[p2p-research] Building Alliances

Ryan Lanham rlanham1963 at gmail.com
Fri Nov 6 18:42:04 CET 2009


Yes, apologies.  Kevin inside my notes is Stateless Society Kevin
Carson...my co-list administrator who does more than his share in any
communal sense.

Ryan

On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 12:23 PM, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>wrote:

> by the way, I see kevin is in cc here, just making sure he understands you
> are probably referring to kevin carson, not kevin flanagan,
>
> what you say below is not incompatible with the overall inequity of the
> U.S. tax system, as documented in the sources I cited,
>
> apart from bushies and neocons, this is largely uncontroversial, I would
> say,
>
> Michel
>
> On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 12:19 AM, Ryan Lanham <rlanham1963 at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Hi Michel:
>>
>> With regard to income tax, the top 50% in the US pay 97% of taxes.  Here's
>> a source http://www.ntu.org/main/page.php?PageID=6  (as an aside I
>> disagree with that organization's policies, but their facts are accurate.)
>> The top 1% in income pay 40% of all income tax.
>>
>> Payroll taxes do fall disproportionately on the middle class, but service
>> use is almost totally per capita (e.g. Medicare.)  The brunt of Medicaid
>> (medical for the poor) is paid by middle income persons.  Source:
>> http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/background/numbers/revenue.cfm
>>
>> Income tax, in the US, makes up almost 47% of the total revenue.  Thus,
>> 25% of the government's revenues are paid by the top 1% of income earners.
>> That's even higher in most European countries and Japan.  It would take me
>> longer to find those numbers but I have them as I used to teach them in a
>> budgeting course.  They nearly always surprised my students.
>>
>> Ryan
>>
>> On corporate taxes,
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 11:18 AM, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Hi ryan,
>>>
>>> i think the moral principle is very simple: the public's money should go
>>> to the public, and the people who produce wealth, the workers and
>>> enterpreneurs, should get taxed less than those who make money through
>>> speculation,
>>>
>>> here's the gist of the 2nd argument, applying to the US:
>>>
>>>  - "Under current law, income from investments gets taxed at 15 percent.
>>> Income from work gets taxed at up to 35 percent. No coherent moral
>>> justification exists for such an enormous tax preference for income from
>>> wealth."
>>>
>>> I'm not sure what non-controversial evidence you have, but here is some
>>> that shows there is a bit of controversy involved:
>>>
>>> from
>>> http://www.alternet.org/workplace/136592/tax_day%3A_you_pay_your_taxes_--_why_don%27t_the_rich_pay_their_share/ (source:
>>> http://www.ips-dc.org/reports/#1207)
>>>
>>> what this shows is that the very rich pay comparatively low taxes, see:
>>>
>>> - if you look in Who Pays Taxes<http://www.opednews.com/articles/Who-Pays-Taxes-by-PrMaine-081210-57.html>(Figure 5) you will see that there has been a truly impressive decline in
>>> income taxes paid by corporations.
>>>
>>> Even in actual dollars though, the very rich get away with paying
>>> proportionally less in taxes than the merely rich. In Figure 7, you will see
>>> that the percent of income one pays in income taxes reaches a peak at an
>>> income of about $600,000 and it steadily declines as incomes grow above that
>>> level.
>>>
>>> This may be falling into propaganda trap of thinking that only income
>>> taxes matter, however. Clearly the very rich only pay a negligible portion
>>> of their income in payroll taxes, while this is the major tax on the many
>>> making less than $100,000 (according to Figure 6a, that is more than 80% of
>>> us).
>>>
>>> If you look in Who Pays Taxes II<http://www.opednews.com/articles/Who-Pays-Taxes-II-by-PrMaine-081214-854.html>,
>>> you will see that in 2006, 10% of the income in the U.S. went to the tiny
>>> 0.025% of the population making $5 million or more, but this tiny minority
>>> paid only 8.9% of the combined income and payroll taxes, not even the 10%
>>> that is the very least that fairness would dictate they pay.
>>>
>>> It is worth note that while those with incomes in the $42,000 to $62,000
>>> range paid a greater tax rate than those making over $5 million, they still
>>> paid only roughly the same rate as the entire population of the U.S.
