Re: free vs. common (was: Re: [ox-en] A name for a peer-production-based society?)
- From: Diego Saravia <diego.saravia gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2009 22:34:32 -0300
[Converted from multipart/alternative]
[1 text/plain]
And we can be productive even without profit, though profit will
continue to be around for as long as new consumers are paying for
product because of their lack of ownership.
So profit is something that can taper toward zero, but will only be
zero for short periods - for as long as that consumer is not 'moving'
his demand.
Ok
What does the US Farm Bill paying farmers to NOT grow have to do with
monopolies?
a lot, but is a completly different discussion, this thread was about common
vs free.
that is the commons problem
problem that is not shared by free goods.
The "commons problem" IS shared by 'free' goods because 'free' goods
are not 'free' because of they ***ALWAYS*** require scarce physical
resources for hosting.
prices in market economy are related to marginal costs
and internet is designed to have 0 marginal cost
so you dont pay more for sending a 1kb mail than to send a 0.5 kb mail.
Governments are run by Corporations.
not always, you have fidel castro, you have chavez, correa, morales, etc
Corporations seek Profit.
Profit requires Scarcity.
So governments always choose scarcity because that's what they are
told to do by owners seeking profit.
scarcity is not choseen, is part of material world structure
what are the costs?
The costs are that we do not have access to clean, "at cost" fish, but
instead must pay manyfold more for poisoned filth.
fish will be day to day more expensive.
But we cannot do that now because our local governments are dedicated
to being purposefully unproductive for the benefit of the Capitalists
(to increase profit).
you think so? all local governments in the world?
Yes.
No
so you think that all productions means must be in state hands.
Absolutely not!
I'm talking about small groups of independent owners, not some
One-World-Government NWO terror.
small groups are incapable of organizing world wide activity
they always will be eliminated or controled by your corporations
But I'm also talking about the dynamic case when I say "profit must be
treated as an investment from the consumer who paid it".
can we have growth without profit?
No, that is why I say we *should* collect from poor, defenseless
consumers, but we should then treat it as their investment in more
Physical Sources so we each and every-one finally have ownership.
the problem is not with profit, but with profit distribution in rent
form.
Sorry, but I don't know what you mean here.
if you have growth you always will have profit. that is not the problem, the
problem is that part of profit is distributed as capital o land rent
but we are really far away the starting point of this conversarion
Who gives a damn? Let's get something done instead of worrying about
convention.
no one, but we can began another thread if we want to analize cooperatives
--
Diego Saravia
Diego.Saravia gmail.com
NO FUNCIONA->dsa unsa.edu.ar
[2 text/html]
_________________________________
Web-Site: http://www.oekonux.org/
Organization: http://www.oekonux.de/projekt/
Contact: projekt oekonux.de