[P2P-F] What is a fair economic system to you?

Tue Dec 20 11:57:03 CET 2011

thanks apostolis!

On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 5:16 PM, Apostolis Xekoukoulotakis <
xekoukou at gmail.com> wrote:

> Just a small reply to Michel. Yes the only other alternative to the market
> is if the society as a unit decides democratically for a fixed price.
>
>
> 2011/12/18 Apostolis Xekoukoulotakis <xekoukou at gmail.com>
>
>> Thank you all for your comments.
>>
>> In conclusion, one of the consequenses of trading and society is that
>> individualistic rules should be changed to maintain the health of the
>> Society.
>>
>> 2011/12/18 Dante-Gabryell Monson <dante.monson at gmail.com>
>>
>>> Yes, these three suit me.
>>>
>>> I would perhaps also like to add, regarding the minimum rule - basic
>>> income -,
>>> that it not be measured monetarily, as speculation could devaluate /
>>> evaporate its value.
>>>
>>> So instead, have the minimum income ( above an individual's vital needs
>>> ) be measured in a variety of units corresponding to ( locally produced ) :
>>>
>>> - minimum access to water , both drinkable and non-drinkable.
>>> - minimum access to basic food income : with a variety of units in terms
>>> of food calories intake, access to nutrition diversity and quality
>>> - healthcare
>>> - minimum access to housing : amount of square meters, quality of the
>>> housing, ...
>>> - access to heating ( of water, of the housing )
>>> - access to minimum income in energy units ( at least electricity )
>>> - generalized access to internet, with a minimum bandwidth ( sufficient
>>> to upload or download medium quality definition videos in streaming )
>>>
>>> ////
>>>
>>> Regarding the Jubilee :
>>>
>>> Historically, if I remember properly, the jubilee seemed to be decided
>>> by the king/queen - as all initial debt was contracted to them -
>>> forms of money such as tally sticks<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tally_stick>,
>>> as far as I understand, at that time was "spent" into circulation, and
>>> demand for such money was initially created through the possibility to pay
>>> one's taxes with it ?
>>>
>>> In a larger, more complex system, with a variety of currencies ( at
>>> least for the currencies which emanate out of contracts ? ), I imagine that
>>> having a free transparent market with a diversity of currencies could
>>> enable local economic networks to form themselves and choose their
>>> preferred mixture of currency usage.   Ideally, some of these currencies
>>> would include a Jubilee.  Ideally it would be the ones spent into
>>> circulation and on which some form of tax ( or membership fee ) could be
>>> paid with.
>>>
>>> If governments do not cover externalities anymore, I could imagine that
>>> forms of organization such as cooperative networks could, and that a
>>> membership fee and other payments such as a form of use value insurance
>>> could be paid with such alternative cooperative network currency.
>>>
>>> ////
>>>
>>> Regarding Cooperatives,
>>> if most of the production can be local, and "sold"/allocated locally,
>>> to its members, hence also to the active producers of the cooperative,
>>> I would imagine there could be an additional incentive to create quality
>>> products.
>>>
>>> I could imagine that a part of the production could be sold for another
>>> type of currency,
>>> such as euros, enabling trade for certain products or resources the
>>> local economic network of cooperatives may not be able to produce,
>>> or more ideally, to invest in production technologies and further
>>> increase autonomy of the interdependent economic network.
>>>
>>> Actually, this is why I would like to use a "Transaction Graph"
>>> approach, explained below...
>>>
>>> ////
>>>
>>> Regarding Netention,
>>> I will in a separate mail put you in touch with one of its main
>>> developers.
>>>
>>> Dear Apostolis, I am not a programmer, yet I am interested in the
>>> approach you intend to take, or the work you may have already done in
>>> trying to program a certain tool.
>>>
>>> A brief description of Netention, as I understand it, and in addition to
>>> the pdf presentation on http://www.automenta.com/netention :
>>>
>>> I see it as a way for agents ( individuals, or other entities ) to
>>> express their current and future desired needs,
>>> and then enable to match them within a network as to create
>>> interdependencies based on their choices.
>>>
>>> A kind of emergent decision making tool.
>>>
>>> I would like to use a netention graph approach,
>>> for what I tend to call "transaction graphs"
>>> http://sharewiki.org/en/Transaction_Graphs
>>> ( transaction graphs is not necessarily netention, but I would like to
>>> use it in such way )
>>>
>>> Which could for example make it possible for agents ( any person, or a
>>> construction/legal entity ) to express the needs of a project,
>>> enable others, as in crowdfunding, to express their support for such
>>> project,
>>>
>>> by expressing its relation to one of their personal needs, or by
>>> expressing a possible interdependent approach in which such project can