>>>
>>> If some groups pay less than average, other groups have to pay more than
>>> average taxes, and the charts in the second article make it clear that it is
>>> the people with incomes in the range from $2 million to $5 million who are
>>> making up for those who pay less.
>>>
>>> People making over $2 million a year are quite able to pay a bit more in
>>> taxes and I do not see them as in need of tax relief. However it is hard to
>>> see why those making over $5 million should pay so much less, unless it is
>>> these people who have the best political connections and propagandists. In
>>> fact, many of them probably are politicians and propagandists.
>>>
>>> the excerpts:
>>>
>>>
>>> Few Americans realize just how incredibly little, historically speaking,
>>> our nation's wealthy now pay in taxes.
>>>
>>> In 1955, the year April 15 became the IRS tax-filing deadline, America's
>>> top 400 taxpayers paid three times more of their income in taxes than the
>>> top 400 of 2006, the most recent year with IRS data available.
>>>
>>> According to a new Tax Day report that we co-authored, if the top 400 of
>>> 2006 had paid taxes at 1955 rates, the federal treasury would have collected
>>> -- from these 400 taxpayers alone -- an additional $35.9 billion more in
>>> revenue in 2006.
>>>
>>> The 139,000 U.S. taxpayers who made over $2 million in 2006, our report
>>> also notes, averaged $5.9 million in income. They paid 23.2 percent of their
>>> total incomes in federal income tax. The comparable rate for equivalent
>>> high-income Americans in 1955: 49 percent.
>>>
>>> If the over-$2 million set in 2006 had paid taxes at the same rate as
>>> their 1955 counterparts, the federal treasury would have collected $202
>>> billion.
>>>
>>> We've now lived through 30 years of "shrink, shift and shaft" federal
>>> budget and tax policies. Right-wing pols, aided by Democrats who should have
>>> known better, have shrunk government and the share of taxes paid by the
>>> wealthiest 1 percent. The tax burden, consequently, has shifted off wealth
>>> and onto wages, off the federal tax system and onto the regressive tax
>>> systems of states and localities.
>>>
>>> The direct result: States and localities have gotten the budget shaft --
>>> and that has forced years of chronic underfunding for mass transit,
>>> education and myriad public services.
>>>
>>> So what can we do, as a nation, to start turning this situation around?
>>> Our Institute for Policy Studies report -- "Reversing the Great Tax
>>> Shift" <http://www.ips-dc.org/reports/#1207> advances a set of specific
>>> steps that would generate over $450 billion in annual revenue, dollars that
>>> would help finance our recovery fairly.
>>>
>>> We recommend that lawmakers:
>>>
>>> *Tax income from capital gains and dividends at the same rates as wage
>>> income*. Under current law, income from investments gets taxed at 15
>>> percent. Income from work gets taxed at up to 35 percent. No coherent moral
>>> justification exists for such an enormous tax preference for income from
>>> wealth. According to Citizens for Tax Justice, taxing all forms of income
>>> the same would generate $80 billion a year.
>>>
>>> *Create a new top tax rate for incomes over $2 million. *Presently, a
>>> person with an income of $300,000 faces the same tax rates as a person with
>>> an income of $3 million. Instituting a top tax rate of 50 percent on incomes
>>> over $2 million would generate more than $60 billion a year.
>>>
>>> *Levy a progressive estate tax on large fortunes. *The federal estate
>>> tax, our nation's only levy on grand accumulations of private wealth, will
>>> expire in 2010 and revert to the 2000 status quo. Lawmakers aren't going to
>>> let that happen -- if, for no other reason, to take inflation into account
>>> -- and that reality creates an opportunity to make the estate tax more
>>> progressive.
>>>
>>> One reform would be to institute graduated tax rates on large estates,
>>> while exempting estates worth less than $2 million, $4 million for a couple.
>>> Such an approach would generate over $100 billion a year a decade from now
>>> -- while taxing no more than 1 of every 200 estates.
>>>
>>> All these steps, we believe, would enjoy widespread public support.
>>>
>>>
>>>   On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 10:53 PM, Ryan Lanham <rlanham1963 at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Michel,
>>>>
>>>> It is certainly not the case in the United States where most taxes are
>>>> paid by the rich both in dollar terms and in percentage terms.  It's not
>>>> controversial and readily discoverable.  I recommend the CBO numbers.
