[GiftEconomy] 'Emerges'? How about 're-emerges'?
Tereza Coraggio
tereza at retrometro.com
Sun Apr 24 09:20:15 PDT 2011
Hi, Frank
I've had long email discussions with the Henry George Society, of
which I'm a member by virtue of having taught a (one-student)
correspondence course in liberation theology through them. However I
disagree with them about land use fees. Property taxes are the most
destructive tax there is for sustenance farmers and has been used for
land-grabs from indigenous people all over the world.
The plan I've proposed to them divides land monopolies into 50 parcels
of roughly equal value, as determined by the owner. Each year the
owner pays 2% of the cumulative value, but has to sell two parcels of
the government's choice (4% of the land) at whatever value he's put on
them. If he puts a high value on his land, he pays more taxes. If he
puts a low value, he has to sell at that rate without knowing which
parcels the government will choose.
These parcels are then made available in a contest in which all local
residents vote on the winners. The contestants submit their plan for
how they'd use the land to benefit the greatest number of residents.
In each year more land would be coming up for use, so those who don't
win one year can try the next.
My logic for this is that it's land distribution that matters - not
the money collected in the land use tax. Indigenous communities want
the land, not the dependency created by the money. Henry George was
brilliant but still saw things from a consumer perspective, in my
opinion.
Tereza
On Apr 24, 2011, at 5:22 AM, fran k wrote:
> Hi. Thanks for those links Dante. Its interesting to see how the
> anti economy is looking at the real economy, Thankyou Teresa for
> your take on exchange separateness distance and sharing closeness,
> its a reilluminating view point. Robin been meaning to reply to your
> posts. Its great your doing projects at the mo. Sound real tasty too.
>
> All this makes me think how the invisible economy is great
> invisible. Versus wrapping projects up legally. But only useful
> awareness as I think wrapping up legally is imperative. Also this
> makes me think of world religions showing the example of the worlds
> greatest example of total social inclusivity via the collection
> plate. Also charity legal form being actually fractal. Being a legal
> form of giver, to managers, to beneficieries. From the organisation
> to the collecting tin. A giver no matter how large or small the
> donation can stipulate what purpose that gift is to be used for, and
> it can be used for no other purpose. So you can see how it can be
> used to free land and basic needs.:)frank
>
> P.s. Teresa, what are your views on henry georges land value
> community charge?.f
>
> On Sun, 24 Apr 2011 09:33 BST Dante-Gabryell Monson wrote:
>
>> Since couchsurfing is mentioned,
>> and also ( capitalist ) enclosure related to sharing,
>>
>> it may be of interest to have a look at
>>
>> http://www.opencouchsurfing.org/
>>
>> "Couchsurfing could go commercial"
>> http://www.opencouchsurfing.org/2011/04/20/couchsurfing-com-could-go-commercial/
>>
>> http://allthatiswrong.wordpress.com/2010/01/24/a-criticism-of-couchsurfing-and-review-of-alternatives/#fraud
>>
>> <http://allthatiswrong.wordpress.com/2010/01/24/a-criticism-of-couchsurfing-and-review-of-alternatives/#fraud
>> >see
>> the evolution of how "donation/verification" money is being spent
>> within the
>> not for profit to support the causes it supports,
>>
>> and the amount of money that may be set aside :
>>
>> 2009 ( over a million dollars )
>> http://www.couchsurfing.org/organization_finances_2009.html
>>
>> 2008 ( nearly eight hundred thousand dollars )
>> http://www.couchsurfing.org/organization_finances_2008.html
>>
>> 2007 ( three hundred thousand dollars )
>> http://www.couchsurfing.org/organization_finances_2007.html
>>
>> 2006 ( hundred thousand dollars )
>> http://www.couchsurfing.org/organization_finances_2006.html
>>
>> ...
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 5:16 AM, Tereza Coraggio <tereza at retrometro.com
>> >wrote:
>>
>>> Sorry, I didn't read the article before I passed it on - I just
>>> read the
>>> beginning about craigslist and couch surfing. Charity Focus, who
>>> publishes
>>> The Daily Good, walks their talk, and everything they do is
>>> volunteer-based.
>>> But sometimes the articles they publish are a bit too corporate
>>> for my
>>> taste.
>>>
>>> That said, I like the sites that enable people to rent their own
>>> houses.
>>> I'll never stay in a commercial property again for a vacation. I
>>> was happy
>>> to hear that someone was developing a way for cars to be shared
>>> without
>>> risk. I hope that P2P taxi services will be soon to follow, so I
>>> can pay
>>> someone in the neighborhood next time I need a ride to the
>>> airport. Lots of
>>> people are piecing together a living from a little bit of money
>>> here and
>>> there and I'd rather support that than incur a favor I don't have
>>> time to
>>> repay. Most people either have time or they have money, but it's
>>> rare to
>>> have both. So hooking the people with time up with the people with
>>> money is
>>> okay in my book. I'm not a purist.
