Short termism Puns

This is a question I’ve asked a few socialists but I received various contradictory answers in response. I’m not trying to strawman any positions here, rather I’m trying to see if my critique/questions holds some water and if it has already been addressed by socialists. So, in regards to the idea of market socialism and collective ownership of the means of production economy wide, this would involve giving every worker within a firm equal voting rights comparable to modern democracy but going further as direct democracy; each action and policy of the organisation or at least the individuals that make such actions are decided upon by the collective decision of the individual members.

I want to clarify that I’m not against this organisation structure, I think there’s enough evidence to point to it being beneficial for workers and firms. However, my question comes in when having this system applied across an entire economy whereby every firm that is large enough to hire multiple workers and isn’t just operated privately ie small family business. Again, not trying to strawman, but when I asked a couple socialists if they see potential issues, they highlighted that people already vote in local, state and national elections, the workplace would effectively function in similar capacity. Except how would this system avoid short-termism decision making by individual workers as their motivations, by and large, isn’t geared towards the long term success of the company, but making an income. Whether or not the company turns a profit/is efficient/successful and survives is irrelevant as long as the worker is guaranteed wages. In a flexible, mobile labour environment where workers can freely enter and exit jobs, why wouldn’t workers always (at least many) vote to maximize the highest benefits and least labour inputs? Voting within a country or community is different in that the vast majority of voters support the long term health of their environment and their “roots” makes leaving quite difficult, especially frequently moving as any refugee will attest.

There are exceptions to this rule, such as contractual obligations making the ease of exiting restricted, such as in some construction work, or financial contributions and incentives in the company like share ownership, performance bonuses and commissions. However, while I can see the first working within a planned economy, you’d need major restrictions on labour mobility and in the 2nd how would these benefit

I heard in yugoslavia the worker keep voting for boss that would increased their pay not caring for the fact if the company have more/less money to give

Im sorry if my question is simple or dumb im just a young boy who is interested at market socialism and heard argument like the above in the internet

Fascinating article from Boris Johnson in 2013. Some people say he was remainer before the referendum campaign but this indicates he has always been quite flexible and swung both ways on this to some extent.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10052775/We-must-be-ready-to-leave-the-EU-if-we-dont-get-what-we-want.html

According to Boris in 2013

Advantages of Remain

1. Foreign direct investment. There may be a risk (though this is far from proven) that international companies and funds could be put off from investing in the UK by the notion that Britain has somehow cut itself off from a giant European market.

2. Widgets. We may be putting UK firms at a long-term disadvantage if we are no longer able to influence the setting of standards and regulations in Brussels. There may be a risk, if we leave, that our partners would be so piqued and irrational as to try to stitch things up against us.

3. Globalization influence. The EU is arguably better placed to strike trade deals with the US, or China, than the UK on its own, though this proposition is plainly untested, and the idea of an EU “Common Foreign Policy” is plainly a joke. Where was the EU on Iraq, or Libya? What, come to that, is the EU position on the Falklands?

4. Perception of UK. It is often said that our strategic significance for the Americans or the Chinese depends on our membership of the EU; though, again, this is untested. More generally, there is a risk that leaving the EU will be globally interpreted as a narrow, xenophobic, backward-looking thing to do.

There may be other good reasons for staying in, but I can’t think of them now. On the other side of the ledger let us consider the advantages of getting out.

Advantages of Brexit

1. We save money. We would no longer have to cough up for the EU budget, and could spend those billions in the UK.

2. We get back our sovereignty – especially over our borders, where we would no longer be in the mad position of being forced to extend our entire welfare system to anyone from Bulgaria or Romania, while keeping out lucrative Chinese tourists to achieve immigration caps.

3. We make our own laws again. We would no longer be forced to accept the vast corpus of EU regulation and legislation – much of it too detailed and interfering – that has added to the costs of British business; though we would also find ourselves being forced to comply, thanks to the sheer lunar pull of the EU market, if we want to continue to export to Europe

A Diamond in the Dirt.

Forterra: An Unloved (Small Cap) Name Embarking on a Structural Growth Story

49.0% blended upside

I explore the story of a fundamentally sound UK pureplay masonry product producer who boasts a high ROE, a solid balance sheet and demonstrable fiscal discipline (with an ESG angle).

The well-founded company continues to generate healthy free cash flow and generate superior dividend yield versus peers, whilst maintaining strong earnings growth and expansionary initiatives.

The name has built a moat through a series of strategic M&A (its heritage London brick constituting 25% of all UK brick stock) and stands to benefit from secular headwinds (namely, top-down government addressing of the housing deficit, benign demographics and an easy credit 'lower for longer' environment).

Domestic politics and economics have embedded a gloomy discount into the sector (as consensus' negative thought-linearity calcifies), and unfortunate floating conditions sits Forterra at the bottom end of peer valuations (despite pack-leading performance). This has created a compelling contrarian value opportunity.

https://docdro.id/WsykdiS

It seems that a lot of problems are caused by business short-termism, such as not taking proper account of risks (like oil spills) or degrading product quality over time. This seems to be linked to short-term incentives like quarterly earnings reports and the desire of managers to show quick results to get promoted. How might this be tackled? Are there any types of business that tend to be more longtermist?