But there is another form of democracy in which nobody is abused, where no one is forced to do anything they dont want

to, and where freedom reigns. Im talking about economic democracy the voluntary voting that goes on every day in the market place. The market place is an economic democracy, a haven of freedom in an otherwise unfree world. In this economic democracy you vote with dollars. Every time you spend some, you are voting for whatever you have purchased. If you buy a BMW car, then you are voting with your dollars for the BMW Company. If BMW does a good job and pleases all its voters, then it gets to make a lot of money. If it fails to satisfy its voters, then it will lose money in lost votes. If you buy a McDonalds burger, then you are voting for McDonalds and registering your preference for their burgers over those of another company. Every time you choose to buy something, or choose not to buy something, you are voting in the democratic market place. You are deciding which companies are profitable and which are not. You are deciding who will be rewarded and who will not. In an economic democracy you can become rich by gathering the most votes. You can also lose your shirt, should you fail to impress the voters. Your dollar is as good as any one elses. The dollar is a dollar, no matter whether it is in the hand of a child, an old woman, a black man, a Chinese woman, a gay nightclub dancer, a Democrat or a Republican. Each dollar carries the same voting power. When you vote with your dollars you are doing so to get what you actually want. And the good news is, when you exchange your dollars this way, the person selling you the goods or services is also getting exactly what he or she wants. In other words, economic democracy is a win/win situation unlike political democracy, which is decidedly win/lose or even lose/lose. Next time you vote by buying anything, consider what you are doing. You are participating in economic democracy. And next time you vote in an election, also consider what you are doing. You are participating in political democracy where what you get is bound to be at the expense of someone else, and what you spend (taxes) never gives you what you want. Whereas political democracy refers to a government in which all citizens have equal opportunity to influence political policies, mainly through voting, economic democracy refers to a society in which all persons have equal rights to work, produce, invest, and buy and sell in a free market.
, , ? , , , , .. .. , , , , , .. , ,

, ,

, ...

Economic democracy is a socioeconomic philosophy that proposes to shift decision-making power from corporate shareholders to a larger group of public stakeholders that includes workers, customers, suppliers, neighbors and the broader public. No single definition or approach encompasses economic democracy, but most proponents claim that modern property relations externalize costs, subordinate the general well-being to private profit, and deny the polity a democratic voice in economic policy decisions.[1] In addition to these moral concerns, economic democracy makes practical claims, such as that it can compensate for capitalism's claimedly inherent effective demand gap.[2] Classical liberals argue that ownership and control over the means of production belongs to individuals and firms and can only be sustained by means of consumer choice, exercised daily in the marketplace.[3] "The capitalistic social order", they claim, therefore, "is an economic democracy in the strictest sense of the word".[4] Critics of this claim point out that consumers only vote on the value of the product when they make a purchase; they are not voting on who should own the means of production, on who can keep profits or on the resulting income distribution. Proponents of economic democracy generally argue that modern capitalism tends to hinder or prevent society from earning enough income to purchase its output production. Corporate monopoly of common resources typically creates artificial scarcity, resulting in socio-economic imbalances that restrict workers from access to economic opportunity and diminish consumer purchasing power.Economic democracy has been proposed as a component of larger socioeconomic ideologies, as a stand-alone theory, and as a variety of reform agendas. For example, as a means to securing full economic rights, it opens a path to full political rights, defined as including the former.[1] Both market and non-market theories of economic democracy have been proposed. As a reform agenda, supporting theories and real-world examples range from decentralization and economic liberalization to democratic cooperatives, fair trade, and the regionalization of food production and currency. Inclusive democracy Economic democracy is described as an integral component of an inclusive democracy, in Takis Fotopoulos' Towards An Inclusive Democracy as a stateless, moneyless and marketless economy that precludes private accumulation of wealth and the institutionalization of privileges for some sections of society, without relying on a mythical post-scarcity state of abundance, or sacrificing freedom of choice. The proposed system aims to meet the basic needs of all citizens (macroeconomic decisions), and secure freedom of choice (microeconomic decisions). Therefore, the system consists of two basic elements: (1) democratic planning, which involves a feedback process between workplace assemblies, demotic assemblies and a confederal assembly, and (2) an artificial market usingpersonal vouchers, which ensures freedom of choice but avoids the adverse effects of real markets. Although David Pepper called this system "a form of money based on the labour theory of value", it is not a money model since vouchers cannot be used as a general medium of exchange and store of wealth. Another distinguishing feature of inclusive democracy is its distinction between basic and non-basic needs. Remuneration is determined separately according to the cost of basic needs, and according to degree of effort for non-basic needs. Inclusive democracy is based on the principle that meeting basic needs is a fundamental human right which is guaranteed to all who are in a physical condition to offer a minimal amount of work. By contrast, participatory economics guarantees that basic needs are satisfied only for public goods or are covered by compassion and by a guaranteed basic income for the unemployed and those who cannot work.[65] Many advocates of participatory economics and Participism have contested this. As part of inclusive democracy, economic democracy is the authority of demos (community) in the economic spherewhich requires equal distribution of economic power. Therefore, all macroeconomic decisions (overall level of production, consumption and investment, amounts of work and leisure implied, technologies to be used, etc.) are made by the collectively and without

