-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
/
diary-aug-2009.htm
180 lines (177 loc) · 21.7 KB
/
diary-aug-2009.htm
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" lang="en" xml:lang="en">
<head>
<title>diary-aug-2009 </title>
<link href=".code/preferred.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"/>
</head>
<body>
<p class='header'>
<a href="_home.htm">Home</a> | <a href="_faq.htm">FAQ</a> | <a href="_thesis.htm">Thesis</a> | <a href="_diary.htm">Diary</a> | <a href="_projects.htm">Projects</a> | <a href="resume.htm">Resume</a> | <a href="_todo.htm">Todo</a> | <a href="_index.htm">Index</a> |<p>
<p class='main'><span class="rel">Related:</span> <a href="diary.htm">diary</a><br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Aug-11-2009:</span> Unpublished draft for <a class="ext" href="http://Groups.Google.com/group/openmanufacturing">Groups.Google.com/group/openmanufacturing</a><br/>
Herbert Snorrason wrote:<br/>
<span class="quot">> Patrick Anderson wrote:</span><br/>
<span class="quot2">>> If <a href="art.htm">art</a>ificial scarcity is eliminated, and if only <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>s are being</span><br/>
<span class="quot2">>> collected, then won't <a href="profit.htm">profit</a> be zero?</span><br/>
<span class="quot">></span><br/>
<span class="quot">> Aren't zero <a href="profit.htm">profit</a>s the natural result of a <a href="free.htm">free</a> market with perfect</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> competition and <a href="part.htm">part</a>icipant <a href="know.htm">know</a>ledge? From my reading of <a href="econ.htm">econ</a>omics, it</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> seems that zero <a href="profit.htm">profit</a>s represent efficiency --- if I'm wrong, do explain why...</span><br/>
<br/>
Yes, that is correct. But confusingly, a perfect market would be *fatal* for Capitalists - for what other reason are they in business?<br/>
<br/>
<a href="part.htm">Part</a> of <a class="ext" href="http://Wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_competition">http://Wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_competition</a> reads:<br/>
<span class="quot">"'According to the standard <a href="econ.htm">econ</a>omical definition of efficiency <small>(Pareto efficiency)</small>, perfect competition would lead to a completely efficient outcome. The analysis of perfectly competitive markets provides the foundation of the theory of supply and demand. Perfect competition is a market equilibrium in which all re<a href="sourc.htm">sourc</a>es are allocated and <a href="use.htm">use</a>d efficiently, and collective social welfare is maximized.'"</span><br/>
<br/>
Since perfecting competition causes <a href="pric.htm">pric</a>e to approach <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>, a strange situation occurs where normal "For <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a>" businesses - who measure their success by the a<a href="mount.htm">mount</a> they can keep <a href="pric.htm">pric</a>e above <a href="cost.htm">cost</a> - would close their doors proclaiming failure during perfect competition.<br/>
<br/>
Now, a business must <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> it's inve<a href="stor.htm">stor</a>s SOMETHING, otherwise, why would they invest? So, if the inve<a href="stor.htm">stor</a>s are expecting <a href="profit.htm">profit</a>, then they require the business they invested in to be able to operate in an imperfect market. <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> is a measure of this imperfection.<br/>
<br/>
But there is another thing that we could <a href="pay.htm">pay</a> inve<a href="stor.htm">stor</a>s if we choose those inve<a href="stor.htm">stor</a>s from a very special set:<br/>
<br/>
If the inve<a href="stor.htm">stor</a>s of a business are the very CONSUMERS of the intended ouputs of that <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion, then they would be satisfied with receiving "at <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>" <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>t alone, and would never need the business to keep <a href="pric.htm">pric</a>e above <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>.<br/>
<br/>
A consuming-inve<a href="stor.htm">stor</a>'s return on investment would be receiving the <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>t at a <a href="pric.htm">pric</a>e that is exactly the same as <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>.<br/>
<br/>
When the inve<a href="stor.htm">stor</a>s of <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion are the very consumers of the output, the organization can withstand perfect competition because those that pre-paid will be expecting <a href="produc.htm">PRODUC</a>T, not <a href="profit.htm">PROFIT</a>.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<span class="quot2">>> Who will be willing to invest in <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion if <a href="profit.htm">profit</a> is zero?</span><br/>
