Re: I considered presenting

> that is funded an owned by people who buy in?

Yes, it is funded and owned by the people who buy in.

But people can "buy in" in two different ways:

1. Sources: This is the traditional way to invest, and usually comes in the
form of plain old money used to buy property.

2. Skills: These are promises to pay as cross-commitments of future work.

I sometimes forget to mention #2, partly because it adds so much complexity
to the discussion.



> Is imputed production like an ever expanding company

The goal is not to expand _forever_, but instead to taper-off as our goals
are met.

Each group that uses this model will likely expand in size as they sell
surplus (though this is not strictly required).

When surplus is sold, profit is collected and invested *for* the payer in
even more Sources, causing those who overpay to gain property ownership in
the the company as it grows.

The company is allowed to grow to any size, but eventually there will be
irreconcilable differences between subgroups.

At this point, the company will 'split' as subgroups secede (or you might
say 'fork') from the rest while retaining their portion of ownership.



The idea is to eventually purchase the planet back from the current owners
but under a 'corrected' organizational form.

Imputed Production solves the usual problem of seeking scarcity by paying
investors with Product instead of Profit.

Profit requires scarcity, so any organization seeking Profit *must* seek
scarcity.

An organization can seek Product when the investor/owners are also
consumers who accept Product as their return on investment..

Abundance is goal when Product is ROI.