[P2P-F] 12 things you need to know about protests in Wisconsin, USA + Unions and P2P alternatives
Michel Bauwens
michelsub2004 at gmail.com
Fri Feb 25 09:47:42 CET 2011
Dear Richard,
I would indeed love to publish this as a p2p blog post, thanks a lot!
For the first week of March?
Michel
On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 11:00 PM, Richard Schulte <
richard at flywheelcollective.com> wrote:
> Thanks Sam for bringing this up!
>
> Flywheel had the pleasure of meeting with the Ohio Employee Ownership
> Center several days ago. We brought up this specific concept to Roy
> Messing, their Cooperative Development Program director, and he brought
> up a few possible constraints, but definitely an interest in the
> possibilities.
>
> Apparently it varies widely state by state, but laws around the use of
> pension funds, 401(k) programs, health funds, and other major benefit
> funds which are often held in common by workers can be somewhat
> restrictive towards investment. However, he expressed that he would be
> further exploring the possibilities and spreading the idea. The
> additional option is that some of the companies who employ these workers
> may also be interested in contributing towards these investments, and
> the imagination widens when other community investment groups are
> involved.
>
> After reflecting on that option, it seems that peer-based manufacturing
> could present a very interesting opportunity for many of the extant
> manufacturers to be able to assist in the 'fill-in' of their supply
> chains by lending towards the creation of extensive networks of small,
> agile, and lean micromanufacturing shops employing p2p methods.
>
> Investment bodies
> -----
>
> Collective Assets
>
> - Pension Funds - these are often restricted to only 8-15% out at any
> given time, especially as older generations begin to collect retirement.
> However, this could change with legislation that may or may not already
> be out there.
> - Health benefits plans
> - 401(k) Plans - many unions found their pension funds tapped out by
> shoddy investment practices and switched to these plans. The issue
> being that they have less control as these are often managed by more
> conglomerated entities.
> - Collective investment stocks such as ESOP plans and worker equity
>
> Community Assets
>
> - Credit Unions - Federal CUs are restricted to about 25% of their
> assets being allocated towards business loans, however legislation is
> being considered that would bump this up to 50%. Of course its on the
> backburner, but with greater pressure that could change.
> - Building & Loan Funds - These are co-op institutions as well that can
> invest in building projects, commercial building loans, and other types
> of business loans.
> - Community Banks - Smallscale community banks can also put a lot of
> weight behind things, and are often not as restricted as credit unions.
> - Distributed Community Lending - so say you are starting a local worker
> co-op, and folks all over town are excited about it. Give them the
> chance to invest directly in the business, or possibly a many-to-many
> RLF in your community!
>
> FAQ
>
>
> Question: Why focus on such small and localized entities? Don't they
> have less capital?
>
> Answer: There is greater reliability, especially in distressed times, as
> these types of institutions are less likely to have risky investment
> portfolios. They have very significant levels of capital to work with
> as adoption of their services grow because of greater consumer
> confidence and local identity.
>
> A good example of collective benefits in action was during the Hugo Boss
> debacle. Remember - Hugo Boss's shareholders were getting antsy and
> trying to close down a Cleveland facility to move it to Turkey. Despite
> lots of great on the ground organizing, the battle was almost lost until
> a very unexpected development occurred - just before the shareholders
> made the decision to liquidate the assets of the Cleveland operation,
> the company in Columbus that managed the pension funds, retirement
> plans, and collective benefits of the Hugo Boss workers, who happened to
> own 20% of the shares of the company, threatened divestment if the
> operation moved overseas. The tables were turned, and the collectively
> held benefits of the workers actually wielded enough weight to stop a
> major company in its tracks.
>
>
> Question: Why not target larger, more conglomerated financial entities,
> venture capital funds, etc.?
>
> Answer: Consider their priorities- most financial entities that have
> stake in wallstreet and global commerce have competitive investments
> elsewhere to the united states, especially in manufacturing. They
> demand faster and higher returns, and often are less likely to foster
> projects that do not fit their vision. Having these kinds of investors
> often leads to uncertainty and poor management of projects, as
> shareholders will often not share the interests of the workers. Also,
> with experience from major venture capital programs in our area such as
> NorTech and JumpStart (pres. Obama just spoke with these folks), we are
> WELL aware of how antsy these folks get just around open source software
> - and they are IP obsessed. Presenting them with Open Hardware Licenses
> would probably drive them up the wall.
>
>
> Strategic Considerations
> - - - -
>
> What Unions often provide in the greatest is a huge base of members, and
> often a very progressive vision (take the United Steel Workers, for
> example). They are motivated to get their workers on the job
> (especially in manufacturing), and know how to mobilize resources around
> such things as training, certifications, and institutional support.
> They can attract state and federal funding for recruitment and training
> programs, and help with compliance. Unions can also give a lot of
> credence and credibility to any kind of campaign or concept, across many
> spheres of social and political influence.