>>>
>>> I like what you're doing, Robin, with the helping on the street.
>>> I'm sure
>>> that's making an impact.
>>>
>>> Tereza
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Apr 23, 2011, at 9:10 AM, Duane Eareckson wrote:
>>>
>>> But the capitalist drive will not be extinguished. They will to
>>> "optimize"
>>>> the culture of sharing for their profit, whether by persuasion,
>>>> threat, or
>>>> force, and they will find ways. Their hypocrisy, that they will not
>>>> <i>share</i> their optimizations, is the glint which betrays the
>>>> machinations to inject extraction in the network of cooperation.
>>>>
>>>> The "central authority" will be the architects of the means of
>>>> sharing.
>>>> The means of sharing cannot be totally autonomous and will be
>>>> organized, to
>>>> some extent. Whereas a rising tide would lift all boats, in an
>>>> ebb tide,
>>>> someone will have to pay for the tugboat.
>>>>
>>>> The most revolutionary force in the world will not go down easy.
>>>>
>>>> Duane
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robin Upton" <robin2008 at altruists.org
>>>>>
>>>> To: <gifteconomy at lists.gifteconomy.org>
>>>> Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2011 2:29 AM
>>>> Subject: [GiftEconomy] 'Emerges'? How about 're-emerges'?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for this, Tereza.
>>>>>
>>>>>> The Sharing Economy Emerges
>>>>>>> Peer to peer exchange of goods and services has skyrocketed way
>>>>>>> beyond craigslist.org and Couch Surfing. Now, access to goods
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> skills is becoming more important than ownership of them. And
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>> has sparked a "Sharing Economy". Gartner Group researchers
>>>>>>> estimate
>>>>>>> that the peer-to-peer financial-lending market will reach $5
>>>>>>> billion
>>>>>>> by 2013. Botsman says the consumer peer-to-peer rental market
>>>>>>> will
>>>>>>> become a $26 billion sector, and believes the sharing economy,
>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>> total, is a $110 billion-plus market. "Is this purely a
>>>>>>> warm-and-fuzzy kind of thing?" says Ann Miura-Ko, a venture
>>>>>>> capitalist at Floodgate Fund. "It's not. It's underutilized
>>>>>>> asset
>>>>>>> utilization." That is to say, sharing is becoming common place.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> The rise of digitally mediated sharing is indeed promising, but
>>>>>> only a
>>>>> capitalist could see this as a fundamentally new thing. I mean
>>>>> life is
>>>>> full of sharing. To say nothing of shared genes, shared
>>>>> understandings
>>>>> or shared streets, people in most parts of the world still share
>>>>> all
>>>>> sorts of stuff daily, just as they used to in the past in USA.
>>>>> Barnraising? Potlatch?
>>>>>
>>>>> So whilst in one sense it's a welcome step away from what
>>>>> Eisenstein
>>>>> calls "the discrete and separate self", sharing does not cease
>>>>> to count
>>>>> just because it goes unaccounted in ledgers. Arguably, unmetered
>>>>> sharing
>>>>> is more important. I haven't investigated the 'Floodgate Fund',
>>>>> so I may
>>>>> be doing her an injustice, but Ann Miura-Ko's designation as
>>>>> 'venture
>>>>> capitalist' suggests to me that she's expecting to get out more
>>>>> money
>>>>> than she puts in.
>>>>>
>>>>> Anyway, it's food for thought for my work on the Internet Gift
>>>>> Economy,
>>>>> which has been going slow lately - distracted by working on the
>>>>> roofgarden. The current model as regards metering is to leave it
>>>>> up to
>>>>> those involved whether they want to record things. Eitherway, a
>>>>> big
>>>>> difference is that there won't be any central authority in
>>>>> charge, so no
>>>>> point for revenue extraction. No business model.
>>>>>
>>>>> Robin
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> GiftEconomy mailing list
>>>>> GiftEconomy at lists.gifteconomy.org
>>>>> http://lists.gifteconomy.org/listinfo.cgi/gifteconomy-gifteconomy.org
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> GiftEconomy mailing list
>>>> GiftEconomy at lists.gifteconomy.org
>>>> http://lists.gifteconomy.org/listinfo.cgi/gifteconomy-gifteconomy.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> GiftEconomy mailing list
>>> GiftEconomy at lists.gifteconomy.org
>>> http://lists.gifteconomy.org/listinfo.cgi/gifteconomy-
>>> gifteconomy.org
>>>
>
>
More information about the GiftEconomy
mailing list