"the triumph of the industrial revolution was the division of labor", how about...

[Iman Barlow]

Of course it's doable. It happens all of the time. Every time 2+ people form a business, they split equity. At the small business level, it's an everyday thing.

At the larger levels, it's equally common. I draft private placement memorandums for clients who need to raise capital in exchange for equity stakes in their business. It's fairly common.

As for the restaurant description - sure the chef can have equity and the servers can have equity. But then no one takes home a paycheck. You get paid in distributions. But servers usually prefer guaranteed compensation over unpredictable payouts. Given the amount of restaurants that fail - it's the smart decision.

That's the part of the conversation that these equity split proponents tend to skip over. Equity usually comes with accepting the risk of not getting paid at times. If you can accept that, early on, some months you won't take home a penny then go for it. But most people can't afford to work for free until the business generates enough to cover it's expenses and still kick off a livable wage.

People look at the businesses that succeed and never think about the ones that failed and what happened to the equity in those scenarios.

I'm hoping with the popularity of shows like Shark Tank it's a thing more people will consider.

 

[Iman Barlow]

You say "prefer" like any servers are ever given the choice between those two.

Or any employees of any business in almost all cases.

Like I said, with the popularity of Shark Tank, I think there's room for a "match maker" type business, that brings together people with a mixture of capital and talents, to grow the pie for everyone's benefit.

 

[Iman Barlow]

That doesn't affect his point at all. And he's talking about all employees, it looks like. They're not given the choice between equity or wages (or some combination of the two). Fact. It would be interesting to see what would happen if something like that were mandated--basically, a move toward syndicalism.

that's a word i've never seen before lol

 

[panamaican]

But it's true regardless. People don't get the choice. He didn't specify which workers don't get the choice (singled out servers and added that it includes any employees of any business in almost all cases).

Everyone who shows at day one and is willing to contribute to the formation costs gets a choice. That's every business.

Obviously there is a better chance for a company that is just getting started to go to zero than an established one.

Right and once the business is well established the equity value of just showing up to work drops precipitously.

That's great, but the point is that people aren't choosing wages over equity (or a combination of the two). They're not given the choice.

And my counter point is that they always have the choice. They choose not to exercise it because they know, at a gut level, that it's not worth more than guaranteed wages.

 

[M3t4tr0n]

OP isn't incoherently crying about liberals. I've reported a possible account hijacking to the admins.

Right? Lol but for real I'm not even mad at ts I tip my fedora to him. He definitely is the boss. He has an agenda and he sticks to it with no fucks given and does it with impunity. I say fuck those liberals put them in there goddam place!

 

[Snackbar]

I support this only to enjoy the complete shit storm failure it would become.

The business of equity division is, at times, messy even between two individuals, let alone an entire work force. I want to see the people that advocate these types of exercises get some skin in the game however and face reality, that every business is not Walmart. Their excitement would be short lived.

 

[Iman Barlow]

I support this only to enjoy the complete shit storm failure it would become.

The business of equity division is, at times, messy even between two individuals, let alone an entire work force. I want to see the people that advocate these types of exercises get some skin in the game however and face reality, that every business is not Walmart. Their excitement would be short lived.

Gotta have clearly defined roles

 

[OldGoat]

That doesn't affect his point at all. And he's talking about all employees, it looks like. They're not given the choice between equity or wages (or some combination of the two). Fact. It would be interesting to see what would happen if something like that were mandated--basically, a move toward syndicalism.

I learned a new word today. I don't like syndicalism. I'd prefer something like a 401k but that paid monthly dividends based upon the whole of the US economy.

 

[OldGoat]

Everyone who shows at day one and is willing to contribute to the formation costs gets a choice. That's every business.



Right and once the business is well established the equity value of just showing up to work drops precipitously.




And my counter point is that they always have the choice. They choose not to exercise it because they know, at a gut level, that it's not worth more than guaranteed wages.

Well, pressing present needs weigh more heavily on people's minds than the future. People aren't rational actors and is party why there is popular support for, in a completely rational world, nonsensical programs like Social Security. The rational and the irrational alike know that the majority aren't going to save a sufficient amount and that's why the government just takes it. Supposedly for our own good.

 

[7437]

I learned a new word today. I don't like syndicalism. I'd prefer something like a 401k but that paid monthly dividends based upon the whole of the US economy.

Isn't that basically what an index fund like the S&P 500 does?

 

[PorkPiePusher]

Gotta have clearly defined roles

Even with those, in my tenure as a lawyer, I don't remember ever seeing a "clean" division of equity.

The next revolution will come from people becoming more self-sufficient by way of 3d printers, independant data circulation and the increasing rise of GMO foods.

 

[OldGoat]

Isn't that basically what an index fund like the S&P 500 does?

I suppose, but there is no mandated contribution to that sort of thing like there is for Social Security. If the idea is that partial ownership and benefits of ownership is a net benefit for everyone then like insurance you have to force participation because the average person would rather bitch to get a handout than invest.

 

[SammyPops]

I'm paying you, you're making tips, and now you want equity in my restaurant too?

I'm guessing said employee would no longer make an hourly wage, and they would pool their tips to be split amongst the equity holders.

 

[dabausplaya]

Isn't that basically what an index fund like the S&P 500 does?

Stock prices are based on buying and selling of stocks, not actual company profits.

 

[Cocrehamster]

Stock prices are based on buying and selling of stocks, not actual company profits.

Maybe in the short term but long term they driven by earnings.