>>> support other projects and individuals needs,
>>>
>>> by contributing in making explicit the needs related to such project,
>>>
>>> by expressing a willingness to support based on expressed needs - either
>>> inconditionally, either conditionally.
>>>
>>> Conditional offers for support can for example be connected to expressed
>>> personal needs,
>>> such as, in reply to a tuition project, one could answer as conditional
>>> offer : "I can provide tuition for 10 children if I am provided with a room
>>> to live and some food".
>>>
>>> Hence such approach in effect can create and use a variety of currency
>>> architectures, without necessarily creating a dependency on a monetary
>>> monopoly, yet being able to include it in such graphed approach of
>>> expressed inter-dependencies.
>>>
>>> Once that the needs and offers are expressed, a query can be used,
>>> eventually there can be an automatic suggested matching, from which
>>> individual users can choose preferred suggestions from ( using also other
>>> metadata for choice, such as geolocation - distance metadata )
>>>
>>> Once these are chosen, a contract confirmation of engagement can be set,
>>> based on the various metadata ( type of resource, timing, etc ) being
>>> included.
>>>
>>> In some cases, contracts can be more complex - and can require a certain
>>> pledging for a variety of needs being fulfilled.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 7:42 AM, Michel Bauwens <
>>> michel at p2pfoundation.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> 3 additions then,
>>>>
>>>> the 'dante' rule, a maximum limit to wealth accumulation
>>>>
>>>> a minimum rule, i.e. basic income
>>>>
>>>> periodic reset, i.e. jubilee
>>>>
>>>> note that historically stable societies never had free market pricing
>>>> but just price theories and practices, i.e. prices were set politically and
>>>> socially according to what these societies saw as worth maintaining (which
>>>> was an unequal but stable social order)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 3:10 AM, Apostolis Xekoukoulotakis <
>>>> xekoukou at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Right now, i think that there should be a redistribution of wealth. In
>>>>> a fair society, it will be 'fair' that someone has more houses. Something
>>>>> to be fair doesnt make it is optimal. To answer the general question about
>>>>> the commons ,like land, each person should have equal time to use an
>>>>> object. Land cannot be owned. Each person will use it for a specific amount
>>>>> of time. One could also trade his right for this land to get another part
>>>>> of land or resource.
>>>>>
>>>>> I liked the article on Fiske. I start from the individualistic point
>>>>> of view, ie the worst case scenario. Communal sharing involves not
>>>>> measuring what one gives and what not. For a fair system , we try to
>>>>> measure equality.
>>>>>
>>>>> My whole effort is to have equality in opportunity. I have found only
>>>>> the market to be able to represent economic relations between people (that
>>>>> are measurable).
>>>>>
>>>>> The problem i have is the problem of transformation.* There is no
>>>>> objective measure to measure happiness or effort.* If it existed we
>>>>> would then exchage 1 unit of effort of a person A to 1 unit of effort of
>>>>> person B.
>>>>>
>>>>> Since there is no such measure, the only thing i found that does that
>>>>> is the market.* The problem of the market is that a person could try
>>>>> to exploit someone else in the bargain. With the proposal we make he will
>>>>> only be expoited due to his current needs and his current skills, ie there
>>>>> is an upper limit that is based on human properties. An economic system
>>>>> that keeps bad memories has no boundary in its ability to exploit.*
>>>>>
>>>>> netention --- I would love if you explained to me how it works.
>>>>>
>>>>> my abstact model right now deals with contracts between consumers -
>>>>> workers. Reality has more variables that can not be put in a model. Let me
>>>>> explain my opinion on this.
>>>>>
>>>>> The production process involves 2 parties. Both gain through it, but
>>>>> they also have conflicting goals.
>>>>> Consumers want good quality of products and a low price. A workers
>>>>> cooperative could create bad products since that way workers will get more
>>>>> money.
>>>>> Workers want good working conditions(1/3 of their life is spent in
>>>>> their work) and a good wage. Consumer cooperatives could create hazardous
>>>>> or generally bad environment for the workers to minimize the cost of
>>>>> production.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think it is best if they cooperated.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is my exact proposition to have both rules work together.
>>>>>
>>>>> *Any person that has ownership of a means of production can retain
>>>>> that part of the ownership that is used for creating non tradeable goods
>>>>> for him as a consumer. For the rest of the means of production he retains
>>>>> the right to not allow someone else to use it. If he allows a part of it to