<span class="quot2">>></span><br/>
<span class="quot2">>> Consumers would invest even when <a href="profit.htm">profit</a> is zero because</span><br/>
<span class="quot2">>> their return on invest would be "at <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>" <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>t.</span><br/>
<span class="quot2">>></span><br/>
<span class="quot2">>> But then consumers would be the <a href="own.htm">own</a>ers of the</span><br/>
<span class="quot2">>> Means of <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>tion which many consider taboo.</span><br/>
<span class="quot">></span><br/>
<span class="quot">> You're forgetting another group. <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>ers would also invest, because</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> their <a href="liv.htm">liv</a>elihood depends on it. So you'd have a mixed bag of consumer</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> and <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>er <a href="own.htm">own</a>ed businesses.</span><br/>
<span class="quot">></span><br/>
<span class="quot">> Interestingly, businesses <a href="own.htm">own</a>ed and operated by consumers have been a</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> long-standing feature of the cooperative movement.</span><br/>
<br/>
<br/>
The <a href="trad.htm">trad</a>itional definition of a "Consumers' Cooperative" shows the individual consumers are not in control, but have instead forfeited their rights to a representative committee that causes the organization to be run largely the same as a for-<a href="profit.htm">profit</a> corporation.<br/>
<br/>
<a class="ext" href="http://Wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumers%27_cooperative">http://Wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumers%27_cooperative</a> tells us: <span class="quot">"'Every year members receive a share of the <a href="profit.htm">profit</a>s that they helped to create, based on the a<a href="mount.htm">mount</a> made in <a href="profit.htm">profit</a>s that year and the how much they had spent with any of its businesses.'"</span><br/>
<br/>
And <a class="ext" href="http://Wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Co-operative_Group">http://Wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Co-operative_Group</a> tells us there was <span class="quot">"'Revenue over 13 billion'"</span> in 2009.<br/>
<br/>
But <a href="profit.htm">profit</a> only occurs when a consumer must buy the good from an <a href="own.htm">own</a>er at a <a href="pric.htm">pric</a>e above <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>.<br/>
<a href="trad.htm">Trad</a>ing goods only occurs when the consumer has insufficient <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership in the Physical <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es of that <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion - for when his <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership is sufficient, he does not 'buy' apples, but instead <a href="own.htm">own</a>s them already as a result of his <a href="own.htm">own</a>ing the Physical <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es and pre-<a href="pay.htm">pay</a>ing the <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>s of <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion <small>(with wages being one of those <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>s)</small>.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Aug-11-2009:</span> Posted to <a class="ext" href="http://Groups.Google.com/group/openmanufacturing">Groups.Google.com/group/openmanufacturing</a><br/>
Kevin Carson wrote:<br/>
<span class="quot">> The important thing is to eliminate</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> <a href="art.htm">art</a>ificial scarcity, not to try to simulate abundance where it does</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> not exist. Where things are naturally scarce--i.e., take effort and</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> disutility to <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>e--then <a href="pay.htm">pay</a>ment is entirely ap<a href="prop.htm">prop</a>riate. I just</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> want the portion of <a href="pric.htm">pric</a>e that reflects <a href="art.htm">art</a>ificial scarcity to</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> collapse, leaving only the actual <a href="cost.htm">cost</a> of effort and materilas,</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> meanwhile continuing to look for ways to reduce the effort and</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> materials required for <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion.</span><br/>
