Re: Limiting use (was: Re: [ox-en] Apple trees (aka capitalism) are bad. What about barter exchange?)
- From: Diego Saravia <diego.saravia gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2009 23:17:31 -0300
[Converted from multipart/alternative]
Well, the first reason is that it makes things pretty complicated. Why
not just simply painting the house and teaching? Exchange doesn't
improve either of these works and there is in fact no reason to relate
them to each other.
I do not have painting machinery, I am not good painting
I do not know how to teach biology.
without scarcity aour world will be devasted earlier
infinite growing is only prevented by scarcity.
Well, in fact mankind developed lots of means to limit the use of
something. Exchange based systems are in fact especially bad in this
because exchange value by it's very nature is not limited. The
over-exploitation of nature is one expression of this.
I dont understand your point, could you explain more slow?
In a society based on peer production there probably need to be rules
limiting the use of things.
we need these rules now :)
for example informational goods, present the following problem. You can copy
without limits and get infinity money from them, without cost.
So you can exchange them for a lot of materials goods. That could put the
world to very high level of consumption.
Bill Gates for example could order to produce a lot of cars if he wants, or
thousand of houses or mansions, etc
But this is classical political business -
in the good sense of the word political. In fact if we are freed from
exchange then we can actually *make* political decisions again which
today are impossible because of the domination of the exchange system.
mmm, you are speaking about a non market exchange system, a planned one.
NO FUNCIONA->dsa unsa.edu.ar
Contact: projekt oekonux.de