https://css.umich.edu/publications/factsheets/built-environment/us-cities-factsheet
It is estimated that 83% of the U.S. population lives in urban areas, up from 64% in 1950
https://ourworldindata.org/data-insights/the-majority-of-people-in-the-world-now-live-in-cities
cities with more than 50,000 people have become the most popular living areas worldwide, as shown in the chart.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/270860/urbanization-by-continent/
North America as well as Latin America and the Caribbean were the regions with the highest level of urbanization, with over four fifths of the population residing in urban areas.
Looking at counties instead of actual cities is your problem.
You don’t seem to understand that the overwhelming majority of businesses are sole proprietorships.
You don’t seem to understand that the second most common type of business is a simple partnership.
No, you've misunderstood. I'm aware of how prevalent those kinds of businesses are, but the goal of this conversation isn't to provide a full legalese explanation or complete set of policy. The purpose is to talk about and have a sense of what the fuck we should be doing. Of course there is going to need to be a different set of rules for businesses with few employees, I never said otherwise. Of course there is going to need to be exceptions, I never said otherwise.
But you've jumped to conclusions instead of asking and having an actual conversation about what this would look like.
Worse, I'd argue that sole partnerships, simple partnership, etc already are employee owned. So even if I was saying that the previous stated limits should be applied with no exceptions or other considerations, it largely wouldn't have anything to do with those kinds of businesses.
What is your “preferred solution”?
A moratorium on IPOs, and purchasing of businesses in any form. Then, all the monopolies like Google, apple, meta, etc need to be broken up. And then, these companies need to be switched to being employee owned where possible.
Slowly over time all businesses will die off, but the ones controlled with stocks will never be replaced. After a few decades of this, the only businesses that will be left will be ones not controlled through stocks or personal ownership.
The economy needs to serve the needs of the people, not the rich.
The idea that businesses shouldn’t be bought or sold is not a solution at all.
Sure it is. The current system has led to a shell game designed to steal the worker's wealth and funnel it to the rich. It's led to extreme wealth inequality. It's led to situations in which it is extremely difficult to tax the rich. It's led to politicians who personally enrich themselves because they constantly have insider knowledge. It's led to business that hoard extreme profits, just to hand them over to the already rich shareholders.
We don't need businesses to be able to be bought and sold. However we do need strength to be given to labor.
Someone wants to buy it from you
There's your problem. Business shouldn't be bought and sold either.
What we can do is apply an annual wealth tax of 1% of all registered securities, (stocks, bonds, etc) and exempt the first $10 million of each natural person.
That's not my preferred solution, but I'd take it over nothing.
Can't have unrealized gains in a system that doesn't have stocks. Abolish the stock market.
It's almost like the 3rd parties have 0% chance of winning even a single electoral vote.
@Olgratin_Magmatoe
@lemmy.world