• alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    16 days ago

    Monopolies are able to afford better equipment and planning, and produce more with less labor.

    Under capitalism they typically don’t because increasing investment no longer increases revenue.

    • rockSlayer@lemmy.blahaj.zoneOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      16 days ago

      Nah, fuck that. Economies can be decentralized and managed by workers directly, electing representatives to negotiate tentative agreements between communities for the workers to vote on

      • alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        16 days ago

        They can be, but they will require far more labor to produce many of the same goods as one where workers are able to say “OK, we need 1 billion tons of cement to make 10 bln tons of concrete to make 20 million homes, that requires 10,000 concrete plants near where we’re going to be using it, workers trained in x y z, 20 bln tons limestone, etc etc etc”.

        The scale of modern industry is bigger than individual communities.

        Centralization of the basic industies enables any level of decentralization for downstream industries; your local pizza shop, whether run by a workers coop or a Small Business Tyrant, isn’t signing multinational agreements to get flour or parts for the oven.

        • rockSlayer@lemmy.blahaj.zoneOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          16 days ago

          The means of production are still going to be present in certain communities rather than others. The cement powder production is located in a certain community that employs the workers there. Rather than a company manage things, the workers collectively decide on what they’re capable of producing for the other communities in a region