>>>>
>>>> I think we'd have to agree to disagree on exploitation and value
>>>> extraction.  But I don't see where that is the point.
>>>>
>>>> The point is that P2P folks often rail against the market, the system,
>>>> and the government.  Why then would they be funded by it?
>>>>
>>>> Ryan
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 9:36 AM, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Ryan,
>>>>>
>>>>> most big companies and rich individuals pay much less taxes than
>>>>> average income people, they have access to plenty of loopholes, but even if
>>>>> they paid, their money didn't come from the sky, but from the value they
>>>>> first extracted from working people. Since working people create the value,
>>>>> and are the ultimate source of taxation, there is absolutely nothing wrong
>>>>> with public funding, on the contrary, it is a moral obligation. We must end
>>>>> the neoliberal corporate welfare state, but rather than just restoring the
>>>>> sometimes paternalistic and disempowering welfare state (which as a baseline
>>>>> to be restored needs to be reformed  against bureaucratic control), we need
>>>>> to augment it with partner state productions, so that more wellbeing and
>>>>> wealth can be created by civil society. The preferential treatment by the
>>>>> neoliberal state of the speculatively richest to the detriment of the
>>>>> producing enterpreneurs and working people would be the way forward.
>>>>>
>>>>> Being against public funding is also an argument for the pure
>>>>> commodification of art as a pure market commodity ... that would be truly
>>>>> immoral,
>>>>>
>>>>> Michel
>>>>>
>>>>>   On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 6:48 PM, Ryan Lanham <rlanham1963 at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Wouldn't it be immoral for people who believe in P2P to take money
>>>>>> from tax payers who are mostly the selfish rich and corporations?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ryan
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 6:28 AM, Kevin Flanagan <
>>>>>> kev.flanagan at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hey Paul,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> State support for the arts is common in europe.
>>>>>>> Im most familiar with the Irish and UK Arts Councils.
>>>>>>> Im not advocating further state support for 'artists'.
>>>>>>> Im interested in putting together an strong argument for state
>>>>>>> support
>>>>>>> for free culture and hacker spaces.
>>>>>>> Using already in place institutions and infrastructure such as arts
>>>>>>> councils.
>>>>>>> I support the idea of a basic income for all.
>>>>>>> But Im suggesting what I see as a practical and achievable short term
>>>>>>> goal.
>>>>>>> If we could specifically get these institutions to recognise the
>>>>>>> social value and put in policy the importance of commons oriented
>>>>>>> production for free culture and hacker spaces then maybe in time we
>>>>>>> can get the state to recognize the value and importance of commons
>>>>>>> based production on a broader scale.
>>>>>>> Lets get these arts councils to expand their remit to support
>>>>>>> specifically free culture and hacker spaces.
>>>>>>> Surely we can show how the skills developed in hack labs are useful
>>>>>>> and transferable and worth state economic investment. Hacker spaces
>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>> in disadvantaged communities could be a great outlet for young
>>>>>>> people.
>>>>>>> I dont have time to look up a good links at the moment because I have
>>>>>>> to go now.
>>>>>>> For example it would be nice to see some research on how Brazil has
>>>>>>> got on with its effort in supporting acces to digital technology.
>>>>>>> Brazilian minister for digital culture Gilberto Gill supporting the
>>>>>>> creation of 650 cultural spaces giving citizens access to computers
>>>>>>> cameras to share music and culture.
>>>>>>> http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9786370-7.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ok Im off for now.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Kevin F
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 6:07 PM, Paul D. Fernhout
>>>>>>> <pdfernhout at kurtz-fernhout.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> > Kevin-
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > As I see it, more support for the arts is a good idea, but a
>>>>>>> half-measure.
