• Kalcifer@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    It’s good to have companies that do not solely view profit as the goal.

    Agreed! Though, I personally am hesitant to use the term “company” — I’m not sure exactly how you are defining it in this context. Perhaps “organization” would be better?

    It’s much more difficult for the costumer to improve the company without buying shares.

    Even then, it’s a bit of a stretch. Not to mention the bias that it sets by requiring capital to have a voice.

    Crown corporations have shown to benefit the public by serving everyone in the province, lowering costs for costumers, keeping the profits local, forcing the market to be more competitive and listening to the government that the people vote in.

    It depends on exactly how it is done. For example, I would argue that the way insurance in British Columbia is set up with ICBC is an absolute moronic disaster. I am also very hesitant to have taxpayer money spent on something that may well be a sinkhole for money. I think Canada Post is done well: any profits that it creates go straight to the Treasury Board, it takes no government subsidies — even pensions are not taxpayer funded, it directly, and fairly, competes with the rest of the market. Canada Post is an example of how it should be done. ICBC is an example of how it should not.

    I also support cooperatives as every member gets the same say.

    Cooperatives have enormous potential, imo. They seem to be vastly underutilized, which I don’t comprehend. I think they could be a solid consideration to combat intrinsic monopolies.