ARM, a British company designing microchips was recently bough by, the weirdly named Japanese bank, Softbank for £24.3bn. Why is this important? ARM was the UK's brightest hope for its technology sector, licensing more micro-chip designs to the US in the past year, than Intel ever made in its history. Softbank are adamant that no jobs will be outsourced from Cambridge, but its still a possibility, and the current workers are set to share a pot of £400m as benefits.
Whats /leftypols/ opinion on foreign ownership, of course wed all like to have companies be worker owned, but in reality this doesn't happen. So, how do we benefit the workers of company's who do get bought out? and how can we ensure that workers rights are maintained?
bourgeois is bourgeois whether it's foreign or domestic
actually it does
Tyler Bell
Okay, of course it does, but not often, and very often its doesn't bring more jobs to its community. If its not nationalized, it of no real benefit to society at large.
Jaxon Rogers
True, but I'll just add one thing, which is that it's easier to fight an enemy in your city rather than an enemy on the other side of the planet.
Wyatt Price
Good point, taking means of production is easier when you actually live near those means.
Robert Morales
Actually cooperative create more jobs, are better paid and offer better job security than their counterparts.
You're talking out of your ass and should do some more research before spouting your ignorance in such a smug condescendingly dismissive tone:
Also who cares if it's nationalised? So a conservative can then privitise it at a loss to his friends? So that your surplus labour can be used to fund bourgeoise art and the military industrial complex? Nationalisation does not mean it's socialist at all if you have less rights working for a state enterprise than you would in an independent workers cooperative where you would also keep the profits rather than letting the state decide for you what's best to be done with them.
Jonathan Stewart
Who cares what country the bourgeoisie are in
Aiden Perez
same as other user said, wouldnt you rather have them near you, than on the other side of the world?
Josiah Bell
Why would anyone sell ARM? It's clear their architecture is going to succeed x-86 is the dominant design. It's only going to be worth more is time goes on.
Leo Jenkins
lol, its fucking text on the internet and your talking about tone? What i said about nationalization was true, but the hypothetical of conservatives re-privitising implies it wouldnt be a socialist system. anarkiddie detected
Anthony Hughes
well the founder sad it was "a sad day" for uk tech, so i assume he doesnt have the dominant share in the company
Cooper Nguyen
show me non-coop reports on how great co-ops are, then i might even start to take you serious.
James Reed
Here's an article from brookings showing how co-ops are just as productive and last just as long as capitalist firms.
This is true, bu it doesn't disprove what i said, co-ops dont bring more jobs to their community and arent good for society at large.
Andrew Adams
Actually they can prevent outsourcing and can create more jobs by decreasing the amount of money saved versus spent since workers tend to spend more of their income than capitalists, thus growing the economy at a faster rate.
Jack Mitchell
1. prove it, i want evidence 2. Thats literally what nationalization does on a nation wide scale
Carson Reyes
...
David Phillips
savings vs spending see pic
it should be self evident that a decrease in consumption leads to a decrease in growth.
nationalization is subject to bureaucracy and the inefficiency that comes with it. Not to mention a lack of firm autonomy can lead to shortages that occurred in the communist bloc. co-ops and socialized capital solves this problem. jacobinmag.com/2012/12/the-red-and-the-black/
Levi Torres
Ineffective management and poor efficiency, ultimately comes down to whose running it. Could it not be argued, though, that high earners are high spenders, but their income is twice as much as their expenditure and so they literally cant spend money fast enough to have he same savings rate as lower earners, not to mention what theyre spending their money on. all that graph really shows is how much money people have.
Gavin Price
If you read the article I linked you'd know that it's not about leadership, but about needing approval to enter and exit markets.
this is exactly the point. If the wealth was spread out among more people more of it would get spent at a higher rate.