<br/>
If <a href="art.htm">art</a>ificial scarcity is eliminated, and if only <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>s are being<br/>
collected, then won't <a href="profit.htm">profit</a> be zero?<br/>
<br/>
Who will be willing to invest in <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion if <a href="profit.htm">profit</a> is zero?<br/>
<br/>
Consumers would invest even when <a href="profit.htm">profit</a> is zero because<br/>
their return on invest would be "at <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>" <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>t.<br/>
<br/>
But then consumers would be the <a href="own.htm">own</a>ers of the<br/>
Means of <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>tion which many consider taboo.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
Patrick<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Aug-10-2009:</span> Posted to Discuss@<a class="ext" href="http://Lists.Autonomo.us">Lists.Autonomo.us</a><br/>
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 11:10 AM, Luis Villa wrote:<br/>
<span class="quot">> Just to <a href="mak.htm">mak</a>e sure that we're all staying grounded in <a href="real.htm">real</a>ity, it seems</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> important to <a href="note.htm">note</a> that there is no significant '<a href="back.htm">back</a>lash against</span><br/>
<span class="quot">> social <a href="net.htm">net</a><a href="work.htm">work</a>ing' out here in the <a href="real.htm">real</a> world.</span><br/>
<br/>
"<a href="back.htm">Back</a>lash" is our impotent and immature reaction to our lack of preparedness.<br/>
<br/>
For how long will the 'We' wait for someone else to organize for us in the 'correct' way?<br/>
<br/>
The 'We' must stop thinking that it can "lash <a href="back.htm">back</a>" at Capitalists that have the forethought and tenacity to organize for us.<br/>
<br/>
The 'We' must <a href="start.htm">start</a> thinking about how to "get together" and organize for our <a href="own.htm">own</a> collective and inclusive <small>(all <a href="user.htm">user</a>s must have <a href="free.htm">free</a>dom)</small> benefit instead of just complaining that somebody else is doing it wrong - especially when those that the We feel are do it wrong had the intention of taking advantage of Us from the very beginning!<br/>
<br/>
The 'We' is paralyzed because of the fear of <a href="proper.htm">proper</a>ty <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership.<br/>
<br/>
The 'We' believes physical <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es can never be held for the sole purpose of "<a href="use.htm">Use</a> Value".<br/>
<br/>
The 'We' has been hypnotized into the false dichotomy between "Capitalism" and "Communism" as though there weren't infinite other ways to organize.<br/>
<br/>
The 'We' will never move forward until we face the combination of power and <a href="free.htm">free</a>dom that is "<a href="proper.htm">proper</a>ty <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership" to discover exactly what is wrong and then begin to buy and <a href="co-own.htm">co-own</a> those Physical <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es in a 'righteous' manner for the material sphere similar to how the <a href="gnu.htm">GNU</a> <a href="gpl.htm">GPL</a> <a href="use.htm">use</a>s Copyright against <a href="prop.htm">prop</a>rietary holdings in the <a href="real.htm">real</a>m of 'design'.<br/>
<br/>
The 'We' does not understand the meaning and purpose of <a href="profit.htm">profit</a> <small>(<a href="pric.htm">pric</a>e above <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>)</small>, and so fear it also.<br/>
<br/>
When the 'We' can finally see <a href="profit.htm">profit</a> is a measure of <a href="user.htm">user</a> dependence upon the <a href="curr.htm">curr</a>ent <a href="own.htm">own</a>ers, then the 'We' can begin using it to balance growth and autodistribute control to all those willing to <a href="pay.htm">pay</a>.<br/>
<br/>
Treating <a href="profit.htm">Profit</a> as an investment from the <a href="user.htm">user</a> who paid it will cause the Capitalist to become unimportant as competition <small>(in <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership of the Material Means of <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>tion)</small> will approach perfection - thus causing any <a href="profit.htm">profit</a> collected against each of those <a href="user.htm">user</a>s to approach zero and therefore 'destroying' the market since <a href="pric.htm">pric</a>e will safely meet <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Aug-10-2009:</span> <a class="ext" href="http://Wikipedia.org/wiki/Co-operative_economics">Wikipedia.org/wiki/Co-operative_economics</a> splits Cooperatives into "Co-operative Federalism", "Co-operative Individualism" and "Retailers' cooperatives".<br/>
