[p2p-research] higher transportation costs can reverse globalization

Fri May 30 22:15:01 CEST 2008

Patrick,

Your arguments are logically sound (IMHO).

But, as I've ranted previously, we live in a world where many people will
not make the choices that would be necessary to see the human ecology you
describe work.

The only way to make what you describe really, really work for me right now
is to chuck it all, and move myself somewhere  where I can make all of the
rules, and where practically everyone else involved agrees to follow the
system you describe.

While it may be possible, it is not a choice that I plan on making.

So, that leaves us with the reality that many people are not willing to
share in the way you describe. Many people are not willing to sell at cost.
Many people are capitalists, and they are not ready to change from being
capitalists, and we all need to deal directly with them.

One more reply follows....

On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 3:22 PM, Patrick Anderson <agnucius at gmail.com>
wrote:

> > On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 2:27 PM, Patrick Anderson wrote:
>
> >> What causes efficiency to be a 'problem'?
>
> > If you are greedy, and want to control everything, then it's not good to
> > have a gaggle of local people, that everyone locally knows and loves, and
> > that cater to local needs and offer a superior product, and who can
> > out-compete you.
>
> By "out-compete" do you mean "offer the same quality at a lower price"?
>
> If so, then would you say "offering the same quality at *cost*" would
> be the ultimate in efficiency?
>
> If so, then "at cost" is a problem for current Capitalist owners
> because it eliminates profit, but is it bad for the workers of for the
> consumers?
>
> >> Will efficiency also be a 'problem' for local food systems?
> >
> > Yes.
>
> How very sad.  Must we perpetuate poverty to insure profit?
>
> If you and some other people collectively purchased a small farm for
> the sole purpose of your own benefit, would the efficiency of others
> be a problem for you?  Why or why not?
>

Sam writes:

When I said it would be a problem, I meant that the efficiency of local
systems would once again be a problem for existing traditional corporate and
government infrastructure. I didn't mean that pure profit driven motives
need to also be the primary focus of self-governing local food systems. In
fact, I am saying that they cannot. I am saying that local food systems need
to position themselves to have higher priorities than financial gain and
control.

****I am not saying, however, that local food systems absolutely must adhere
to some ideal that flatly distributes all ownership of everything, and only
sells at cost, period.  Why? Because no one will do it!!!!****  Most of the
people I am connected with do not and will not have the luxury to become
completely self sufficient in the way you suggest any time soon. They are
still too dependent on existing systems and infrastructure. So, my change
strategies are designed to work with existing interfaces and infrastrucures,
because I want to see the changes actually happen. Also, because, I honestly
believe that for Human Species survival, we need to start change processes
within existing systems, and that we can't do a ghost dance and 'roll up the
world'. (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghost_Dance#Jack_Wilson.E2.80.99s_vision)
Because, the only way it works is if virtually everyone in the world does
the 'dance'.

>
> >
> >>
> >> Is efficiency a problem for the lone islander?
> >
> > Depends on who the loan islander is.... ;-)
>
> I don't understand your response.  The idea of efficiency being 'bad'
> is based on the idea of keeping prices above costs, but the lone
> islander has no need to keep price above cost, as it doesn't even make
> sense.  If a ship dumped a load of wheat on his island during the
> night would it hurt him as the dumping of low-price product on 3rd
> world countries currently hurts the suppliers there?
>
> If he found a way to eliminate jobs (lower employment), would he
> celebrate or cry?
>
> Abundance and efficiency are always good when the owner of the
> productive sources is the consumer of that product, but we have
> somehow missed or tend to disregard this case.
>
> >
> >>
> >> What Mode of Production can withstand (Local? added by Sam) efficiency?
> >
> > Lying, and appealing to base emotions, coupled with whatever mode of
> > production you'd care to choose, seems to have trumped modes of
> production
> > that were simply efficient for a while now.
>
> What I meant to ask is "In what case (in what arrangement of property
> ownership) is abundance and efficiency always good?".
>
> If you own an apple tree and eat all the fruit thereof, do you care if
> someone else is offering apples at a low price?  Does the efficiency
> of others hurt you?  What if each apple consumer had just enough
> ownership in apple trees to supply them with all the apples they need
> (while some of those owners may be paying others to do that exact work
> with money they had earned doing something they are good at)?  That
> would be bad for Capitalists, but would it be bad for society?
>
> Would those owners be troubled by efficiency?  Would they dream of
> destruction and scarcity?  Using profit as a reward for non-consuming
> owners incents antisocial, even warlike behavior.
>

-- 
Sam Rose
Social Synergy
Tel:+1(517) 639-1552
Cel: +1-(517)-974-6451
AIM: Str9960
Linkedin Profile: https://www.linkedin.com/in/samrose
skype: samuelrose
email: samuel.rose at gmail.com
http://socialsynergyweb.com/services

Related Sites/Blogs/Projects:
OpenBusinessModels: http://socialsynergyweb.net/cgi-bin/wiki/FrontPage
http://p2pfoundation.net
http://blog.p2pfoundation.net
http://www.cooperationcommons.com
http://barcampbank.org
http://communitywiki.org
http://openfarmtech.org
Information Filtering:
http://ma.gnolia.com/people/srose/bookmarks
http://del.icio.us/srose
http://twitter.com/SamRose
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20080530/06fb7838/attachment.html 