>
> Gap Financing - Union benefit plans and worker equity could act as a gap
> financing measure, or a vote of confidence, to attract additional
> funding from community financial institutions. For example, they could
> cover the down payment for a building and initial equipment costs of a
> new operation. This would boost confidence from, say, some local credit
> unions or social investors, and they would provide investment or loans
> towards further building costs, initial feedstocks and payroll.
>
> Revolving Loan Funds - We already have a RLF in Ohio that acts as a gap
> financing program for ESOPs, Worker Co-ops and the like. You can
> receive a loan of up to $15,000 from them, however they have community
> partners who will match these loans up to a total of $350,000. It's
> called the Commonwealth Revolving Loan Fund, and it is actually
> administered by Roy Messing (who I mention above).
>
> RLFs are a great strategic move because they make the messiness of many
> to many investment a more streamlined process. All of the financial
> bodies mentioned above can invest in these funds, and with steady
> returns this can lower their risk (something very important these days
> for collective benefits). There is not a great amount of complexity
> involved either - invest and get returns. The institutions and social
> investors who are investing in these RLFs could also give guidance to
> some of the folks who are seeking investment (which can be very
> helpful), and possibly give additional financial support where RLFs are
> acting as a gap financing measure.
>
> Business Incubators - The business incubator model is huge. It's what
> gets politicians, unions, investors and whatnot all excited. There are
> some pretty good models here - pooling costs for buildings, utility
> costs, and shared financial, legal, and other helpful services. These
> often receive a lot of government funding, which is often pretty
> hands-off. A p2p manufacturing incubator, in a more forward thinking
> area, would not be a difficult effort (should i say the Bay Area?). Then
> again, it may not even be impossible in the midwest, if the right
> factors come together.
>
> Also, combined with the concept of Business Incubators could be
> EcoIndustrial Parks. Imagine the incubators above growing into
> prototyping and fab shops. You would have offices where people design,
> engineer, unit test, etc. They would send g-code and other designs down
> to the shop floor where parts that could be printed would be printed, in
> addition to those parts that could be torch cut, machined, pressed,
> injection molded, etc. These prototypes could even be a side effort to
> the actual production process, which could be happening in the same
> shared facility! The EcoIndustrial aspect would be that the industrial
> facilities would be combined - possibly through some off-grid
> co-generation scheme, providing heat and electricity. The fabbed goods
> would be produced using green practices, and possibly have the same
> implications (OEM parts for electric vehicles, solar arrays, turbines,
> biogas operatons; equipment for agroecological operations - anything
> from soil blockers to remote climate sensing equipment.) Green P2P
> would attract A LOT of attention, funding and subsidies. There are also
> very real supply chains that such operations would easily nudge into,
> even out here in the midwest. Especially when there are TONS of empty
> industrial parks all throughout the rural midwest (and urban) that have
> all the infrastructure in place, state and federal funding ready and
> waiting to subdisize any use of them, and entire communities of folks
> around them who would be glad to get to work!
>
>
> Conclusion
> -----
>
> So, really, there are a lot of opportunities for unions to act as an
> arbiter and confidence builder in p2p manufacturing. They have many of
> the resources that are needed - and unlike venture capitalists - are not
> going to consider manufacturing in "knowledge economy" nations to be
> abhorrent or competitive with their investments. On the other side of
> the coin, Unions are also beginning to show a lot of international
> solidarity, so there would be less resistance than one might anticipate
> to, say, international p2p supply chains if they were sustainable and
> fostered the growth of manufacturing in NA and Europe.
>
> Most importantly, they offer the advantage of oversight and collective
> bargaining in more tough situations. As the p2p manufacturing economy
> unfolds, one must pay close attention to the treatment of workers, to
> safety and to the fairness of pay and benefits. Definately the worker-
> co-op model affords for some measure of workplace democracy, but when
> there is no agency outside your own shop you can get stuck. This is why
> our worker co-op is joining the IWW - not to mention the excitement of
> being a part of an international movement of worker solidarity.
>
> P.S. - Michel - I can turn this into a p2p blog post here soon if you
> like, with some polishing :)
>
> --
> Richard Schulte
>
> Flywheel Tech Collective
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, 2011-02-24 at 15:28 +0700, Michel Bauwens wrote:
> > Dear Sam,
> >
> > copying two more union-p2p friends on this dialogue,
> >
> > Michel
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 10:35 AM, Samuel Rose <samuel.rose at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > Thanks Mark,
> >
> > This a long-term perspective/investment. Based on an ideas
> > first
> > articulated to me by Richard Schulte of Flywheel Tech
> > Collective, who
> > is copied on this email, the idea is to work with Unions to
> > start
> > building worker-owned cooperatives of various types,
> > especially based
> > around production and design of open source
> > technologies/software.
> > Mark, I copied you because I know that you've been in dialogue
> > with
> > Unions right here in Michigan for years. I wondered if you
> > might know
> > of some Union folks here in Michigan that might be candidates
> > for this
> > type of thing?
