Message 05020 [Homepage] [Navigation]
Thread: oxenT05017 Message: 3/5 L2 [In index]
[First in Thread] [Last in Thread] [Date Next] [Date Prev]
[Next in Thread] [Prev in Thread] [Next Thread] [Prev Thread]

Re: [ox-en] the commons as the condition for the basic income

[Converted from multipart/alternative]

[1 text/plain]
Dear Franz,

Thanks for your apt criticism. However, I am not sure whether you have read
the whole article because, taking for example the system cap and dividend
proposed by Barnes (mentioning also some potential problems of this system),
I am not speaking of a simple capitalization of the externalities ; rather
the aim is firstly to recognise them and then through the auction system to
minimize  (keep them in the levels we want, as zero pollution is impossible
to happen). Another point to be mentioned is that in such a short article I
don't deal with the commons (although,  in the epilogue, I try to refer to
the broader vision of the Commons) as a means of production. The
institutionalization of the Commons is not an imperative just for the wealth
distribution ,as you articulate it, but amongst others wealth distribution,
in the proposed way, is a process that could simultaneously eliminate
pollution and provide a basic income.

I totally share your view that we should seriously target empowerment and
autonomous wealth creation by the commons for the commons. However,
pragmatically speaking there are some first steps to be made. And the very
first, in my view, is related to the recognition and realization of the
existence of the Commons sphere. Not by us (this already has happened). But
by the receivers of the basic income and the "rigid" governments.

Best,

Vasilis

2008/9/28 Franz Nahrada <f.nahrada reflex.at>


Michel Bouwens writes:


It is the Commons itself, as an institutional form, that is the best
possible solution and way forward to achieve a basic income for the
world's
citizens and thereby eliminate povery.


I see just a commons that is no commons in Kostakis suggestions.

Total separation between "wealth creation" and "wealth distribution".

sorry, that does not work for me.

If we do not seriously target empowerment and autonomous wealth creation
by the commons for the commons, we are doomed.


Enterprises, states, and even
individuals, that pollute the environment through various ways (waste,
nuclear tests, etc.) or television stations and telephone companies that
use
the air (the air consists a means of production for them) for the
transmission of their signals, will pay a large amount of money to a
Commons
fund, as they use or affect, directly or indirectly, part of our common
wealth


This is really interesting: a lot of wealth is not monetized but
considered as potentially monetizeable. The least that could be said here
is that this is a fetishist misperception. Is the author clear that he is
supporting the emergence of a split interest and running us into the
dilemma that we are allready in? The monetary system only works because of
permanent cost externalisation, and yet it is seen as an engine of wealth
creation. If so, we would have to swallow the constant damage it does
because it is our "basic income". That all sounds so familiar to me,
replace "commons" by "national wealth", and you know why I am getting
nauseated here.

Michel, I am really sorry, but I feel this is defiitely not the way to go.
If basic income makes sense, its there to help create the commons (how
long this way is we all know) , rather than have commons consumed by
capital. A commons that is just the imaginary right of all human beings to
natural resources is IMHO not a practical reality, but a very dangerous
ideology.

What do others mean at this point?

Franz

_________________________________
Web-Site: http://www.oekonux.org/
Organization: http://www.oekonux.de/projekt/
Contact: projekt oekonux.de





-- 
Vasilis Kostakis

http://p2pfoundation.net/Vasilis_Kostakis


[2 text/html]
_________________________________
Web-Site: http://www.oekonux.org/
Organization: http://www.oekonux.de/projekt/
Contact: projekt oekonux.de
Thread: oxenT05017 Message: 3/5 L2 [In index]
Message 05020 [Homepage] [Navigation]