Both groups organize themselves around pooling money to get things done.

There is no real reason why one group of people should operate enterprises and the other should not.

And there are multiple reasons for certain enterprises to not fall into the hands of people whose primary objective is profit rather then service to the community.

hurt so many and help so few.

Public ownership does not have to mean government management. A sovereign wealth fund could hold financial claims with decentralized management in the enterprises indirectly (perhaps partly) owned by the sovereign wealth fund.

Public ownership does not have to be exclusive. It could coexist with extensive private property in residences, small businesses and agriculture and with worker-ownership via democratized ESOPs and cooperatives.

Public ownership through a sovereign wealth fund would transform the financial capital of the country into a public patrimony under a stewardship responsible to the whole people. This would replace the huge concentrations of financial capital under irresponsible private ownership.

They want their ideology back.

And it is unquestionably entering its terminal phase. The question remains whether it will take down the planet itself before it crashes to bits, as it inevitably must. This is what capitalism IS when left to its own immensely destructive devices. This is not a bug, it is the central feature of the system.

Any system whose foundation premise is that infinite growth is possible on a finite planet is insane beyond description. Mother Nature always bats last. ALWAYS.

Trying to sell the idea that "companies own everything" to voters is going to make you look like an idiot.

Cars: The "Car company" doesn't own my car because I bought it outright. If I had leased it, then yes they WOULD own it. If I had a car loan, then then bank would be a part owner because they payed for part of it. Why is this a problem? How would you distribute cars otherwise?

Ditto houses: either you rent from an owner or take out a mortgage and share ownership with the company that gave you the money. How would you propose to restructure that arrangement?

"The average citizen is working their life away only to ultimately put money in other peoples pockets". Try selling that "arise workers; you have nothing to lose but your chains" mantra if you want (I know Bernie Sanders won't), and you'll lose 90% of the voters.

You propose to end all corporate ownership. Explain the structure by which you'll replace it.

Belong to you. GM won a lawsuit claiming that tampering with onboard computer system violated GM's terms of agreement with GM claiming they owned the system and the proprietary software that runs it.

Engine designer. John Deere made the same claim and it was upheld on the GM ruling.

It further applies to most software, the things you create on your computer and store in "the cloud," the pictures and writing you post on Facebook, (edit: and here, for DU can change its mind whenever it wishes) and so on.

Try to sell any of that without giving The Man his cut and they'll come for you, as soon as you make enough money to make it worth their while to take it from you.

you are so ignorant of this new "trend". With all your high level contacts and such.

What "new trend" are you talking about? And by the way, that poster is anything but ignorant. You might want to edit your post.

and I mean what I say

crowd source but not pay taxes for the commons?

Here are some dirty words in my lexicon:

capitalism
privatization
neo-liberal
outsourcing

Three cheers friend.

Richard Wolf gives a very interesting, and convincing, argument for them.

I do, also, believe that certain utilities should be state owned and non-profit. Electricity, water, cable and Internet.

... their public library is a socialist institution, that the highways, police and fire departments are socialist, they would think differently about this word.

I once heard someone argue that Social Security is not socialism. Nonsense, it's socialism to its core.

I get treated far better when i have to contact the corporate-owned Florida Power & Light than I do when I have to contact the publicly-owned Broward County Water and Wastewater Services. If they ware there to serve the public, the county employees are truly nasty and should be replaced.

I firmly feel there are some things that we shouldn't leave up to the profiteers. They are far too important to the welfare of our citizens.

Utilities, healthcare, prisons, education and our military to name a few.

We need the internet to do basically everything today. If one is going to be required to use the internet to address our government and services, then we are going to have to assure everyone has the internet. We could do it so much more economically and environmentally sound if we did it ourselves.

Or trash pick-up. Instead of giving subsidies to private corporations, why don't we give them nothing and instead hire our own citizens to run and clean up our own communities?

Make people understand and truly feel they have a vested interest in the health and wealth of their environment and communities and they will develop that interest, no matter how unreachable you may consider them to be. We need to create the opportunities for them to have the chance to do just that.

I am a capitalist. As capitalist as they come. But within the bounds of Adam Smith, good taste, common sense, scientific evidence and with the overall desire for all to do well and live in a democracy increased by our consumer powers, not lessened.

But they do.

Great wealth is rarely achieved by innovation, most often it is achieved by screwing over others -- workers, ordinary taxpayers, small businesses, destroying the natural environment, insider trading...

Our government, "We the People," ought to compete directly with the scummiest employers, offering better pay and better jobs than they do so that the worst corporations have to improve their working conditions and pay or they won't find any employees.

The very worst of the worst corporations ought to be subject to a corporate "death penalty" when they kill and maim employees and customers in the name of profits, defraud taxpayers, small investors, and pensioners, and otherwise behave in a way that is harmful and of no benefit to society.

It tends to hold down prices and encourage quality.

Allowing too many mergers and acquisitions and consolidation kills competition. If you end up with only a few coercive, monster corporations controlling markets and throwing their weight around with little or no competition, it might make Wall Street monopolists happy but the public would likely be better served by nationalizing them under public ownership and management and removing the profit motive. Business--of, by, and for The People. Without the sharks.

I've wondered if the government shouldn't just buy Walmart and run it like a military PX for the public--with a living wage for all employees.

Now that the home is paid off, it is mine. That is the way it works. You borrow money, the mortgage company owns the home until the note is paid and then you own it.