Critics on the left complained that the third way reduced equality to an equal chance to compete in economies in which the rich were growing ever richer and the poor were increasingly disadvantaged. Such a position, they insisted, is hardly socialist. But even these critics seldom called for a return to a centralist form of socialism; instead, they were more likely to advocate a decentralist form of
market socialism. As the name implies, market socialism blends elements of a free-market economy with social ownership and control of property. Proposals have varied, but the basic idea is that businesses will compete for profits, as in
capitalism, but they will be owned, or at least governed, by those who
work in them. The workers in every business will choose their supervisors, control their working conditions, set the prices of their products, and decide how to share the profits—or to cope with the losses—of their
enterprise. Market socialism is thus a form of “workplace democracy,” or “economic democracy,” that enables workers not only to vote in political contests but also to have a say in the economic decisions that affect them daily in their work.