• merc@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 hours ago

    It still sounds like capitalism to me. It’s just more traditional capitalism. I’m pretty sure that the first mechanical looms were in factories where the owner was actually present in the factory, trying to make sure the machines kept working.

    I’d even argue that ownership of land isn’t really capitalism anyhow, it’s more similar to feudalism. Capitalism involves buying capital and using that to transform raw materials into a finished product that can be sold at a profit. Feudalism involves charging someone rent for occupying land you own. Capitalism involves competing with other capitalists for more efficient processes, more cost-effective machines, and so-on. Landlords can’t have “more efficient” land. A capitalist has to use their machines to generate profits. If the machines are idle, they don’t make money. A landlord does nothing at all, then collects rent money.

    So yeah, ban rent, or severely limit it. Require that a capitalist owner is actually physically present and involved in day-to-day operations, and you’ll completely eliminate billionaires, probably even centi-millionaires.

    • cacheson 🏴🔁🍊@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 hours ago

      I call it mutualism.

      The “still sounds like capitalism to me” part is the reason that I think it’s the most practical way forward. It makes a radically beneficial structural change, while still being easily understood by anyone that’s used to capitalism.

      Socialists, generally speaking, want people to have ownership of their homes and workplaces. State socialists (think USSR-style) want this to be indirect, with the state owning everything on the behalf of the workers. Anarchists and other libertarian varieties of socialist want people to have this ownership directly, without the state as an intermediary. It’s in this sense that mutualism is a form of socialism.

      I included land in the absentee ownership prohibition because it’s important for everyone to have somewhere they can exist without having to get permission. Whether one thinks of it as part of capitalism or not, the threat of homelessness (since all land is already owned) is part of what enforces our current economic hierarchy.