I think that csa is a nice example of what the economy should be like. They democratically decide about production. They create economic stability and the only concern that farmers have is the quality of their product and production.
I ll try to refrain from telling much since I dont know where my endeavor will take me.
The csa model works because there are only 2 parties. What if for example we had a trading circle of more parties.
Lets take a circle of 4 parties. This example is simple.
4 people A, B, C, D
4 products a, b, c, d
producer -product-> consumer This is the Social contract between the 2 parties.
The circle:
A -a-> B -b-> C -c-> D -d-> A
As we can see there can be no economic stability if at least one of the contracts is not signed since prices, the quantity of products are determined by all 4 contracts. *ps1
Also each party hasnt contacted or talked to one party from which they are affected.
In contrast to the csa model it is impossible to talk to all parties.
In the general case, there are thousands of circles connected together. So the csa system cant be used.
My work is abstract. it represents parties as a decision function. ( it is simply an ordering of the possible states of living plus some other things)
I intend to create a method that finds the prices and quantities of products in such a network.
This way social contracts that last for a long time and provide economic stability will be able to be created.
Each party will know how much he is affected by each party and will give them the incentive to help them, protect them. Imagine if a consumer in USA knew how he would be affected if the life conditions in Brazil of the workers deteriorated.
As a conclution, I could say that this will remove the market uncertainty as a factor of economic production. People will just be interested in how to reduce the working hours and increase the product quality.
1. ps. The quaity of the product and the working conditions will be determined with democratic conversation.
2 ps. Right now i have the impression that there will be inequalities. I am not sure though.
2011/12/1 Patrick Anderson
<agnucius@gmail.com>
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Michel Bauwens
<michel@p2pfoundation.net> wrote:
dear apostolis, could you explain/qualify product maximizing economy or corporation, eventually for our blog or wiki ?
would this be like a CSA kind of structure, I think you are on to something very important, and I may use this concept myself in the future, it feels like a missing piece in the p2p edifice?
Michel
This might help - just pretend I didn't write it:
Corporations, in their current form, cannot do the "right thing" because they/we erroneously believe Profit to be the goal of production while somehow misplacing Product itself as the real end.
This is caused by our choosing investors who expect to be paid Profit.
And can be solved by choosing investors who expect to be paid Product.
But the only investors able to accept Product as a return are the future Users of that Product.
So we must organize Users to co-buy and co-own the Sources of Production for the purpose of receiving at-cost use-value.
Corporations organized in this way will have no reason to work against we, the people, except when selling some of that Product to non-owners.
For that we must write a Terms-of-Operation as a form of self-regulation to impose the constraint "Profit is Payer Investment" so that all Users incrementaly gain ownership in the Sources of the Products they need.
[extracted from https://lists.ourproject.org/pipermail/p2p-foundation/2011-June/002158.html ]
_______________________________________________
P2P Foundation - Mailing list
http://www.p2pfoundation.net
https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
--
Sincerely yours,
Apostolis Xekoukoulotakis