thanks Kevin, good point, Michel Message: 1 Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2017 14:13:47 -0500 From: Kevin Carson <[email protected]> To: P2P Foundation mailing list <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [P2P-F] thinking true meta-governance and the gaps in p2p theory regarding the household economy Message-ID: <CANETeEz58DrDsYAbc9bnak18Z5JnFZHUN102QtdQbXj13VFLuA@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" IMO the boundary between the household and the larger informal/social economy is very permeable. The nuclear family household is relatively recent and artificial, and to a considerable extent encouraged by 20th century capitalism's promotion of social atomization which reduced the household to the smallest possible size which would still socialize the costs of reproducing labor-power and the culture of obedience without providing a potential base for cost-, income- and risk-pooling which might increase the bargaining power of labor. It's quite likely that as total labor hours decline and precarity increases, we'll see a lot more not only of multi-generational houses but of multi-family cohousing, micro-villages and the like that internalize an increasing share of direct production for use. -- Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: http://commonstransition.org P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net <http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates: http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/