>>>>>>> > As you say at the end, we could look at expanding it to all sorts
>>>>>>> of commons
>>>>>>> > production, but it is hard to judge what is "worthy". A "basic
>>>>>>> income" for
>>>>>>> > all is probably a better general solution than trying to decide
>>>>>>> what
>>>>>>> > projects a person wants to do are worthy of support. References:
>>>>>>> >  http://www.basicincome.org/bien/aboutbasicincome.html
>>>>>>> >  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income
>>>>>>> >  http://www.usbig.net/whatisbig.html
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > A basic income just for "artists" is possible:
>>>>>>> >  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income_in_the_Netherlands
>>>>>>> > but in the end, is a mother or father any less an artist for
>>>>>>> helping sculpt
>>>>>>> > a young life than someone who works in clay and sculpts statues?
>>>>>>> And, it is
>>>>>>> > hard to judge a person's worth or a project's worth at the time. It
>>>>>>> may only
>>>>>>> > become clear 1000 years later if something is "worthwhile". And
>>>>>>> besides,
>>>>>>> > worthwhile to whom? Maybe it is enough that an individual's life is
>>>>>>> > worthwhile to themselves?
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > For me, a big changeover point is if everyone could get laws about
>>>>>>> a basic
>>>>>>> > income passed everywhere. So, rather than have artists fighting
>>>>>>> against
>>>>>>> > mothers and fathers and mimes and songwriters and so on over who
>>>>>>> should get
>>>>>>> > the most subsidies, we have both working together, as an alliance,
>>>>>>> to have a
>>>>>>> > basic income for artists, mothers, fathers, writers, journalists,
>>>>>>> mimes, and
>>>>>>> > everyone else, even rich CEOs.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > It's been said:
>>>>>>> >  http://quotationsbook.com/quote/31495/
>>>>>>> > "The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the
>>>>>>> poor, to
>>>>>>> > sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets and to steal bread. "
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > Well, a basic income, in its majestic equality, allows both the
>>>>>>> rich as well
>>>>>>> > as the poor to paint local bridges, to mime in the streets, and to
>>>>>>> give away
>>>>>>> > home-baked bread. :-) Maybe financially obese people won't want to
>>>>>>> do those
>>>>>>> > things compared to poor people who know how important those things
>>>>>>> are, but
>>>>>>> > with a basic income, rich people could. :-)
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > See also:
>>>>>>> > "[p2p-research] Basic income from a millionaire's perspective?"
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/2009-August/003949.html
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > Is it possible you could make some freely licensed art about that
>>>>>>> issue? :-)
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > --Paul Fernhout
>>>>>>> > http://www.pdfernhout.net/
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > Kevin Flanagan wrote:
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> Hello,
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> It was great to finally get to meet some of you in person at media
>>>>>>> >> ecologies.
>>>>>>> >> I have some suggestions and questions regarding building alliances
>>>>>>> >> that Id be interested in thrashing out here on the list.
>>>>>>> >> My question here is how can we incentivize government to support
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> >> building and protection of the commons?
>>>>>>> >> My suggestion is this -
>>>>>>> >> As an artist Ive been involved in and worked with several artist
>>>>>>> led
>>>>>>> >> organisations. Most of these organisations could not survive
>>>>>>> without
>>>>>>> >> government subsidy through bodies such as arts councils. Naturally
>>>>>>> >> there is pressure from government on arts councils and hence on
>>>>>>> >> artists and arts organisations to be accountable for this
>>>>>>> investment.
>>>>>>> >> In order to receive financial support artists and arts
>>>>>>> organisations
>>>>>>> >> are required to fulfill certain criteria to prove the social value
>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>> >> their work. So the better an organisation is at proving the social
>>>>>>> >> value of their work the more likely it is that they will receive
>>>>>>> >> support. This means that lots of artists end up working to
>>>>>>> governments
>>>>>>> >> agenda through Public Art and Community Arts projects. Maybe this
>>>>>>> >> sounds a bit harsh but sometimes I think of community arts as a
>>>>>>> kind
>>>>>>> >> of goverment funded social band aid for disadvantaged communities.
>>>>>>> The
>>>>>>> >> criteria for funding are usually that such projects support ,
>>>>>>> social
>>>>>>> >> inclusion, multiculturalism, intercultural relations. Often what
>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>> >> produced in the creative process if immaterial affect so its not
>>>>>>> >> always easy to show how these arts projects fulfill these
>>>>>>> criteria.
