December 2011 - P2P-Foundation - lists.ourproject.org

Infinite Growth is Goal when Profit is Treated as Reward
by Patrick Anderson 10 Dec '11

10 Dec '11

Apostolis wrote: > Patrick have you thought of the initial capital problem? Yes, we can fix this by allowing the latecomers who do not have capital to pay Profit when they *buy* the Product. But, in order to avoid subjugating those new users, we must treat that over-payment as that Payer's Investment. In other words, "Profit is Payer's Investment". This allows us to accept latecomers so we can grow, but avoids the usual problem of capital accumulation. Also, since we are not treating Profit as Reward, there is no incentive for continuous growth that causes usual Capitalist businesses to never be satisfied with stasis. > In most cases people have different amounts of money > which might lead some people to not be able to co-own. Yes, we can sell surplus to those who cannot afford to invest up-front, charging Profit against them, but when we Invest that Profit in more Capital, the ownership of that new Property must eventually vest to that Payer. > > Then there are 2 possibilities we can consider. > > Either not allow companies to exist that are not co-owned. I don't think we can stop others from running their businesses however they like. I only intend to create new businesses that have internal constraints enforced through a legally-binding Terms of Operation - similar to how the GNU GPL is applied by 'owners' to their own property. > Allow poeple to be indebted to people and > that will create profit for the creditor. By 'indebted', do you mean "pay Profit"? I agree we should allow latecomers to pay Profit, but we should (choose to) treat that over-payment as an Investment from that Payer - so that all users incrementally gain the co-ownership needed for them to eventually also stop buying Product. The (co-)owners of a dairy must pay all the Costs of production, but they do not buy milk since they own that Product *already*, and since the last transaction is missing, Profit does not exist. |||Profit is undefined when Product is ROI.|||

3 8

The 'silent war' with Iran
by 10natalie＠cox.net 09 Dec '11

09 Dec '11

http://walt.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/12/07/the_silent_war_with_iran

2 1

Profit Measures the Payer's Lack of Ownership in the Means of Production
by Patrick Anderson 09 Dec '11

09 Dec '11

Sepp wrote: > It takes someone with a minimum of > managerial skills to do the organizing, I agree, and I am not one of those people. But maybe we could pay those organizers a very large Wage instead... The reason I resist paying them from Profits is that Profits simply WILL NOT EXIST if Investors are receiving Product for risk because there is no Sale. For example, imagine a group of us Invest to buy and build a network for our own benefit. We do not sell any of the bandwidth, but simply use that Product as our Return. We must still pay all the Costs of production, including any Wages to managers and workers, but Profit will not exist because the Product will never be sold. The scenario I describe is the 'static' case, and only applies unless we DO start selling Product to those with insufficient ownership. Isn't it interesting that Profit only appears when the late Payer has insufficient ownership?