representation. However, microeconomic decisions are made by the individual production or consumption unit through a proposed system of vouchers. As with the case of direct democracy, economic democracy is only feasible if the participants can easily cooperate.

Democratic cooperatives
A cooperative is a limited liability entity, organized either for-profit or not-for-profit, that differs from a corporation in that its producing members, rather than investors, comprise the decision-making authority. By various names, cooperatives play an essential role in all forms of Economic Democracy. Classified as either consumer cooperatives or worker cooperatives, the cooperative business model is fundamental to the interests of economic democracy. According to the International Cooperative Alliance's Statement on the Cooperative Identity, "cooperatives are democratic organizations controlled by their members, who actively participate in setting policies and making decisions. Men and women serving as elected representatives are accountable to the membership. In primary cooperatives members have equal voting rights (one member, one vote) and cooperatives at other levels are also organized in a democratic manner.

Worker cooperatives
According to the United States Federation of Worker Cooperatives: "Worker cooperatives are business entities that are owned and controlled by their members, the people who work in them. The two central characteristics of worker cooperatives are: 1) workers invest in and own the business and (2) decision-making is democratic, generally adhering to the principle of one worker-one vote." Worker cooperatives occupy multiple sectors and industries in the United States, mostly in the Northeast, the West Coast and the Upper Midwest, totaling 300 democratic workplaces in the United States, employing over 3,500 people and generating over $400 million in annual revenues. While a few are larger enterprises, most are small. Growing steadily between 1990 and 2010, technology and home health care experienced most of the recent increase.[99] Worker cooperatives generally employ an industrial model called workplace democracy, which rejects the "master-servant relationship" implicit in the traditional employment contract.[100]According to Wilkinson and Pickett, neither ownership or participation alone are sufficient to establish democracy in the workplace. "[M]any share-ownership schemes amount to little more than incentive schemes, intended to make employees more compliant with management and sometimes to provide a nest-egg for retirement... To make a reliable difference to company performance, share-ownership has to be combined with more participative management methods." [101] Dahl further argued that selfgoverning enterprises should not be confused with other systems they might resemble: "Self-governing enterprises only remotely resemble pseudodemocratic schemes of employee consultation by management; schemes of limited employee participation that leave all critical decisions with a management elected by stockholders; or Employee Stock Ownership Plans (ESOPs) that are created only or primarily to provide corporations with low-interest loans, lower corporate income taxes, greater cash flow, employee pension plans, or a market for their stock, without, however, any significant changes in control."[102] In worker cooperatives, net income is called surplus instead of profit and is distributed among the members based on hours worked, seniority, or other criteria. In a worker cooperative, workers own their jobs, and therefore have a direct stake in the local environment and the power to conduct business in ways that benefit the community rather than destroying it. Some worker cooperatives maintain what is known as a multiple bottom line, evaluating success not merely in terms of net income, but also by factors like their sustainability as a business, their contribution to the community, and the happiness and longevity of their workers.[103] Worker-control can take many forms depending on the size and type of the business. Approaches to decision-making include: an elected board of directors, elected managers, management job roles, no management at all, consensus, majority vote, or combinations of the above.[103] Participation in decision-making becomes the responsibility and privilege of each member.[104] In one variation, workers usually invest money when they begin working.[103] Each member owns one share, which

provides its owner with one vote in company decision-making. While membership is not a requirement of employment, only employees can become members.[105] According to Kenneth W. Stikkers, the Mondragon cooperatives in the Basque region of Spain have achieved a previously unknown level of economic democracy. Established in 1956, Mondragon has since become an economic model that transcends the capitalist-socialist dichotomy and thereby helps us to imagine creative solutions to current economic problems.