. At most cooperatives will slow that process. The rich will not willingly give up their wealth, and a capitalist company can always out-compete co-ops in a market because they have muh freedumb to exploit workers for the sake of perpetuating the company.

prickly pls go

Its not a competition thing they just own everything so they can pay people like shit and keep the excess money for themselves, a co-op would make the same in profit since they would also have capital without parasitism. Walmart isn't more efficient they just pay people garbage wages

I mean no one even tries to establish co-ops anymore in areas not serviced by large corporations where they could undisputedly find success. Even a violent organizer for communism would want co-ops for a base of influence, but the communist movement is entirely taken over by neo-liberal chomskys

Not always, but more often than not.

Also bribes and other criminal activity. It's kinda hard to keep things secret if you have to explain where did the $100k go or taking a vote on should we break the law and dump toxic waste somewhere illegal.

Fiery Pinto would've been practically impossible in an open society of co-op.

low profit industries requiring lot's of micro management, certain industries that are less capital intensive and more labor intensive
i worked for a small pest control company and it makes sense that small bussinesses would do better in that sector

You've got a very reductionist view of economics.
There are restrictions and laws in place which are used to protect small businesses. Small businesses also can specialise and have unique selling points, be in unpopular locations etc etc.

That might be true by the number of businesses but large corporations dominate the landscape in sheer size and accumulation. Corporate wages account for 90% of the payroll in the US.

The whole problem with this argument is that you base the supposed success of small business simply by the raw number of small businesses.

The simple number of small businesses is meaningless. What's important is the amount of the economy they control, which is minuscule. Well over half of all small businesses go out of business within the first 6 months, almost all the rest go out of business within the first two years. Only a small minority of small businesses last in the long term and an even smaller minority get big enough to provide the sort of comfortable lifestyle to the owner that bullshit liberal "rags-to-riches" stories promise.

Basically, it's a scam.

As for worker cooperatives, they tend to be larger, last longer, and be more productive than "traditional" businesses. The problem is that productivity has almost nothing to do with success in a capitalist market. It has everything to do with the ability to accumulate capital, which is hampered by the cooperative model. So, no, the Mutualist model doesn't work.

Are you counting franchises as "small businesses?"

This.

It would be like saying socialism is winning because there are more proles than bourgeoisie.

He shills for worker owned businesses, you fucking stupid fucking faggot.

America has a progressive taxation system, laws that try to prevent monopolies from forming and lots of regulations which are very favourable to small businesses (in the corporate form). An actual real left wing government could easily modify the framework to favour co-operatives if they wanted to


Marx deals with a hypothetical pure market economy with no intervention by the state.

Also concentration of capital in a financialized economy can't literally mean ownership by one entity but webs of control.

Also Marxs isn't hostile against co-operatives, they can work and succeed corporations but they're just not the end goal

Acquiring capital to start one is much harder than it seems.
A lot of banks wont give out loans.

Damn it, comrade! You said it first!


Aslo this.

Small open and close all the time. What was the last time a big one closed? .. unless it was simply cause porky took the cash and run, leaving workers to starve.

fucking faggot