2 1

Fw: Democracy trumps austerity
by robert searle 09 Dec '11

09 Dec '11

----- Forwarded Message ----- From: Alex Wilks - Avaaz.org <avaaz(a)avaaz.org> To: "dharao4(a)yahoo.co.uk" <dharao4(a)yahoo.co.uk> Sent: Thursday, 8 December 2011, 15:53 Subject: Democracy trumps austerity Dear friends, In 24 hours EU leaders may take an axe to our jobs and our democracy. But we can block this. If we send massive signal to the summit that we won't surrender our rights and our future, they'll realise that their plan will never pass a referendum, and make a new, better plan. Sign the petition urging leaders to reject austerity and save the economy now: Tomorrow EU leaders may wave through a crazy Merkel/Sarkozy plan that would abolish our right to choose sane economic policies. But together, we can stop our leaders trashing our democracy and our jobs.Panicked by big banks, EU governments -- all but 5 of which are conservative-led -- want to change our constitutions and the EU treaty to permanently ban high public spending. This is nuts: in the 1930s, such spending was precisely what allowed Europe and the US to escape the Great Depression. Europe needs to toughen up and regulate the banks, not surrender to them our right to choose policies that create jobs. Not now, and certainly not forever.Democracy is our trump card. The 27 EU leaders can’t just agree this plan themselves -- they need to come up with solutions that will stand the test of referenda or parliamentary votes. If we raise a mass chorus from across Europe today, we can change their political calculations and force a rethink. Let's call on our leaders to reject austerity, regulate the banks and invest in our future. If we reach 100,000 signers, we'll deliver the petition to the waiting media outside tomorrow's summit. Sign and send to everyone: http://www.avaaz.org/en/democracy_trumps_austerity/?vl A few Eurozone countries used the single currency as an excuse to over-spend, and Europe needs to stop that happening again. But short-circuiting democracy always backfires and can provoke a right-wing backlash. The tough economic decisions Europe needs must be taken by strong, democratic, accountable institutions. Even Germany has repeatedly violated, and is currently violating, its own promises to limit its debt and deficit. Keeping those promises would have been counter-productive at a time when money is tight. The hawkish bond buyers have already toppled three European governments -- let's stop them in their tracks. If Germany allows it, the European Central Bank can do what other central banks do -- intervene to guarantee government bonds and face down the markets. Since Italy isn't bankrupt, the bank can even make money on this. If the ECB buys time, the EU can find a more sensible and democratic way out of the current crisis, including through new measures to tax speculation and channel credit to those of us who need it most.This is about the survival of the European welfare state, which represents our core values and helps stabilise our economies when recessions hit. If the new constitutions and treaties are agreed this week, our governments would have to keep cutting spending on unemployment insurance, pensions and health, worsening the recession. It's a no-brainer. For the sake of our democracies, our societies and our economies, we have to say no. Sign the petition now: http://www.avaaz.org/en/democracy_trumps_austerity/?vl Reasonable people can disagree about the best way to protect us all from national overspending and crippling debt. But imposing austerity measures that we already know won't work and tying the hands of our democracy is not the answer. Over and over again, our community has stood up and won real accountability from our leaders when they have tried to bypass us -- now we must come together and demand to be heard once again. With hope, Alex, Emma, Ricken, Jamie, Pascal, Giulia, Stephanie, Laura and the rest of the Avaaz team. More information: Germany’s Denial, Europe’s Disaster (New York Times)http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/30/opinion/germanys-denial-europes-dis… EU Treaty plan faces obstacles (Der Spiegel)http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,802221,00.htmlEurozone warned of credit downgrades after Germany and France strike deal (The Guardian)http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/dec/05/eurozone-credit-downgrade-germany-france?INTCMP=SRCHKilling the Euro (New York Times)http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/30/opinion/germanys-denial-europes-dis… the euro zone’s flaw fatal? (Washington Post)http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/02/opinion/krugman-killing-the-euro.htm… Support the Avaaz Community! We're entirely funded by donations and receive no money from governments or corporations. Our dedicated team ensures even the smallest contributions go a long way. Avaaz.org is a 10-million-person global campaign network that works to ensure that the views and values of the world's people shape global decision-making. ("Avaaz" means "voice" or "song" in many languages.) Avaaz members live in every nation of the world; our team is spread across 13 countries on 4 continents and operates in 14 languages. Learn about some of Avaaz's biggest campaigns here, or follow us on Facebook or Twitter. This message was sent to dharao4(a)yahoo.co.uk. To change your email address, language, or other information, contact us via this form. To unsubscribe, send an email to unsubscribe(a)avaaz.org or click here. To contact Avaaz, please do not reply to this email. Instead, write to us at www.avaaz.org/en/contact or call us at +1-888-922-8229 (US).

1 0

"complete loyalty to the financial markets"
by Dante-Gabryell Monson 09 Dec '11

09 Dec '11

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2011/dec2011/euro-d07.shtml "Merkel and Sarkozy reacted to the announcement by the rating agency by pledging their complete loyalty to the financial markets." "To enforce stricter budgetary discipline, Merkel and Sarkozy intend to change the European treaties by March 2012." Avaaz Petition : https://secure.avaaz.org/en/democracy_trumps_austerity/ *"*History demonstrates that austerity cannot save our economies from recession"

1 0

[Tomorrow Friday 6:30 @ Eyebeam] Experimental Economics + Finance research group.
by fran ilich 09 Dec '11

