Why would price competition be a problem in the Utopian Polis? And aren't some firms failures _because_ of price comeptition? Let's say an employee-owned cooperative puts some of their earnings into retirement funds. Collectively, they decide that they want to undercut the competition to get more business and expand. They decide to put off saving for retirement. They keep their wages the same, just don't pack away funds. That way, they reckon, they can get more business in the long run. Their sacrifice in the present will be made up for with future business -- notably future business that is highly stable. They'll have driven out the local competition entirely or have reduced it to a few players.
Which is why I think it's just the same economy as we're dealing with now, only writ small. The "small business" is only small relative to other businesses. A small thirty employee restaurant is only small by comparison to a chain. But, in a small local economy, it's large by comparison to Mel's Diner.
Other than that, I was pointing out that, while mom and pops failing might not cause a recession when, by definition, they are marginal players in what is otherwise dominated by large businesses, the loss of a small factory in small town can be pretty shitty -- and that's living in today's world where the cushion we're talking about is afforded by economies of scale and the existence of big businesses who can pick up the slack.
The convo reminded me of a restaurant I worked for. When it went out of business, it was pretty shitty for the thirty of us. It wasn't so great for the vendors, but they dealt with the blow because they were big food and liquor suppliers and had countless small restaurants as customers. But, what if the vendors had all been local companies supplying them with locally grown wine, goat cheese, and endive?
Funny thing is, this restaurant went out of business mainly because the owner--a big time libertarian--got sick of paying $ to Howard Johnson's for the franchise. He also had to follow their rules, investing in new uniforms, complying with internal codes, buying a certain % from the commissary (rather than buying wherever he found the cheapest price.) The rules were what really chapped his ass -- big time libertarian an' all.
(Side note: I'm from a town famous for its libertarians. Every April 15, Lady Godiva mounted a horse, bare nekkid, and trotted down Main St. as a form of tax protest. This was a tradition started
Anyway, fed up, he left the franchise. Tore down the huge Interstate HoJo's sign and put up the new sign with the new name. Of course, since he depended mainly on business from Interstate travel -- truckers, canadians driving to florida for the winter, etc. -- he eventually went under because the Big Name brought in the business. when people are traveling, they like a Big Predictable Name. They knew what to expect at a HoJo's: price, service, cleanliness. Whether this was good or bad is irrelevant. The point was: it was predictable. People like that when they're traveling, especially when they're desire for adventure is destination oriented. They want to get where they going to have the adventure, they usually don't want it on the road. Makes for good commercials for anti-diarrhea medications, though, eh? *grin*
Anyway, resturant closed. Who picked up the slack? Another small businessman, only he owned a bunch of properties. Technically, he probably gave people jobs when he otherwise really didn't need to hire them, but he saw the long-term advantage to him and his plans for expansion. Bear the costs now to save money down the road. Planning. Planning. PLanning! :) But he couldn't have been done this were he not a major player in that small local economy -- by comparison he was just a guppy.
But, had this been Utopian Polis, where would the thirty employees turn for employment or a way to sustain themselves 'til something turned up?
Would the restuarant go under to begin with? It's just serving the local economy, right? By definition, these people aren't supposed to be driven by profit, right? Or are they? And, if they are, then what's to stop employee-owned small businesses from engaging in the same predatory practices that any business has every engaged in? Just that they're localized? And why should any firm, driven by profit, do anything other than want to expand?
The answer seems to be that you'd need a vast ideological infrastructure to keep people in check.
Kelley