[P2P-F] Falling transaction costs

Wed Oct 26 08:58:01 CEST 2011

Hi Apostolis,

I'm not an expert on this, but it seems to me that any form of ownership and
distribution would risk inequality, and that therefore, active regulatory
rules and measures would always be needed in addition.

I think both marxist interpretations of exploitation in production, and
gesellian ones on exploitation in the spher*e of distribution through money,
have merit* (certainly today, with profit margins in production being
marginal, exploitation seems mostly financial ..) ... Therefore it seems to
me, an integrative approach in necessary, which includes transformation in
the design of money and the financial system. Ancient Greeks during the
polis, and I heard, free medieval cities had active measures against
accumulation of power and money. Though they ultimately all lost out, they
functioned for relatively long periods.

I suppose that measures around forbidding or limiting interest would work,

Michel

On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 7:15 AM, Apostolis Xekoukoulotakis <
xekoukou at gmail.com> wrote:

> Yes I am also in favor of unalienable consumer or citizen shares, but in
> every new creation of  means of production due to those very small
> differences in reward( and for many other personal reasons_spending), it is
> possible after a long period of time that one group of people would loan
> their money to the other group. with favorable terms to the lenders . Those
> loans for the creation of the means of production have the effect of
> magnifying the inequalities.
>
> In all cases, the consumers or citizens together with the workers control
> the means of production.
>
> So to put my ideas in your example, a citizen might not be able to pay a
> specific amount to retain his percentage in case the cooperative needs to
> raise capital. He would have to make a loan.
>
> I cant really understand how unalienable shares might help. I know that the
> starndard marxist theory says that profit is gained through the control of
> the means of prod. Here the consumers and workers control the means fo prod.
> but the lenders obtain profit.
>
> Is there a mistake in my assumptions?
>
>
> 2011/10/25 Michel Bauwens <michel at p2pfoundation.net>
>
>> Tom, perhaps you could present this essay on our p2p blog?
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 9:15 AM, Sandwichman <lumpoflabor at gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> People may be interested in the "conventional economic theory" about
>>> transaction costs. I've done a bit of work on this in response to reviewer
>>> comments on a paper I wrote. The reviewer suggested that I should
>>> contextualize  my analysis (of working time and productivity) as to how it
>>> related to mainstream theory. This struck me as somewhat odd because I am
>>> dealing with what I have already identified as a gaping hole in conventional
>>> theory. Be that as it may, I traced the broken threads of mainstream theory
>>> back to where they were cut and I think the result is a blistering, albeit
>>> calmly presented, indictment of the mainstream.
>>>
>>>
>>> http://ecologicalheadstand.blogspot.com/p/problem-with-problem-of-social-cost.html
>>>
>>> Essentially, mainstream economic models are constructed on the premise
>>> that things like transaction costs, overhead costs, external economies and
>>> social costs are "incidentals" that can be assumed away as a simplification
>>> and then added back into the equation at a later stage in the analysis. On
>>> the contrary, these things are central to the economic processes of
>>> production and exchange in a market economy. Furthermore, this centrality
>>> was well known to pioneers of neoclassical economic analysis and was a
>>> keystone of their methodology.
>>>
>>> On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 5:18 PM, Michel Bauwens <
>>> michel at p2pfoundation.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> what I find interesting about it is that it gives an objective grounding
>>>> to the trend towards distributed ownership.
>>>>
>>>> While I'm not opposed to collective pr*operty and obviously not to the
>>>> commons, I think that distributed individual property of productive forces
>>>> will be an important part of a future social order, as it extends the
>>>> contributory logic of p2p to the physical world.*
>>>>
>>>> That an individual can freely constitute collective capital by
>>>> aggregating and disaggregating his own 'citizen share' of the productive
>>>> forces has everything to do with peer production and the commons, since it
>>>> opens the possibility of fr*eely creating 'common stock' comm**ons.
>>>>
>>>> I h*ave no knowledge of current possibilities of having access to
>>>> productive forces for free ?
>>>> *
>>>> Michel
>>>> *
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 10:49 AM, Karl Robillard <krobillard at san.rr.com
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Michel,
>>>>>
>>>>> Your blog posting of Matt Cropp's ideas about the fall in transaction
>>>>> costs
>>>>> states in bold:
>>>>>
>>>>>  "THIS IS A MOST IMPORTANT ARGUMENT AND CRUCIAL ASPECT OF THE ‘P2P
>>>>> Revolution’!!"
>>>>>
>>>>> Why do you think it's so important? Currency systems are about tracking
>>>>> ownership and subjective value perception rather than providing open
>>>>> access
>>>>> and accurately tracking production inputs and outputs.  It seems to me
>>>>> it has
>>>>> almost nothing to do with open source, the commons, or peer production.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why would anyone want to "micro-own" parts of something when they could
>>>>> get
>>>>> access to the whole for free?  Matt closes by saying that technology
>>>>> "could be
>>>>> paving the way towards the age of the co-operative".  This is history
>>>>> already
>>>>> - there is no "could be" about it.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -Karl
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Sandwichman
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20111026/ce4be236/attachment.htm 