09 Dec '11

Diego de la Vega cooperative media conglomerate invites you to its Experimental Economics + Finance research group Facilitated by Eyebeam Fellow Fran Ilich and scholar / curator Jennifer Flores Sternad. With a special guest from Brazil: Felipe Altenfelder Silva, founder of Fora do Eixo <http://foradoeixo.org.br> Circuito Fora do Eixo (Out of the Axis Circuit) is a network created in the end of 2005 by cultural producers from the north, south and west regions of Brazil. It started with the collaboration between producers from Cuiaba (Mato Grosso), Rio Branco (Acre), Uberlandia (Minas Gerais) and Londrina (Paraná), aiming at stimulating the circulation of musical projects, production technology exchange and the trade of products. The network grew and the market relations became even more favorable for small music related initiatives. Introduced by the ever-growing access to information, the musical industry's new challenges, laid fertile ground for small initiatives to grow, especially those that had collaborative structures. Initiatives like the Cubo Card from Cuiaba - a system of complementary currency revolving around cultural services - , or the grand number of music festivals produced by the members of the network have shown that it is possible to produce in a sustainable scale, emphasizing the direct contact between producers from all brazilian states, through a network of information and under the logic that together we can achieve more. Nowadays, Circuito Fora do Eixo is present on 25 out of the 27 states of Brazil. All brazilian regions are integrated in this network, making it's action visible nationwide. From this structure certain initiatives have come up, such as the Grito Rock América do Sul - an independently organized event from Circuito Fora do Eixo that happened in 74 different cities (out of which 4 where in Argentina, Bolivia and Uruguay) - and the Fora do Eixo Festival, that happened in São Paulo in 2010. Finally, the Fora do Eixo Portal - the network's website - managed to gather all these producers in a social network, open to public, where all the information from Circuito Fora do Eixo can be found and downloaded, allowing a greater amount of information a social technology to be traded. Friday December 9, 2011. 18:30 hrs Eyebeam Art + Technology center Conference room http://eyebeam.org 212.937.6580 540 W 21st St. New York, NY 10011

1 0

Re: [P2P-F] skdb-related luddite project
by Michel Bauwens 08 Dec '11

08 Dec '11

Dear Iuval, sorry for the delay, I understand that marcin is not easily approachable, but the choice of the technologies was actually the result of a process, eli could tell you more I can't really help you technically, but hopefully, vinay, chris, and bryan, all p2p makers, can help you with advice, however, I can't forward attachments to the p2p-f and open-man lists, so please resend to the people I copied here, Michel On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 9:40 PM, Iuval Clejan <clejan.iuval(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, I am interested in starting a project that might benefit from existing > skdb infrastructure. What I would like to create is a blueprint for a > minimalist technology for basic needs (food, shelter, water, healthcare, > clothes), that has the constraint that everything produced is truly local > (for various areas, both urban and rural), mostly artisanal (land and > craft-based rather than factory-based), low initial investment after first > prototype, as low labor as possible (hopefully an improvement on the middle > ages) and replicable. This eliminates alot of modern technology, including > anything computer-related and factory-produced (unless it is found in a > junkyard). I am obviously not opposed to using computers as a means to > achieve this end. I am looking for collaborators that would identify all > the dependencies of energy, information and materials. This project is > similar to the Biodome project, except that instead of a minimalist > ecology, I am looking to create a minimalist technology. It might also be > similar to the Manhattan project, in that I want to bring together experts > in sustainable agriculture, blacksmithing, carpentry, glass making, fiber > technology, history of technology, rocket stoves, water catchment and > distribution, and then spend some time designing, finding missing links and > inventing ways to fill them. I have engaged in several of these > specialties, but I am not an expert in any,. > > The most similar existing project I am aware of is Marcin Jakubowski's > Global Village Construction Set. I have tried to talk to him but he is not > amenable to discussion with me. I am concerned about the explicit > dependence on computers, and the seeming ad hoc nature of his 50 > machines--how did he settle on those? I would like to see a diagram > emerging from a design process that shows clearly all the dependencies with > all the arrows converging on the 5 basic needs above, making it easier to > see missing links and to trim down to a minimal set (although some > redundancy could be engineered). > > Can you help me in some way? I am of course sympathetic to the goals of > the P2P foundation, so please let me know if I can help you (CV enclosed). > I am also enclosing a proposal that I submitted to the Open Society > Institute, which was rejected, if you want more details. The proposal was > outlining a fellowship project and thus did not include detailed budget > information. > Thanks, > Iuval > -- P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

