Re: I considered presenting

Patrick, I meant interest as a return on an investment.


On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 3:10 PM, Brent Shambaugh
<brent.shambaugh@gmail.com>wrote:

> I'm sorry if I was in any way rude. Thanks.
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Brent Shambaugh <brent.shambaugh@gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
>> Interesting. A rating system is mentioned here.
>>
>> https://payswarm.com/minutes/2012-09-04/
>>
>> "
>> Manu Sporny: the other thing that you could do is that, if the working
>> group has a way of tracking, saying "here's some money we expect you to
>> spend on X, Y, Z", then if they don't show up with the money/goods then you
>> know not to trust them (sort of a prebuy type of trust test system)
>> Manu Sporny: the working group could deposit funds into members' accounts
>> Manu Sporny: another way is to have members show up with the physical
>> good and then do the transfer when they are present with it
>> Manu Sporny: there are many different ways to do the reimbursement
>> model, we just need to discuss how
>> Nick Person: having a really easy way to generate the meta data so if
>> there's a problem we can look at it and connect it with other semantic web
>> communities, etc. is useful
>> Nick Person: a public rating system could also be used
>> Nick Person: Yes, we've been thinking of a public rating system as well.
>> Manu Sporny: using the identities you could keep track of
>> positive/negative transactions and link them to identities
>> Manu Sporny: and keep track of "karma" (etc) to help people decide who
>> they want to do business with
>> Manu Sporny: we were thinking of having a publically accessible database
>> to keep track of this to help payswarm authorities use a public rating
>> system to help figure out who to trust, etc."
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 2:57 PM, Brent Shambaugh <
>> brent.shambaugh@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> In reponse to:
>>>
>>> "Hi Mr Shambaugh,
>>>
>>> I am also working on a new approach to production.
>>>
>>> Reading your articles I see your focus is very different from mine, so I
>>> hope we can learn from each other...
>>>
>>>
>>> I have some delicate (sometimes considered offensive) questions:
>>>
>>>
>>> 0.) How will investors be compensated? I say investors should be
>>> consumers who are compensated with Product instead of Profit.
>>>
>>>
>>> 1.) Who should be owners of the means of production? I say the consumers
>>> should be the owners - so they do not need to buy the product because, as
>>> co-owners, they own their % already.
>>>
>>>
>>> 2.) What should be done with Profit when we sell surplus Product to
>>> outsiders? I say Profit should be treated as an investment from the
>>> consumer who paid it - so that all consumers slowly gain the co-ownership
>>> needed to secure their future needs.
>>>
>>>
>>> 3.) How should workers be compensated? I say by accepting their promises
>>> of future work as yet another form of investment - so they each become
>>> co-owners in the means of production for which they need the products (not
>>> necessarily the means of production for which they know and want to
>>> operate) within the production network.
>>>
>>>
>>> 4.) How do we vote within such a system? I say by treating the payment
>>> of costs as a vote, and the absence of such payment as a vote against - so
>>> each person votes to build and maintain the "public works" they want by
>>> simply paying for those things.
>>>
>>>
>>> 5.) How do we solve the Tyranny of the Majority when decisions are not
>>> unanimous and cannot be resolved through payment-based-votes? I say by
>>> allowing any "realistically divisible" subgroup to secede from the rest for
>>> any reason while retaining their portion of co-ownership. When the means of
>>> production cannot be divided realistically, the minority can probably sell
>>> their shares to the outsiders who are paying more than cost for surplus as
>>> explained in #2.
>>>
>>> Thanks for your time.
>>>
>>> Sincerely,
>>> Patrick Anderson
>>> http://ImputedProduction.BlogSpot.com"
>>>
>>> Okay, I'll give it my best shot based on what I know.
>>>
>>> 0.) How will investors be compensated? I say investors should be
>>> consumers who are compensated with Product instead of Profit.
>>>
>>> See the big paragraph below. I believe it is largely up to the concerned
>>> party.
>>>
>>> 1.) Who should be owners of the means of production? I say the consumers
>>> should be the owners - so they do not need to buy the product because, as
>>> co-owners, they own their % already.
>>>
>>> Investors could come together like a co-op, or someone could own it. I
>>> believe it is largely up to them. Computers might be able to help keep
>>> track of things depending on computer power, network speed, the ability to
>>> model and query data, and perhaps other things. I imagine people working
>>> with a firm in a collaborative fashion, or drawing a loose boundry around a
>>> project which represents a firm.
>>>
>>> 2.) What should be done with Profit when we sell surplus Product to
>>> outsiders? I say Profit should be treated as an investment from the
>>> consumer who paid it - so that all consumers slowly gain the co-ownership
>>> needed to secure their future needs.
>>>
>>> Largely, I believe this should be up to whoever is producing.
>>>
>>> 3.) How should workers be compensated? I say by accepting their promises
>>> of future work as yet another form of investment - so they each become
>>> co-owners in the means of production for which they need the products (not
>>> necessarily the means of production for which they know and want to
>>> operate) within the production network.
>>>
>>> Sure, I think this could be possible. Again, I believe that it largely
>>> up to the firm and the workers.
>>>
>>> 4.) How do we vote within such a system? I say by treating the payment
>>> of costs as a vote, and the absence of such payment as a vote against - so
>>> each person votes to build and maintain the "public works" they want by
>>> simply paying for those things.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately, this ties the ability to pay with the ability to vote.
>>> This bothers me. I should study U.S. History. There were many who thought