>>>>>>> >> What Im wondering is can free culture centers, hack\fab labs,
>>>>>>> maker
>>>>>>> >> clubs, do this better. I think so. The added advantage of such
>>>>>>> centres
>>>>>>> >> is eductaion in transferable skills. Goverment likes transferable
>>>>>>> >> skills that help peoples job prospects. Whether in electronics,
>>>>>>> >> programming, media. Some research into how the EU and UNESCO
>>>>>>> promote
>>>>>>> >> social inclusion through culture would be useful. Are these
>>>>>>> policies
>>>>>>> >> IP biased? Can we as advocates of free culture and the commons
>>>>>>> propose
>>>>>>> >> ammendments or new policies that incentivize governments to
>>>>>>> provide
>>>>>>> >> financial support for free culture spaces, hack labs and to
>>>>>>> recognize
>>>>>>> >> the intercultural importance of the shared commons oriented
>>>>>>> production
>>>>>>> >> of these spaces? Any ideas who might already be working on this?
>>>>>>> >> Existing models perhaps that can be used as examples?
>>>>>>> >> How might dialogue about the commons interface with current
>>>>>>> thinking
>>>>>>> >> on multiculturalism? Does breaking down financial barriers to
>>>>>>> entry
>>>>>>> >> promote social inclusion locally, nationally, internationally? Of
>>>>>>> >> course but how do we measure this?
>>>>>>> >> I dont know how this sounds or even if its interesting but I
>>>>>>> thought
>>>>>>> >> Id just put it out there.
>>>>>>> >> Maybe the the current system of support for the arts is one to
>>>>>>> look at
>>>>>>> >> expanding for supporting the commons based production? Maybe
>>>>>>> alliances
>>>>>>> >> can be built with existing cultural organisations?
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> Best
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> Kevin F
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> >> p2presearch mailing list
>>>>>>> >> p2presearch at listcultures.org
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> > p2presearch mailing list
>>>>>>> > p2presearch at listcultures.org
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> p2presearch mailing list
>>>>>>> p2presearch at listcultures.org
>>>>>>> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Ryan Lanham
>>>>>> rlanham1963 at gmail.com
>>>>>> Facebook: Ryan_Lanham
>>>>>> P.O. Box 633
>>>>>> Grand Cayman, KY1-1303
>>>>>> Cayman Islands
>>>>>> (345) 916-1712
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> p2presearch mailing list
>>>>>> p2presearch at listcultures.org
>>>>>> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>   --
>>>>> Work: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhurakij_Pundit_University -
>>>>> Research: http://www.dpu.ac.th/dpuic/info/Research.html - Think thank:
>>>>> http://www.asianforesightinstitute.org/index.php/eng/The-AFI
>>>>>
>>>>> P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net  -
>>>>> http://blog.p2pfoundation.net
>>>>>
>>>>> Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss:
>>>>> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>>>>>
>>>>> Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens;
>>>>> http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Ryan Lanham
>>>> rlanham1963 at gmail.com
>>>> Facebook: Ryan_Lanham
>>>> P.O. Box 633
>>>> Grand Cayman, KY1-1303
>>>> Cayman Islands
>>>> (345) 916-1712
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Work: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhurakij_Pundit_University -
>>> Research: http://www.dpu.ac.th/dpuic/info/Research.html - Think thank:
>>> http://www.asianforesightinstitute.org/index.php/eng/The-AFI
>>>
>>> P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net  -
>>> http://blog.p2pfoundation.net
>>>
>>> Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss:
>>> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>>>
>>> Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens;
>>> http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Ryan Lanham
>> rlanham1963 at gmail.com
>> Facebook: Ryan_Lanham
>> P.O. Box 633
>> Grand Cayman, KY1-1303
>> Cayman Islands
>> (345) 916-1712
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Work: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhurakij_Pundit_University - Research:
> http://www.dpu.ac.th/dpuic/info/Research.html - Think thank:
> http://www.asianforesightinstitute.org/index.php/eng/The-AFI
>
> P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net
>
> Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss:
> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>
> Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens;
> http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
Ryan Lanham
rlanham1963 at gmail.com
Facebook: Ryan_Lanham
P.O. Box 633
Grand Cayman, KY1-1303
Cayman Islands
(345) 916-1712
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20091106/55161a11/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the p2presearch mailing list