I read the article and get that. It is, to my mind, how modern capitalism started... People clubbing together and investing (big and small) in a "venture" and then sharing the profits/dividends made on the basis of the proportion invested. (Things like the East India Company and dozens of others). Could you explain to me, in simple language, what is the difference between what you say you love and how capitalism has always worked. I
The difference is that, with modern American capitalism, the people investing in a venture are nonworking (nonproductive capital). They don't do anything to create the value of that venture except give it money. And yet they earn most of the rewards created by that venture.
Collective ownership of a venture means that the people who CREATE the value are also the beneficiaries of that value. So at an employee-owned company, it's the employees who built the company that benefit from its success (rather than just an investor in it). In a collectively owned city land trust, the residents who live and work in the town, are the beneficiaries when the town gets richer (rather than an outside property developer or private land owners).
It's that those who create the value (working capital) benefit from the value they created. Instead of just whoever has the money (nonworking capital).