<br/>
"Co-operative Federalism" is supposedly consumer-<a href="own.htm">own</a>ed, but this is clearly is not perpetually true since <a href="profit.htm">profit</a>s would need to be treated as consumer investment yet: <span class="quot">"'<a href="profit.htm">profit</a>s <small>(or surpluses)</small> from these co-operative wholesale societies should be paid as dividends to the member co-operators, rather than to their <a href="work.htm">work</a>ers'"</span>.<br/>
<br/>
"Co-operative Individualism" is <a href="work.htm">work</a>er-<a href="own.htm">own</a>ed, and so is of little interest to us here.<br/>
<br/>
"Retailers' cooperatives" are <a href="own.htm">own</a>ed by groups of capitalist corporations. BORING!<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Aug-10-2009:</span> <a class="ext" href="http://FAX.Libs.UGA.edu/hd2951xc776/1f">FAX.Libs.UGA.edu/hd2951xc776/1f</a> scans of CO-OP magazine from 1921-1947. <a href="use.htm">Use</a> <a class="ext" href="http://WinDjView.sf.net">WinDjView.sf.net</a> to read the excellent djvu versions.<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Aug-07-2009:</span> Beginning to <a href="use.htm">use</a> "<a href="payer own.htm">Payer Own</a>ed" as a <a href="new.htm">new</a> codename for the CCC to disassociate it from the <a href="trad.htm">trad</a>itional definition of a "Consumers' Cooperative".<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Aug-07-2009:</span> The structure and goals of a "Consumers' Cooperative" <small>(CC)</small> as defined at <a class="ext" href="http://Wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumers%27_cooperative">Wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumers%27_cooperative</a> are massively <a href="diff.htm">diff</a>e<a href="rent.htm">rent</a> from those of a Consumer Capital Cooperative <small>(CCC)</small>. The internal <a href="work.htm">work</a>ings and final outcome barely resemble each other.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<span class="h2">==Structural <a href="diff.htm">diff</a>erences</span><br/>
<span class="bullet">*</span> A CC is a committee-<a href="admin.htm">admin</a>istered entity which inflicts "Tyranny of the Majority" dragnet compliance through slush-<a href="fund.htm">fund</a> fees.<br/>
<br/>
<span class="bullet">*</span> A CCC is not an <a href="admin.htm">admin</a>istrative entity and has no defined committee, but is merely an observation that many independent <a href="co-own.htm">co-own</a>ers using the CCCC may choose to <a href="work.htm">work</a> together for the benefits it brings. We define a CCC only for the purpose of easily talking about such groups of <a href="co-own.htm">co-own</a>ers, but that cooperation is neither mandatory nor centrally managed. The CCCC may even need a clause to help keep otherwise independent groups from being coerced into <a href="part.htm">part</a>icipating in governance or being drawn into clustering policies which some personalities will likely want to inflict during later stages of development.<br/>
<br/>
It is now clear to me how misleading it is to utilize the term 'cooperative' since that word is <a href="trad.htm">trad</a>itionally envisioned as an overarching entity of control instead of the loosely connected independent groups of <a href="co-own.htm">co-own</a>ers which the CCCC would foster.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<span class="h2">==<a href="own.htm">Own</a>ership of the outputs</span><br/>
<span class="bullet">*</span> A CC entity <a href="own.htm">own</a>s the outputs of <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion and sells those goods <a href="back.htm">back</a> to each individual consumer/<a href="own.htm">own</a>er - causing <a href="pric.htm">pric</a>e above <a href="cost.htm">cost</a> even if consumer/<a href="own.htm">own</a>er had sufficient <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership to have been the <a href="own.htm">own</a>er of those goods already.<br/>
<br/>
