2020-09-28: git clone github.com/tock/tock
2020-09-28:
Hylo.com/c/freeland
A fun new way to work and own.
Sign work agreements to gain square feet.
Produce any* good or service on your land.
Sell future products to buy land without debt.
Own land to own future products without purchase!
2020-09-26: The For Product business model:
Articles of Incorporation
Statement of Intent
2020-09-22:
http://CrossCrowdPredictiveProduction.github.io/free%20farm.htm
http://CrossCrowdPredictiveProduction.github.io/crowd%20control.htm
http://CrossCrowdPredictiveProduction.github.io/cross%20crowd%20predictive%20production.htm
2020-09-21: The Age of Revolution -- https://libcom.org/files/Eric%20Hobsbawm%20-%20Age%20Of%20Revolution%201789%20-1848.pdf
2020-09-21: "'Bootstrapping'" by Bob Haugen -- https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NwEcKf-AlD3WlvHFNCmGmDKp9NerPeAaHeTHTrdF628
2020-09-21: Change Gang
2020-09-12:
Land allocation is kinda like disk partitioning.
There are many ways to do it, but it is mostly required.
Some space must be used for 'metadata' such as roads and pipes.
2020-09-11: Open Source Business Models
SustainOSS.org >>Holding a space for conversations about sustaining Open Source.
FairOSS.org >>Sustaining open source software by funding projects the world depends on
2020-09-11: UBIResearch.org >>We are a professional association of scholars, community groups, policymakers, and entrepreneurs working towards a better monetary system. Together, we are painting a clearer picture of the possibilities of a universal basic income (UBI).
2020-09-06: https://www.sfu.ca/~wainwrig/Econ400/jensen-meckling.pdf
"'
In this paper we draw on recent progress in the theory of (1) property rights, (2) agency,
and (3) finance to develop a theory of ownership structure1 for the firm.
In addition to tying together elements of the theory of each of these three areas, our analysis casts new light on and has implications for a variety of issues in the professional and popular literature including the definition of the firm, the “separation of ownership and control,” the “social responsibility” of business, the definition of a “corporate objective function,” the determination of an optimal capital structure, the specification of the content of credit agreements, the theory of organizations, and the supply side of the completeness of markets problems.
'"
2020-09-06: Unlike Labor Vouchers, earthChange work-to-own agreements insure property vests to workers as that production is completed.
Wikipedia.org/wiki/Labour_voucher
"'
They are also not exchangeable for any means of production, hence they are not transmutable into capital.
Such a system is proposed by many as a replacement for traditional money while retaining a system of remuneration for work done.
The followers of Owen stood for a society of co-operative communities. Each community would own its own means of production and each member of a community would work to produce what had been agreed was needed and in return would be issued with a labour voucher certifying for how many hours he or she had worked. A person could then use this labour voucher to obtain from the community's stock of consumer goods any product or products which had taken the same number of hours to produce.
Owen believed that this co-operative commonwealth could begin to be introduced under capitalism and in the first half of the 1830s some of his followers established labour bazaars on a similar principle in which workers brought the products of their labour to the bazaar and received in exchange a labour voucher that entitled them to take from the bazaar any item or items which had taken the same time to produce after taking into account the costs of the raw materials. These bazaars were ultimately failures, but the idea of labour vouchers appeared in substantially similar forms in France in the writings of Pierre-Joseph Proudhon.[citation needed]
Although he disagreed with the manner in which they were implemented by Owen, they were later advocated by Karl Marx as a way of dealing with immediate and temporary shortages upon the establishment of socialism. Marx explained that this would be necessary since socialism emerges from capitalism and would be "stamped with its birthmarks". In Marx's proposal, an early socialist society would reward its citizens according to the amount of labour they contribute to society. In the Critique of the Gotha Programme, Marx said:
[T]he individual producer receives back from society—after the deductions have been made—exactly what he gives to it. What he has given to it is his individual quantum of labour. For example, the social working day consists of the sum of the individual hours of work; the individual labour time of the individual producer is the part of the social working day contributed by him, his share in it. He receives a certificate from society that he has furnished such-and-such an amount of labour (after deducting his labour for the common funds); and with this certificate, he draws from the social stock of means of consumption as much as the same amount of labour cost. The same amount of labor which he has given to society in one form, he receives back in another.[3]
However, Marx essentially refused the idea in the Poverty of Philosophy, especially within the capitalism (I. chapter, 2. §). Marx stated that the time in itself separated from other people's time is not suitable to measure the value of work. The value "is constituted, not by the time needed to produce it by itself, but in relation to the quota of each and every other product which can be created at the same time" (3.§. A.). According to Marx, the introduction of labour vouchers would create a lazy society and economy as there would not be concurrency between employers and employees, so nobody would be able to tell what the optimal (minimal) time which was needed to produce something would be. For example, what if "Peter" works 12 hours per day, meanwhile "Paul" works only 6 hours. This means that "Peter" worked 6 unnecessary hours and his labour vouchers are not worth anything as this is regarded +6 hours, not to mention other factors of the work. To summarize Marx's opinion in the Poverty of Philosophy, the labour voucher is not suitable to create a new socialist society, and the theory of Proudhon and others is nothing more than a utopian apology of the existing capitalist system. By Friedrich Engels, Proudhon himself tried to introduce the labour voucher system in 1849, but his attempt collapsed soon. Marx was adamant in saying that labour vouchers were not a form of money as they could not circulate—a problem he pointed out with Owen's system of labour-time notes.
After the October Revolution, the Bolsheviks were forced to let the direct production-exchange and gave valueless vouchers to the peasantry for the grain and the food-stuff which were confiscated by brutal force, but this method led to local rebellions and after all to the civil war. Vladimir Lenin never suggested introducing the labour voucher system in the industrial areas. No other socialist countries used later the labour voucher system.
Sir Leo Chiozza Money advocated for a similar monetary scheme in his 1934 book Product Money (Methuen) with notes or certificates being issued for productive work and destroyed once exchanged for consumption goods. In Nazi Germany, Adolf Hitler (Hjalmar Schacht finance-minister and banker) applied a kind of labour-voucher named MEFO-bond, whose aim was to hide the rearmament program's expenditures before the Western world as the big trusts did not pay by money-transfer to each other, but bought MEFO bonds from the state and changed these bonds in closed circuit. More modern implementations as time-based currencies were implemented in the United States starting in the 1970s.
'"
2020-09-02:
We all need land and water
to wash and eat and sleep.
We can own land and water
to avoid paying rent.
We can use peer-to-peer (P2P) agreements
and a grouping mechanism
to fund
buy Undeveloped land to begin large scale ecosystem restoration through permaculture techniques creating food-forested cities truly owned and directly operated by those humans without paying tribute to others.
shaped by patterns found in the GNU GPL Copyright license, time banking, and crowdfunding, but with subtle changes to each of these approaches.
Though it is quite simple, It is very difficult to communicate how it works because it is so similar to what we already know.
For example, property ownership in this system is held by workers, but not for the usual reason.
Every worker is also a consumer and it is because of the need to consume that workers must own.
And so, instead of the Farmer owning the Farm, the Miller owning the Mill, and the Baker owning the Bakery, It is suggested each own a portion of each industry according to the amount they predict they will need to consume of the final results.
This creates a vertically integrated and consumer owned chain of production that does not require a token counterflow except for the work required- and that flow can also be minimized by trading skills early- So the farmer would farm for the two others, while the two others would mill and bake in exchange.
This means the bread is not sold at the end of production because it is *already* the individuated property of each consumer/owner.