Not really you will still own a large chunk of it depending on how much is given away, maybe upto to 50%. Although this is a big hypothetical. Also remember the incentives of becoming a an entrepreneur need not be that one becomes a multi-billionaire when because even making a a few million or thereabouts is pretty good. You dont need to look at the likes of Philip Green, Mark Zukerberg, Sergei Brin or whoever as some sort of role model.
In a small business the owner is normally working there whereas we are mostly discussing large corporations which are mostly owned by capital rich shareholders who dont work there or know about the industry or have the skills to make the business work. Those shareholders are not important and do not add value in any way, they are mostly there because owners have floated their companies in order to take a massive payout. My point is that it is not healthy for a society for people to make money without adding value but just buy passively buying up shares and taking advantage of others talent and hard work.
Your example of a small business is different, Yes, if your 5 or 6 employees left you could recover. If Goldman lost even 20% of their employees tomorrow I think their business would be dead so it is not the same thing.
A good example is the privatization of Royal Mail, the state owned British mail delivery company. When this happened a few years ago funds in the city made huge sums because the shares were initially sold at a discount to their fair value. But the people working there didnt make as much even though thehy are the ones keeping the place moving. Now, if these guys went on strike or even just upped and started a new company the old Royal Mail would be worth only it's current assets (buildings and cash) and the new company set up with borrowed and employee money could be up and running in a few weeks.
My point is where is the value in these organizations? Is it with the owners or with the employees? In a small business it will be with the owners but in floated companies it will be with the employees so they should have more power and gain from their success. This is the natural way and I expect once a solution is found these types of companies will become more prominent.
In a small business the owner is normally working there whereas we are mostly discussing large corporations which are mostly owned by capital rich shareholders who dont work there or know about the industry or have the skills to make the business work. Those shareholders are not important and do not add value in any way, they are mostly there because owners have floated their companies in order to take a massive payout. My point is that it is not healthy for a society for people to make money without adding value but just buy passively buying up shares and taking advantage of others talent and hard work.
Your example of a small business is different, Yes, if your 5 or 6 employees left you could recover. If Goldman lost even 20% of their employees tomorrow I think their business would be dead so it is not the same thing.
A good example is the privatization of Royal Mail, the state owned British mail delivery company. When this happened a few years ago funds in the city made huge sums because the shares were initially sold at a discount to their fair value. But the people working there didnt make as much even though thehy are the ones keeping the place moving. Now, if these guys went on strike or even just upped and started a new company the old Royal Mail would be worth only it's current assets (buildings and cash) and the new company set up with borrowed and employee money could be up and running in a few weeks.
My point is where is the value in these organizations? Is it with the owners or with the employees? In a small business it will be with the owners but in floated companies it will be with the employees so they should have more power and gain from their success. This is the natural way and I expect once a solution is found these types of companies will become more prominent.