<span class="bullet">*</span> When using the CCCC, the individual <a href="own.htm">own</a>ers of each individual Physical <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>e is the <a href="own.htm">own</a>er of the ouputs of that <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion, so goods are not sold unless the <a href="own.htm">own</a>er decides he has an 'excess' and chooses to do so - but in that case <a href="profit.htm">profit</a> must be treated as an investment from the <a href="pay.htm">pay</a>er.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<span class="bullet">*</span> A CC may have arbitrary conditions of <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership applied homogenously to all Physical <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es across the entire cooperative such as <span class="quot">"'Membership is open to everyone as long as they share the Group's values and principles.'"</span> <small>[ <a class="ext" href="http://Wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Co-operative_Group">Wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Co-operative_Group</a> ]</small><br/>
<br/>
<span class="bullet">*</span> The CCCC has only one condition of <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership: If the <a href="own.htm">own</a>ers of an <a href="obj.htm">obj</a>ect under the CCCC choose to sell, give, <a href="rent.htm">rent</a>, <a href="trad.htm">trad</a>e, share, <a href="prop.htm">prop</a>agate or convey that <a href="obj.htm">obj</a>ect - any <a href="pric.htm">pric</a>e above <a href="cost.htm">cost</a> must be retained by the <a href="pay.htm">pay</a>er as a receipt of investment in more <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tive <a href="sourc.htm">sourc</a>es. This investment is <a href="curr.htm">curr</a>ently <a href="know.htm">know</a>n as a <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>t Future.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<span class="h2">== Treatment of <a href="profit.htm">profit</a></span><br/>
<span class="bullet">*</span> A CC treats <a href="profit.htm">profit</a> as a reward for the <a href="curr.htm">curr</a>ent <a href="own.htm">own</a>ers: <span class="quot">"'Every year members receive a share of the <a href="profit.htm">profit</a>s that they helped to create, based on the a<a href="mount.htm">mount</a> made in <a href="profit.htm">profit</a>s that year and the how much they had spent with any of its businesses.'"</span> But <a href="profit.htm">profit</a> only occurs when a consumer must buy the good, and that only occurs when he has insufficient <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership in the Physical <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es - for when his <a href="own.htm">own</a>ership is sufficient, he should not need to 'buy' apples, but would instead <a href="own.htm">own</a> them already as a result of his <a href="own.htm">own</a>ing the Physical <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es and <a href="pay.htm">pay</a>ing the <a href="cost.htm">cost</a>s of <a href="produc.htm">produc</a>tion.<br/>
<br/>
<span class="bullet">*</span> The CCCC is a <a href="trad.htm">Trad</a>e <a href="agree.htm">Agree</a>ment that requires <a href="pric.htm">pric</a>e above <a href="cost.htm">cost</a> be treated as an investment from the <a href="pay.htm">pay</a>er so that latecomers gain <a href="proper.htm">proper</a>ty in <a href="new.htm">new</a> Physical <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>es at the rate they are willing and able to <a href="pay.htm">pay</a>.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<span class="bullet">*</span> A CC is supposedly 'democratic' in that each member has one vote over the operation of the *entire* cooperative no matter the a<a href="mount.htm">mount</a> they have invested. This has Tyranny of the Majority problems, gives <a href="new.htm">new</a>comers too much weight compared to more established members and will probably lead to 'representative' governance.<br/>
<br/>
<span class="bullet">*</span> The CCCC creates extremely localized governance because it is applied solely by the <a href="co-own.htm">co-own</a>ers of each indivisible Physical <a href="sourc.htm">Sourc</a>e. The only mandatory laws are embodied within the CCCC and enforced by the private-<a href="proper.htm">proper</a>ty laws of the 'containing' city, <a href="stat.htm">stat</a>e and nation. <a href="own.htm">Own</a>ers using the CCCC might enforce extra restrictions upon the <a href="use.htm">use</a>, <a href="mod.htm">mod</a>ification, copying and sharing of their physical <a href="proper.htm">proper</a>ty instances as long as those restrictions do not violate the CCCC.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Aug-06-2009:</span> Thinking again about the 'CoBuy' <a href="ide.htm">ide</a>a and how it relates to <a href="co-own.htm">co-own</a>ership, the <a href="gnurho.htm">GNUrho</a> and <a href="produc.htm">Produc</a>t Futures.<br/>
<br/>
<hr/><span class="date">Aug-03-2009:</span> <a class="ext" href="http://FlameDesktop.com">FlameDesktop.com</a> <span class="quot2">>></span><br/>
</p>
<p class='footer'>
Page generated from <a href=".text/diary-aug-2009">diary-aug-2009</a> by <a href=".code/etym.el">etym</a>.</p>
</body>
</html>