2 1

Fwd: Myth about British Land Scarcity - landowners paid to keep property off the market
by Michel Bauwens 08 Dec '11

08 Dec '11

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Dante-Gabryell Monson <dante.monson(a)gmail.com> Date: Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 2:42 AM Subject: Myth about British Land Scarcity - landowners paid to keep property off the market To: econowmix(a)googlegroups.com http://www.newstatesman.com/life-and-society/2011/03/million-acres-land-own… "The myth spun about Britain is that land is scarce. It is not – landowners are paid to keep it off the market. As a result, we have the smallest, most expensive houses in Europe" large excerpt : The partly understood change is the urbanisation of society to the point where 90 per cent of us in the United Kingdom live in urban areas. Hidden inside that transformation is the shift from a society in which, less than a century and a half ago, all land was owned by 4.5 per cent of the population and the rest owned nothing at all. Now, 70 per cent of the population has a stake in land, and collectively owns most of the 5 per cent of the UK that is urban. But this is a mere three million out of 60 million acres. Through this transformation, the heirs to the disenfranchised of the Victorian era have inverted the relationship between the landed and the landless. This has happened even while huge changes have occurred in the 42 million acres of rural countryside. These account for 70 per cent of the home islands and are the agricultural plot. From being virtually the sole payers of such tax as was levied in 1873 (at fourpence in the 240p pound), the owners of Britain's agricultural plot are now the beneficiaries of an annual subsidy that may run as high as £23,000 each, totalling between £3.5bn and £5bn a year. Urban dwellers, on the other hand, pay about £35bn in land-related taxes. Rural landowners receive a handout of roughly £83 per acre, while urban dwellers pay about £18,000 for each acre they hold, an average of £1,800 per dwelling, the average dwelling standing on one-tenth of an acre. Britain urgently needs land reform, but there is a problem. The "tenants" of between 30 and 50 per cent of the Home Island land mass are unknown. ... -- P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

1 0

Fwd: 2nd teach-in at [Occupy London] Transcending State & Corporations: Introduction to Peer-to-Peer and the Commons
by Michel Bauwens 08 Dec '11

08 Dec '11

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: George Por <george(a)community-intelligence.com> Date: Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 2:23 PM Subject: [Occupy London] Transcending State & Corporations: Introduction to Peer-to-Peer and the Commons To: occupylondon(a)groupspaces.com hi all, Normally, I wouldn’t use this list for announcing an educational programme at the Bank of Ideas if it was not for the shortness of time left to reach people by other channels, and more importantly, for the high importance of the subject to the long-term strategy development of the Occupy movement. Michel Bauwens, founder of the Foundation for Peer-to-Peer Alternatives, and an Advisor to our School of Commoning, led an acclaimed teach-in on “Peer-to-Peer and the Commons, a new paradigm for change” at OWS in Zuccotti Park <http:// nurturingthecommons.nycga.net/2011/11/03/michael-bauwens-address-at-zuccott… >, a month ago. Now he is visiting London and will bring his talk to the Tent City University, 10 Dec, 10 am. Given the feedback we got from some Occupy-ers, saying that 10 am is too early, he will repeat the programme by offering an extended, 2-hrs version of teach-in facilitation the same day, 10 Dec, 2-4 pm at the Bank of Ideas This is the first programme in a new series of events offered by the School of Commoning at the Bank of Ideas. To RSVP, please go to <http:// www.meetup.com/School-of-Commoning-Events/events/43804672/> . Hope to see you either at TCU in the morning or at BoI in the afternoon. george -- George Pór Director, School of Commoning education for commons culture & social renewal <http://www.schoolofcommoning.com/> "amplifying your collective intelligence & wisdom" *Transcending State & Corporations: Introduction to Peer-to-Peer and the Commons * Key ideas: To succeed in radical social change, we need three things: 1. a genuine mass movement, 2. concrete alternatives that can change our lives, and 3. the ability to be able to stop bad policies, and propose new ones. 1. As the first native movement and great hope of the digital age, Occupy has grown into mass movement in a relatively short time. 2. Regarding the concrete alternatives that can change our lives and allow us to live our values right now, that is what commons-based peer production provides – a new way of producing value. 3. To stop bad policies that don’t work and propose good ones that does, we need true democratic processes. The peer-to-peer vision relies upon the three major sectors of society – the state, market and civil society – but with different roles and in a revitalized equilibrium. At the core of the new society is civic society, with as its main institution, the commons, which uses peer production to generate common value outside of the market logic. These commons consist of both the natural heritage of mankind (oceans, the atmosphere, land, etc.), and commons that are created through collective societal innovation, many of which can be freely shared because of their immaterial nature (shared knowledge, software and design, culture and science). In the vision of a commons-based society, the market is subsumed under the dominant logic of the commons... This vision does not preclude an evolution of society through which the market may become entirely marginal. In this vision, the public sector is neither a corporate welfare state at the service of a financial elite, nor a welfare state that has a paternalistic relation to civil society, but a Partner State, which serves civil society. This vision anticipates an evolution of society through which the state becomes marginal and sovereignty returns to the people. In this teach-in, we will also explore how to get from here to there. Bring your curiosity and open mind. -- P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