>>> about voting and they ended up with a republic, not a democracy.
>>>
>>> Type "America is not a democracy" into Youtube. I'm sure you'll quickly
>>> find that it is a Republic and not a democracy.
>>>
>>> Aaron Russo explains America is NOT a Democracy
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RewUP-Fdhqk
>>>
>>> Glenn Beck "America Is Not A Democracy, It's A Republic"
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHmseYh44vA
>>>
>>>
>>> Why America is a Republic, not a Democracy
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=fvwp&v=ygEEL57AcZs
>>>  (Argues that it is good that we are a Republic and not a Democracy,
>>> because if
>>> we were a democracy "majority rule" our rights would not be protected,
>>> and eventually we would end up with an oligarchy.")
>>>
>>> Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness...
>>>
>>> On Wikipedia:
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life%2C_liberty_and_the_pursuit_of_happiness
>>>
>>> John Locke: Natural Rights to Life, Liberty, and Property - Jim Powell
>>>
>>> http://www.fee.org/the_freeman/detail/john-locke-natural-rights-to-life-liberty-and-property/#axzz2OmeNfngB
>>>
>>>
>>> 5.) How do we solve the Tyranny of the Majority when decisions are not
>>> unanimous and cannot be resolved through payment-based-votes? I say by
>>> allowing any "realistically divisible" subgroup to secede from the rest for
>>> any reason while retaining their portion of co-ownership. When the means of
>>> production cannot be divided realistically, the minority can probably sell
>>> their shares to the outsiders who are paying more than cost for surplus as
>>> explained in #2.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure, maybe U.S. history has something to say.
>>>
>>>
>>> At first I thought distributed funding (
>>> http://adistributedeconomy.blogspot.com/2012/03/distributed-funding.html)
>>> was the way to do it. It's just nodes and edges, with the nodes
>>> representing people, projects, or whatever and the edges the "paths" where
>>> the obligation flows. The edges could be a record of debts or intentions in
>>> the case of pay later or donate later. The edges could also be conduits
>>> that direct payment in the case of pay now and donate now. The flow could
>>> be from any node to another node, or any node and any number of other
>>> nodes. The amount from one node to another node could be some percentage of
>>> the total amount to all neighboring nodes. That is, the unit whole that
>>> someone gives is divided amongst all of the other nodes.
>>>
>>> I could place various conditions. For example, I might want to not pay
>>> out until I make a profit. Also say that I wish to have a convention such
>>> that 50% of what I make represents the unit whole that is divided amongst
>>> all of the other nodes. I'd say this would represent donate later, or pay
>>> later if there was some sort of obligation like investors. Another model
>>> for pay later could be a convention such that whatever I owe people is what
>>> I owe, and whatever this adds up to would be the unit whole for all of the
>>> neighboring nodes. Pay now would be a little different. Say I want to buy
>>> something, but I want to give to each of the contributors. Than the
>>> contribution would be calculated somehow, maybe in labor content as Paul
>>> Cockshott and Allin Cottrell suggest in A New Socialism, or maybe by the
>>> crowd by voting like in Better Means [2]. The main difference would be that
>>> labor content could be predetermined by some entity (I'm going to have to
>>> go back to the book) in Towards a New Socialism, and democratically by the
>>> group involved in Better Means. (Thanks Pavlik Elf!) Donate now doesn't
>>> have to be based on anything, but I may want to follow the payment scheme
>>> put out by pay now. I could also independently decide what I wish to donate
>>> to each neighboring node.
>>>
>>> Goods and services could also be used in place of money. Food for
>>> thought. I ran accross a startup called Producia that uses a time based
>>> currency called fini for college students (
>>> http://checkthis.com/producism).
>>>
>>> In practice this could be a bit different. Ripple [3] is worth checking
>>> out. They found an ingenious way of routing around money in a distributed
>>> way.
>>> Also, I'm not sure at this point why linked data could be helpful for
>>> payments. I'd like to find this out. Payswarm is one such example. It is
>>> supposed to keep track of things,
>>> so that things can be paid for. It's been bothering me that Ripple and
>>> Payswarm use JSON [5], [6]. On the other hand this could be a good thing.
>>>
>>> Thanks Patrick for your insightful questions! You motivated me to answer
>>> them.
>>>
>>> [1] Towards a New Socialism:
>>> http://ricardo.ecn.wfu.edu/~cottrell/socialism_book/
>>> [2] Bettermeans Introduction: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAlnMWlvw9g
>>> [3] Ripple: https://ripple.com/
>>> [4] Payswarm: https://payswarm.com/
>>> [5] (Ripple) JSON API: https://ripple.com/wiki/JSON_API
>>> [6] JSON-LD: http://json-ld.org/
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 8:12 AM, Patrick Anderson <agnucius@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> > As far as interest
>>>>
>>>> Sorry to be dumb, but what do you mean by 'interest'?
>>>>
>>>> There is no monetary interest in the system I described.
>>>>
>>>> Where would the interest be coming from that you refer to?
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Brent Shambaugh
>>>
>>> I've worked with polymers, I teach chemistry, I'm currently researching
>>> how to build better economies.
>>>  Website: http://adistributedeconomy.blogspot.com
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Brent Shambaugh
>>
>> I've worked with polymers, I teach chemistry, I'm currently researching
>> how to build better economies.
>> Website: http://adistributedeconomy.blogspot.com
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Brent Shambaugh
>
> I've worked with polymers, I teach chemistry, I'm currently researching
> how to build better economies.
> Website: http://adistributedeconomy.blogspot.com
>



-- 
Brent Shambaugh

I've worked with polymers, I teach chemistry, I'm currently researching how
to build better economies.
Website: http://adistributedeconomy.blogspot.com