Re: [ox-en] There IS such a thing as peer money
- From: Stefan Merten <smerten oekonux.de>
- Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2009 16:24:50 +0100
Hi Marc!
[Converted from multipart/alternative]
BTW: It seems to me that the newlines in your post get lost somehow.
May be this is a bug in the converter used to sanitize
multipart/alternative mails for the list. In general it's better to
send plain text only mails here.
2 weeks (20 days) ago marc fawzi wrote:
Here is the latest draft of the P2P Currency model I've been working on:
http://p2pfoundation.net/P2P_Social_Currency_Model
Thanks for structuring this so clearly. It made it easy for me to scan
a few important things.
Premise
Money is one of the fundamental elements of today's society.
Yes. In fact it structures today's societies more than anything else.
Changing what money is and how it works will fundamentally change society.
Yes. But since money *as such* structures society change only takes
place when money becomes irrelevant.
Motivation
[...]
Prior to the collapse, very few people questioned the design of the economy.
I was among them ;-) . In fact that collapse has not only been
foreseen since the 1990's by some thinkers but even explained why it
ultimately had to happen. *And* why there is no chance to remedy the
reasons for this [1]_. However, I guess most of this material is only
available in German.
.. [1] In fact I find it striking how contemporary "analysises" of
this crash just scratch at the surface. So far I heard nobody
who were able to really explain what happened recently. In fact
greed and the things usually used as an "explanation" existed
throughout capitalism (and before) and thus they are hardly an
explanation for what happened.
The real explanation is of course that the valorization of
labor works worse and worse. That is why the financial system
became more and more important. And in fact there is no reason
to assume that this can be remedied somehow without giving up
capitalism.
Model's Context
[...]
The P2P *Energy* Economy adds the requirement that individual peers
must be able to generate their own energy as well as be able to sell
their excess energy to other peers, using a distributed electric
grid (reference: P2P Energy Production.)
Ah, then I understand why you put the label "P2P" on your model.
However, I can not see why in a peer production based society everyone
must be able to generate his/her own energy not talking of the
possibility of *selling* excess energy.
Unfortunately you didn't give a source so I don't know who made the
point.
Is there another reason why you use the label "P2P"? I'm asking
because I worry that the term P2P becomes meaningless if it is put on
everything.
Model's Axioms
Axioms
The following are non-universal axioms (i.e. starting truths for this model)
1. Money, as defined here, is a tokenizer of energy and information,
and as such it carries both energy and information in every token.
I can't see this is a money definition which makes sense. Money is
foremost a social relationship and in your definition there is no
sociality included. In particular human efforts are missing.
2. Money, as defined here, does not grow in value on its own, i.e.
cannot derive value from itself over time, i.e. 'interest' is not
possible.
No money I know of does this. If that would be the case for the money
in my pocket then I'd kindly ask you for the recipe ;-) .
However,
* the use of money by buying and applying
* means of production and
* (abstract) labor power and
* selling the resulting products
results in surplus value. Interest is only a derived form of surplus
value.
Also you are putting lots of today's left-wing Western moral in your
axioms. This makes it hard for other people to accept and therefore
this seems to me a reason your why model is doomed to fail.
Apart from that: If you replace (renewable) energy by standard labor /
money then I'd say your axioms are simply given in today's societies.
Then the question comes up why your model should be any better.
Iff money, not just peer money, can be derived and used more
intelligently, then there is nothing in my (and other people's)
operative reality against its existence.
Hah! I respond with an axiom:
* Money systems have the inherent tendency to become the "invisible
hand" meaning they follow their own logic. Therefore they can not be
"used more intelligently".
Just kidding. Of course this is not an axiom but the result of an
analysis of a money based system namely capitalism. In fact there are
hardly any axioms in social sciences (though there are also very few
in mathematics).
2 weeks (20 days) ago marc fawzi wrote:
Patrick,
Thanks for your feedback.
I think Patrick's observations are very good and he really put the
finger on your weak spot. Your reply shows that in fact your model has
exactly the same problems as capitalism.
Re: #1, Abundance comes from the whole (from all peers producing energy) not
from ONE peer or ONE group of peers producing so much more energy than
everyone else, i.e. dumping energy into the market for the purpose of
driving down prices and killing off competition.
Indeed it would be *great* if a single peer would be able and willing
to supply all the energy needed on earth. Nobody else would need to
care anymore. I for one am glad that the Linux kernel developers care
for the kernel the best they can. A single energy provider would be a
very concrete use value and indeed something I'd strive for.
It is your system that demands that what would be the best thing in
concrete terms must not happen for the sake of the system. This is
because your system builds an abstraction - called money - which
immediately starts a life on its own preventing useful things to
happen.
If you look carefully it is exactly this own life of the abstraction
you are complaining about for capitalism:
We have just watched our monetary system take a dive from the 110th
floor (see: global economic meltdown 2008)
In your observation you are right to assume that this was not the
result of any human intention but instead a "move" of a system living
its own life while ruling us. The problem is the abstraction and its
own life *as such*.
Grüße
Stefan
_________________________________
Web-Site: http://www.oekonux.org/
Organization: http://www.oekonux.de/projekt/
Contact: projekt oekonux.de