diary-mar-2009

Mar-30-2009: Papers.SSRN.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=952953 >>The Impact of the Termination Rule on Cooperation in a Prisoner's Dilemma Experiment

Mar-27-2009: CEOsforCities.org >>CEOs for Cities is a national net work of urban leaders dedicated to building and sustaining the next generation of great American cities.

Mar-26-2009: http://Wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_(economics) >>The economic value of a good or service has puzzled economists since the beginning of the discipline. First, economists tried to estimate the value of a good to an individual alone, and extend that definition to goods which can be exchanged. From this analysis came the concepts value in use and value in exchange.

Mar-26-2009: SocialTradeGame.org >>In the Social Trade game you are the manager of one of STRO's transaction net works and your tasks include hiring staff, starting marketing campaigns and setting the height of bonuses.

Mar-23-2009: Title idea: "'Dependence Theory of Value'" (GTV) [as compared to the Labor Theory of Value (LTV)]

Where the word 'value' is equal to the "surplus value" described by Karl Marx - being a generalization of profit, rent and interest.

The LTV claims consumers pay profit at the point-of-sale because workers added that value at the time-of-production. This "surplus value" beyond the wages they were paid.

Mar-23-2009: http://cis.poly.edu/~ross/papers/LightweightParadigm.pdf

Mar-19-2009: OSHWBank.org >>The mission of the bank is to fund and invest in Open Source Hardware. It helps open source projects achieve scale discounts at low quantities of production, where most DIY happens. The objective of the bank is to break-even, and sustain and grow Open Source Hardware.

AntiPastoHW.BlogSpot.com >>A blog about Open Source Hardware and experiences with LiquidWare.com

Mar-18-2009: Keep meaning to read SocialEdge.org/discussions/business-models/models-and-whats-missing

Mar-17-2009: Reply to "'Why does the 'we' fail?'" at UrbanEvolution.org/thinktank/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=188

"'Does the 'we' fail?'" Post by StaMint March 17th, 2009, 6:22 pm

Adrisya Alok wrote: >>I would also be quite curious what the person who started the thread has to contribute! It seems a shame to have people start a conversation and wander off into the abyss.

It's funny, I do feel as though I'm wandering in the abyss...

I must have assumed too much in my original question.

Many responses seem to say we are not failing.

I think there are flaws in how we organize,

And I think we can 'solve' those flaws,

But only if we admit they exist.

Then we can talk strategy.

To solve 'we' property.

For security.

Together

Otherwise, if we don't learn how to share physical property, every individual will be required to do every type of work for themselves, even if they don't have those skills or the buildings, organisms, energy, tools etc. needed for that production.

Almost nobody I know can even afford to own land and water rights.
Almost every person I know owes their house to the bank through a Mort Gage = Death Grip.

It seems we might be better off crash-landing on another planet or a deserted island.

Could we each afford to build a hut if there were only as many as are subscribed to UrbanEvolution.org?

I don't know how it can be claimed the 'we' are not failing when there is so much preventable poverty, homelessness, starvation, etc. among the very persons working the hardest because they are unable to afford any real ownership.

love

Mar-13-2009: "'Why does the 'we' fail?'" posted to UrbanEvolution.org/thinktank/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=188

Hello all.

My question is small, but the answer is likely not...

What I want to know is why humans tend to always fail when they try to organize - leaving each of us attempting to do everything alone.

Why do our efforts go 'astray' as the size of each group grows? Why do our efforts not scale?

If Capitalism is wrong, what *specifically* is wrong with it, and can if be fixed?

I'm not suggesting State-run Communism as an alternative. That apparently doesn't work either.

But could we ever figure-out the 'bug' with our organizational skills that keep us from creating community, or will we be forever confined to solitude for basic survival while simultaneously being semi-forced to participate in the problematic corporate world?

Love,
StaMint {Patriarch Lamiaceae}

Mar-11-2009: New GNUnix idea: Update a special hibernation file every minute or so you can always recover your most recent session in case of power outage. The file would only record and restore the state of all physical memory in use - ignoring any RAM banks the OS is not using.

Mar-06-2009: Wikipedia.org/wiki/Primitive_accumulation_of_capital >>The core question is how did it happen that a small percentage of the population obtained possession of the necessary resources to start businesses which employ people and gain profit; and analyzing how it happened that the vast majority of the population, came to be in the condition of having no sources of self-sustainment and having therefore to survive by selling their labor for a living wage.

Mar-06-2009: MelbEcon.UniMelb.edu.au/het/steuart/prin.htm >>An Inquiry into the Principles of Political Economy

Mar-06-2009: GlobalJusticeCenter.org/papers/caffentzis.htm >>A Tale of Two Conferences: Globalization, the Crisis of Neoliberalism and Question of the Commons

Mar-04-2009: Modified from original posted to ListCultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/2009-February/001581.html

"'Co-Owned Public Peer Property'"

When I say "co-ownership" I am talking about some group choosing to invest and hold some physical property for their own benefit. I'm NOT talking about every human on Earth having a say in that investment - only those who paid would have a say (a vote), and that vote would naturally be weighted by the amount of ownership they paid for.

Some examples that already occur:
1.) Some people joint-purchase an RV (Motor Home) so they can pay only costs.

2.) People used to co-own vacation homes before the Time-Share industry organized to take that over for the purpose of charging more than cost.

3.) Co-purchasing an airplane allows the group of owners to share it amongst themselves - hiring a pilot to operate it if necessary, but realizing great savings compared to rental.

Co-ownership allows each of us to invest in industry that would otherwise be out of reach because of financial constraints.

The capitalists are already using the strength of co-ownership against us when the joint-invest in for-profit corporations.

Without co-ownership we will be forced to do everything on our own, without any intradependence.

The Capitalists will infiltrate any community we try to establish - just as they currently do - when they buy the land, water rights, net works, restaurants, meeting places, grocery stores, shopping malls, farms, factories, etc. that are more efficiently owned by more than one person.

Once they own that infrastructure, and if we are not "pushing against it" by organizing and co-owning for ourselves, then we will be overrun as usual.

Single-ownership is important for Personal property, but for as long as we continue to resist solving the problems of co-ownership, we will be at the mercy of those that use it against us.