>>>>> be used by others, the owners will be paid the cost for creating such an
>>>>> item  multiplied by the percentage o time that they used it. After that
>>>>> part of means of production is allowed to be used by others, it is
>>>>> considered part of the commons ,like land, and everyone has equal right to
>>>>> use it.*
>>>>> *
>>>>> *
>>>>> I made this to retain  the 2nd rule at all times.* I also ask you to
>>>>> try to use accumulated wealth to exploit people**.* I think that it
>>>>> is impossible.
>>>>>
>>>>> This rule also has the consequence that workers cannot own the means
>>>>> of production because then those workers would have better opportunity than
>>>>> others.
>>>>>
>>>>> Now that i am writing this email i think that we could make a similar
>>>>> rule to the previous one where we allow workers to retain ownership to the
>>>>> means of production which they use to work but i am uncertain right now.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 2011/12/18 Dante-Gabryell Monson <dante.monson at gmail.com>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 10:16 PM, Apostolis Xekoukoulotakis <
>>>>>> xekoukou at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes patrick that is what i mean. I also think that this is the only
>>>>>>> natural - common sense thing to do. But i would like to hear what the
>>>>>>> others say because i may be wrong.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I also agree with Dante about limiting private accumulation but I
>>>>>>> think that if we do what patrick and i say, we will nullify the previous
>>>>>>> wealth from affecting the future creation and distribution of wealth. Think
>>>>>>> of this wealth like a ferrari. Let them have this wealth. the ferrari cant
>>>>>>> make more ferrari s and increase inequality in opportunity.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks - ok , let the super rich keep their Ferrari. ( or Yacht , or
>>>>>> Villa )
>>>>>> What if we use the example of accumulated property of land and
>>>>>> housing ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (I am also in the direction of automating the whole process. People
>>>>>>> will put what they want and how much they like to work at a specific job,
>>>>>>> and the programm will automatically designate what job is the best for each
>>>>>>> person and the prices and amount of products that will be created.
>>>>>>> Engineers will also be able to put new production methods and the new graph
>>>>>>> will be instantly computed plus the price that people would be willing to
>>>>>>> pay for the new production method.)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So you would still keep a market pricing approach ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This leads me to another p2pf page
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://p2pfoundation.net/Relational_Model_Typology_-_Fiske
>>>>>>
>>>>>> as for the software,
>>>>>> I know other projects are in development, such as
>>>>>> http://www.automenta.com/netention
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There is one problem though.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Since profit will not exist,  it will just flow back to the
>>>>>>> consumers and producers, we will have a problem of competition with the
>>>>>>> rest of the world in which workers and consumers are forced to pay profit.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The way I understand it through these conversations,
>>>>>> is that there is interest in setting up what, to me, resembles very
>>>>>> much consumer and worker cooperatives ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumer_cooperative
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worker_cooperative
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If people decide not to accumulate wealth to increase productivity,
>>>>>>> they will unfortunately revert back to the system that creates inequality
>>>>>>> since in the rest of the world we are forced to increase
>>>>>>> productivity(through the profit maximization aim of enterprises).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> P2P Foundation - Mailing list
>>>>>> http://www.p2pfoundation.net
>>>>>> https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Sincerely yours,
>>>>>
>>>>>      Apostolis Xekoukoulotakis
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> P2P Foundation - Mailing list
>>>>> http://www.p2pfoundation.net
>>>>> https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> P2P Foundation - Mailing list
>>> http://www.p2pfoundation.net
>>> https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>> Sincerely yours,
>>
>>      Apostolis Xekoukoulotakis
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
>
> Sincerely yours,
>
>      Apostolis Xekoukoulotakis
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> P2P Foundation - Mailing list
> http://www.p2pfoundation.net
> https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
>
>

-- 
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ourproject.org/pipermail/p2p-foundation/attachments/20111220/bc87ce0a/attachment.htm 