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 10:26 PM, Mark Dilley
> > <markwdilley at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Sam - thank you for sending this out what seems so many
> > days ago - I have been following this pretty keenly and am
> > curious about the title of your email "+ Unions and P2P
> > alternatives"
> > >
> > > open ears from anyone here.
> > >
> > > Best, Mark
> > >
> > >
> > > On 19Feb2011, at 5:19 PM, Samuel Rose wrote:
> > >
> > >> "What's happening in Wisconsin is not complicated. At the
> > beginning of
> > >> this year, the state was on course to end 2011 with a
> > budget surplus
> > >> of $120 million. As Ezra Klein explained, newly elected GOP
> > Governor
> > >> Scott Walker then " signed two business tax breaks and a
> > conservative
> > >> health-care policy experiment that lowers overall tax
> > revenues (among
> > >> other things). The new legislation was not offset, and it
> > turned a
> > >> surplus into a deficit."
> > >>
> > >> Walker then used the deficit he'd created as the
> > justification for
> > >> assaulting his state's public employees. He used a law
> > cooked up by a
> > >> right-wing advocacy group called the American Legislative
> > Exchange
> > >> Council (ALEC). ALEC likes to fly beneath the radar, but I
> > described
> > >> the organization in a 2005 article as "the connective
> > tissue that
> > >> links state legislators with right-wing think tanks,
> > leading anti-tax
> > >> activists and corporate money." Similar laws are on the
> > table in Ohio
> > >> and Indiana.
> > >>
> > >> Walker's bill would strip public employees of the right to
> > bargain
> > >> collectively for anything but higher pay (and would cap the
> > amount of
> > >> wage hikes they might end up gaining in negotiations). His
> > intentions
> > >> are clear -- before assuming office, Walker threatened to
> > decertify
> > >> the state's employees' unions (until he discovered that the
> > governor
> > >> doesn't have that power)."
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> http://www.alternet.org/newsandviews/article/479560/12_things_you_need_to_know_about_the_uprising_in_wisconsin/
> > >> _______
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Aso worth reading:
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> http://prop-press.typepad.com/blog/2011/02/report-from-day-five-first-chance-to-reflect.html
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> ________________________________________________________________________
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> I think the time is here to start talking with people about
> > >>
> >
> http://p2pfoundation.net/The_Political_Principles_of_Peer-to-Peer_Advocacy
> > >> here, in the Industrial Midwest (which includes WI)
> > >>
> > >> One simple way to route around party politics is to give
> > people a
> > >> direct p2p way to actively reflect existing poltics as we
> > saw in
> > >> iceland with http://skuggathing.is/portal based on
> > >> https://github.com/rbjarnason/open-active-democracy
> > >>
> > >> Another parallel approach is to start applying collective
> > decision
> > >> making and pooling of resources directly to problems people
> > are
> > >> addressing. In addition, creating cooperatives, supporting
> > alternative
> > >> currencies when appropriate.
> > >>
> > >> Unions in all of these states have resources, including
> > pension funds,
> > >> that they could invest directly in worker-owned cooperative
> > companies,
> > >> as has been discussed by Richard Schulte of
> > flywheeltechcollective in
> > >> the past. Some of them have expressed interest in doing
> > this. These
> > >> kinds of changes for entities like unions are long term
> > changes and
> > >> investments, and will take time. However, I think every
> > year that goes
> > >> by makes more and more on the left receptive to p2p
> > alternatives.
> > >>
> > >> If people are interested in working on P2P political
> > advocacy and
> > >> approaches in 2011-2012, let's talk here and continue to
> > build towards
> > >> thing people can really use in places like Wisconsin, Ohio,
> > Michigan,
> > >> Eastern Europe, South America, etc
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> --
> > >> Sam Rose
> > >> Future Forward Institute and Forward Foundation
> > >> Tel:+1(517) 639-1552
> > >> Cel: +1-(517)-974-6451
> > >> skype: samuelrose
> > >> email: samuel.rose at gmail.com
> > >> http://forwardfound.org
> > >> http://futureforwardinstitute.org
> > >> http://hollymeadcapital.com
> > >> http://p2pfoundation.net
> > >> http://socialmediaclassroom.com
> > >>
> > >> "The universe is not required to be in perfect harmony with
> > human
> > >> ambition." - Carl Sagan
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > --
> > Sam Rose
> > Future Forward Institute and Forward Foundation
> > Tel:+1(517) 639-1552
> > Cel: +1-(517)-974-6451
> > skype: samuelrose
> > email: samuel.rose at gmail.com
> > http://forwardfound.org
> > http://futureforwardinstitute.org
> > http://hollymeadcapital.com
> > http://p2pfoundation.net
> > http://socialmediaclassroom.com
> >
> > "The universe is not required to be in perfect harmony with
> > human
> > ambition." - Carl Sagan
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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: 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/20110225/07b553c3/attachment.htm
More information about the P2P-Foundation
mailing list