2013-10-23: High-level design of the Cross-Crowd website.
User chooses from 3 roles:
Owner : Buy product futures by committing property (usually by paying money which is then used to buy property).
Worker : Buy product futures by committing promises (future labor or work-bonds).
Customer: Buy product surplus and so pay profit which is then used to buy property.
Both futures and surplus may be purchased with either property or promises.
Workers cross-commit Promises through the VIPM.
2013-10-19: Watching Evil Dead 2 with Henry.
2013-10-19:
www.lib.niu.edu/1993/ihy930578.html Hog Reduction Program of the AAA
www.EconBrowser.com/archives/2007/01/the_new_deal_an.html The New Deal and the Great Depression
LivingHistoryFarm.org/farminginthe30s/crops_17.html Culling the Herds
If you were the ruler of a nation, would you decrease production and destroy food to help the hungry?
You may think question is too stupid to ask, but in 1933, during the peak of the Great Depression, the US government created the Agricultural Adjustment Act which paid farmers to not plant and to kill and dispose of livestock. Among other insanity, 6,000,000 pigs were destroyed to help the poor!
How is it that small groups act rationally but larger groups take the opposite approach.
At what point does our logic flip?
Is there a way to avoid this paradox?
I'm not asking if the government should or should not interfere, I'm asking why do corporations want the government to act against us, and is it possible to create corporations that are *on our side*.
Once we discover how to create corporations that serve we, the people, there will no longer be any reason to keep government separate from production since their goals will be the same and will finally be realigned with sanity and abundance.
2013-10-17: Again with the resume
2013-10-14: Product futures can alternatively be thought of as a subscription-based concept.
This viewpoint has consumers signing-up for goods and services at some quality and rate.
For example, 1 dozen grade AA medium eggs per week or 3 bus-rides per day, etc.
2013-10-14: The people of CERO.coop surely have good intentions as usual but their dire misunderstanding of our economic system continues to celebrate the wrongheaded approach of Worker as Owner.
They ignorantly believe large corporations "get rich off of our work" while not realizing profit has nothing to do with work. Profit is a result of consumer dependence and is eliminated completely when the consumer is the (co-)owner and accepts the product as the return on investment.
2013-10-12: Working on Product Futures
Designing a way to commit property and promises toward future production.
A web page displays planned products with estimates of the money, work and time needed to complete those goals.
The user selects the products they want and then pays by committing money or by cross-committing promises to work.
These users become real co-owners in the property such as land, tools, water, organisms, energy, etc. required for the products they want.
Workers do not receive wages but are instead compensated by the products of co-ownership and the cross-commitments of other workers just as the same as those who invest money.
Since we do not pay wages, we do not pay taxes as employers nor as employees.
The products are never sold since the people who want those products own them already as a result of their owning the property required for that production. For example, the co-owners of a dairy do not buy the milk from themselves, but each owns the same % of milk as they have ownership in the dairy.
Since we do not sell the products, we do not pay sales tax and also avoid legislation that might prohibit sales (for example it is illegal to sell raw milk in some parts of the US).
2013-10-06: To Facebook
While the claimed intent of ObamaCare is to simply provide us with services we know we all might need, it is naive to assume such a move is without strategically nefarious intent.
Humorously, those who most claim to believe such socialization might work are the very same that admit to having the least faith in the system (both corporate and government) being called upon to implement such changes.
We are being confused into choosing between two woefully inadequate approaches while the more difficult discussion of how we, the people might have real control is left untouched.
True socialization would have groups of those who predict they may need such services (anyone who would usually want health insurance) having real ownership and control of the Means of Production (in this case, the hospitals) within their local vicinity.
True socialization can be had through shared property ownership on a local level, but must include very carefully though-out constraints on how that ownership must 'flow' across time.
The false socialization we are being sold is yet another way for corporations (in this case insurance companies) to receive welfare from the value we provide through our labor and loss of sovereignty.
2013-10-02: decide between wording of:
skill, promise
source, property
group, crowd