hi Karl,<br><br>the affirmation that one hour of labour equals that of everyone else, directly challenges some forms of domination ... it may not be the best solution, that is not what we're discussion, but there are no objectively fair standards to judge value, they can only be socially constructed and agreed on,<br>
<br>there have been, in community economics, <a href="http://p2pfoundation.net/Community_Economics">http://p2pfoundation.net/Community_Economics</a>, various historical attempts to tackle this, and not all of them are based on time, <a href="http://p2pfoundation.net/Time-Based_Economics">http://p2pfoundation.net/Time-Based_Economics</a><br>
<br>f.e.<br><br><ol><li><a href="http://p2pfoundation.net/Fair-Share_Labor_System" title="Fair-Share Labor System">Fair-Share Labor System</a>
</li><li><a href="http://p2pfoundation.net/Labor_Quota_System" title="Labor Quota System">Labor Quota System</a></li><li><a href="http://p2pfoundation.net/Anti-Quota_Labor_System" title="Anti-Quota Labor System">Anti-Quota Labor System</a></li>
</ol><br>My only point is that monetary designs that challenge capitalist-exploitative logics can be one of the means to tackle social justice, amongst others, but of course, they are insufficient by themselves ... but I don't see how that keeping compound interest, scarcity designed money could be used productively in a just society,<br>
<br>each social field has its own relative autonomy, and needs specific measures and changes; the important thing is to have an integrated or integral view of social change, which helps us to make right choices, after delibartion, amongst proposed alternatives<br>
<br>now each value system will have its flaws, but they can be corrected by auxiliary measures ...<br><br>My question to you is, how do you intend to integrate 'intent' in the economic system ..<br><br>michel<br><br>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 1:37 PM, Karl Robillard <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:krobillard@san.rr.com">krobillard@san.rr.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="im">On Tuesday, August 02, 2011 02:53:08 am Michel Bauwens wrote:<br>
> hi Karl, one remark about open source currencies ... your reasoning applies<br>
> there was well,<br>
><br>
> for example, indeed Bitcoin is designed to be a scarce, hoarded and<br>
> speculative currency, but other complementary currencies are designed for<br>
> equity, such as Time Dollars,<br>
><br>
> so neither openness, not peer to peer architectures are by themselves<br>
> sufficient,<br>
><br>
> I think for those that believe in equity and justice, we need to find the<br>
> right ways to critique hyper-capitalist solutions such as the one regarding<br>
> education,<a href="http://miiu.org/wiki/Vesting_students_as_co-owners_of_schools" target="_blank">http://miiu.org/wiki/Vesting_students_as_co-owners_of_schools</a><br>
><br>
> I'd like to use your remark in the blog as well?<br>
><br>
> Michel<br>
<br>
<br>
</div>Everyone is free to repost what I write to this list. �Sharing ideas is why<br>
I'm here.<br>
<br>
You were asking for critiques of Open Source Ecology and it occurs to me that<br>
Marcin ignores just what we're talking about, the insufficiency of openness. �He<br>
has no interest in copyleft licensing and the political impulse it provides.<br>
<br>
Here's what Wikipedia says about time-based currency:<br>
<br>
�"One hour equals one service credit. In these systems, one person volunteers<br>
to work for an hour for another person; thus, they are credited with one hour,<br>
which they can redeem for an hour of service from another volunteer. Critics<br>
charge this would lead to fewer doctors or dentists. Other systems, such as<br>
Ithaca Hours, let doctors and dentists charge more hours per hour."<br>
<br>
A dollar is worth whatever people agree on. �An hour of labor is worth<br>
whatever people agree on. �Where's the difference Michel? �An economy run on<br>
opinion and abstract notions of fairness will never be just. �Rather than<br>
pretending that we can measure the unmeasurable (the value of human life) I'd<br>
rather see people focus on more direct methods of bridging intent with<br>
outcome.<br>
<div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
<br>
-Karl<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
P2P Foundation - Mailing list<br>
<a href="http://www.p2pfoundation.net" target="_blank">http://www.p2pfoundation.net</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation" target="_blank">https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>P2P Foundation: <a href="http://p2pfoundation.net" target="_blank">http://p2pfoundation.net</a>� - <a href="http://blog.p2pfoundation.net" target="_blank">http://blog.p2pfoundation.net</a> <br>
<br>Connect: <a href="http://p2pfoundation.ning.com" target="_blank">http://p2pfoundation.ning.com</a>; Discuss:�<a href="http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation" target="_blank">http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation</a><div>
<br>Updates: <a href="http://del.icio.us/mbauwens" target="_blank">http://del.icio.us/mbauwens</a>; <a href="http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens" target="_blank">http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens</a>; <a href="http://twitter.com/mbauwens" target="_blank">http://twitter.com/mbauwens</a>; <a href="http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens" target="_blank">http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens</a><br>
</div><br>