Message 01963 [Homepage] [Navigation]
Thread: oxenT01624 Message: 3/5 L1 [In index]
[First in Thread] [Last in Thread] [Date Next] [Date Prev]
[Next in Thread] [Prev in Thread] [Next Thread] [Prev Thread]

About scarcity, property, and land (was: Re: [ox-en] Peace on earth)

Hi Patrick and list!

Thanks for your post. I'll use your post to repeat and clarify some of
my thoughts. This is very useful at times because always thoughts fit
together slightly better :-) .

Last month (49 days ago) Patrick Anderson wrote:
If you were king of America, what would you do?

I guess you mean USA when you say America?

You have hundreds
of billions of dollars at your fingertips to be used on any whim.
How do you proceed?

This is easy: Burn it. And all shares, debt - the whole financial
system with it.

Economics generally attempts to attach rewards that drive humans to
goals that may not drive them.

Economics can not attempt something because economics is not a
subject. We need to keep that in mind.

Also I find it not given that economy needs to be a coercive system by
some law of nature.

Bare bones capitalism is based on supply and demand.

Though this is true it is really uninteresting. A lot of systems are
based on supply and demand - or at least supply and demand plays a
role in it. Well, if I think longer about it next to every process is
based on supply and demand.

What makes capitalism unique is instead that supply and demand is
(largely) controlled by an abstract exchange system. This abstract
exchange system is the source for an unbelievable "amount" of
alienation from the things that are subject of this very supply and
demand. This alienation to me is one of the major problem of

It is a game system meant to drive citizens to work and consume.

Not really. People would be active and consume without capitalism as
well. However, capitalism shapes human activity as well as consumption
in a certain way. This shape is deeply characterized by the alienation

The first hack I call "Artificial Scarcity".  It relies upon the
difference between the perceived and actual supply of some thing.

In Oekonux terms "Artificial Scarcity" makes no sense because scarcity
is always human-made and thus artificial.

May be this works as a short definition: Scarcity is given when the
need for something is not met by an appropriate supply for some
alienated reason - for instance because denying others from the supply
makes money. If there is no alienated reason for no supply for a need
- such as some special Free Software program simply does not exist yet
- I'd talk of an limitation.

Limitations can be moved by technology, knowledge, etc. In particular
all products are always limited because there is always the options to
extend the productive capacity to produce more.

Absolute limits are given by some absolutely limited deposit. The
absolute limit is usually not known. I don't know of any examples for
absolute limits beyond bare raw materials as long as they are not
mined. After mining they are products.

One day some clever apes noticed the 'supply' presented to those in
need didn't have to be the same as the true supply available.

Because they can benefit in some way alienated from the flow of
things. If there is no such benefit any more a main incentive for this
type of activity is gone. That's why burning all the money is so
important ;-) .

Later, some even more dangerously clever apes decided to begin
pretending intellect is property.  They then proceeded to LOCK CLOSE
all they could to create even more scarcity.

But the difference to material scarcity is not qualitative.

Real Property is the only true property.  It consists of animate
objects, inanimate objects and land.

RP ownership is important.  We each need to fulfill our organic
needs of air, water, food, shelter, clothing, sanitation,
transportation, medicine.  RP allows individuals the opportunity to
address many of these issues.

You are confusing the terms possession and property. Possession is
what you describe: Control the material basis of ones life.

On the other hand you may have possessions in your property but
property is not limited to possessions. Indeed any property beyond
your possessions makes only sense when used in a way alienated from
the material being of the property.

Sadly, hoarding has made land artificially scarce.  Some hoarding
may be done somewhat innocently.  But much of it is used to
purposefully remove sovereignty.

Land played a society bearing role before capitalism. Today land is of
course needed but it is not at the center of capitalism. Forget about
land. It is unimportant in capitalism and will be even more so in
information / GPL society.

	Citizens need private land ownership for true sovereignty.

I'm not interested in land. What the hell should *I* for one do with
land? The only thing I can imagine is some alienated usage. This might
be a concept for societies where processing the ground is at the
basis. But nor in capitalism neither in any (civilized) society
following it.

	Begin the new economy today by asking a local business to
allow the growth of gifting plants on their property.

Why should I? I have no robot yet to care about these plants and why
the hell should I?

						Mit Freien Grüßen



Thread: oxenT01624 Message: 3/5 L1 [In index]
Message 01963 [Homepage] [Navigation]