1 0

Use-Value Crowd Funding - Mutually Funding the Products We Need
by Patrick Anderson 08 Dec '11

08 Dec '11

Miles Fidelman wrote: > Somebody has to actually do the work of getting organized, and to effect any > economies of scale that involves raising and investing serious amounts of > money BEFORE there's any return. Either: > > a. Taking money out of current income (take the money I'm using to buy > groceries, to help set up a new store, or farm, or buy chickens, or > whatever) - not a viable option for most, or, It is true that many people live paycheck to paycheck, and cannot afford to invest money, though some are out of work, and so could invest their time. But some have a bit of extra money and are actually looking for somewhere to invest. I would love to pre-pay for raw milk if I could then get that Product at Cost. Mutual Funds are one way people already invest without knowing how to accomplish that production. Think of this as Mutual Funds, but for Use-Value returns. > And then there's the whole aspect of getting organized, which involves > either spending large amounts of time, or hiring folks and paying them, or > both. Yes, consumers don't know how to do that, but they could invest 'blindly' as they already do, but with at-cost Product as the return. So what I am talking about might be thought of as Use-Value Crowd Funding - where the investors are not skilled in those areas, but are simply adding money for the purpose of receiving at-cost Product as a side-effect of their co-ownership in the Means of that Production. > > By and large, one has to operate at a pretty large scale to get costs down > to the level of a supermarket, or Walmart. The question remains, who's > going to bother? True, but people continue to try opening such stores. For example, http://Wasatch.coop will attempt to open as a consumer owned grocery store, supposedly co-owned by the consumer-investors. I say 'supposedly' because these co-owners do not pre-pay for Products and then receive them at Cost, but instead pre-pay and then *buy* the Products back from their collective selves - paying Profit and Taxes during that final, unnecessary transaction. > > >> >> Verizon collected $1.38 Billion from us last quarter. But when we, >> the consumers co-own a network, we only pay the costs, so for a >> network the size of Verizon, we would pay $1.38 Billion *less* every 3 >> months. > > Verizon also has a huge organization, 100s of thousands of miles of copper > and fiber installed on poles and under streets, and a huge amount of > experience - not to mention tremendous monthly cash flow. > > Lots of luck replicating that from scratch. Guaranteed it will cost more > than what Verizon charges now. > Yes, the ramp-up is difficult, and so what you say is true at first, but once we have some critical-mass, we will be operating at Cost (except for any needed growth funded by latecomers paying Profit), and so will undercut all Capitalist endeavors - eventually attracting all possible consumers to join us as co-owners of the backbone of a distributed internet. Patrick Anderson http://ImputedProduction.BlogSpot.com

2 1