[p2p-research] excellent contribution on flow money byMartienvan Steenbergen

[Martien van Steenbergen]

On 29 May 2009, at 12:35 , Wittel, Andreas wrote:

> Hi Martien,
>
> Yes I have read your suggestion regarding the VAX standard. You  
> would measure labour in time. One hour spend working is valued with  
> x, and 2 hours with 2 times x.

It is a bit more complicated than that. Of course, when you have one  
hour worth 100, then two hours are worth 200. But there is also a  
difference between the kind of hours. One hour of dentist is valued  
more thant one hour of a janitor. And one hour of dentist Fred may be  
valued more than one hour of dentist John. So price differences and  
valuations will continue to play an important role.

> This would be a far better system than the one we have today, but  
> again, it would not be a fair system imo. This system would not take  
> into account the quality of labour. Some people might be more  
> focused and more productive, and get things done quicker. If they  
> work less hours, they would get punished.

Well, almost. Due to market working, there will be competition on  
price/value. So if someone is more productive, he or she may be more  
attractive to potential buyers. One way or another, the final price of  
a product or service will always reflect both the material and labour  
resources that went into it.

BTW, when I use the term ‘value’ it includes aspects about the  
quality. Higher quality is normally valued more than lower quality and  
people in general are willing to pay a highr price for higher quality.

> Also I think this VAX standard would contradict what you suggest  
> later in your response, that it is ok to mesh work with leisure. How  
> do you want to measure the hours then?

I sense a misunderstandig here. What I mean to say is that work will  
be (or ought to be) as pleasurable as leisure. So similar even that  
you cannot feel or sense the difference. This is only possible if the  
‘work’ closely matches (resonates) with your personal talents and  
passions that you forget time. So, when do you forget the time while  
still being busy? That is the time that you're in flow, that the job  
at hand and your talents match completely.

Unfortunately, in our current economy, many are forced to separate the  
two. You go to work, do the obligatory things to make money (to pay  
the rent, mortgage, debts), and then rush home to actually do the  
things you really like (and therefore match your talents). Some,  
however, go home and get drunk or high to forget about work...

> I remain convinced that Toni Negri is spot on saying that the value  
> of labour has become immeasureable (affective work and conceptual  
> work will always escape ‘objective’ forms of quantification.

I get your point and I partially agree, especially on the  
‘objectivity’ of this quantification. Therefore, comparing two similar  
yet distinct things (service or objects) does allow you to, very  
subjectively, scale their relative value (for yourself). As a result,  
you can link an different amount of money to each and ask yourself the  
question if you can and will afford it.

For very subjective and scarce or unique things like paintings and  
such, auctions are a way to make this decision.

> Any monetary system would be based on the idea of quantification,  
> thus I don’t have much hope that alternative monetary systems would  
> get us very far.

Okay. Time will tell. Thanks for putting me on this track. It will  
make me ponder it and formulate an asnwer and/or solutions some time  
in the future.

> I’d be interested in thinking about something else. Could we imagine  
> an economic system that leaves this form of measuring behind? A  
> system where 10 sacks of wheat do not have to returned exactly with  
> 10 sacks? A system of producing, contributing, sharing, and using  
> without absolute forms of measurement? This would have to be based  
> on trust, on the trust that most people are more interested in  
> making the commons works than abusing it.

Well, yes. I believe so. Then again, we have quite a challenge to  
rebuild this trust into the world. Trust has been so abused, so  
deformed that it takes ‘global psychotherapy’ to heal. When we can  
design systems and constructs that help us catalyse this process, we  
should. I believe that there are monetary systems that foster  
collaboration and community, and therefore trust.

In fact, the trustwidth concept (see other messages on same topic) is  
a promising step in that direction.

Thanks again for your feedback Andreas. Love it.

Succes en plezier,

Martien.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20090529/72349eae/attachment.html>