[p2p-research] Repurposing Profit for User Freedom

[Patrick Anderson]

Ryan Lanham wrote:
> Patrick Anderson wrote:
>>
>> Co-Ownership is one way to hold physical sources.
>>
> There are already large numbers of ways to do this.
> Foundations, co-ops, governments, trusts, etc.
>

I'm afraid they are all wrong in their own ways.

More from ignorance than maliciousness, ALL of our attempts to
organize have failed to provide even our *basic* necessities.

How could so many people be homeless and hungry when there is far, far
more than enough land and water needed to do so?

If our planet was much smaller (or think of an island), and if there
proportionally fewer humans, would more than half of the inhabitants
be without clean water, food and shelter?

Would we, as islanders, also construct famine (as the US Farm Bill
does) by paying each other to NOT grow food - so that prices are kept
above cost?

We are *terrible* at organization.

Once a person or group decides to organize, they immediately take a
stance against all the people who will pay for the growth of that
entity in the future.

Those who organize don't understand what profit measures, and so treat
it as some sort of reward - as though they should celebrate the
depravity and dependence that is the basis and only reason a consumer
would pay profit.

We, as a species, should be 'setup' by now.

Sure there is still work to do, but why are most of us working almost
non-stop for just the absolute bare essentials?

Why do we work our entire lives and *still* not even own a house?

We must organize for the benefit of those willing to pay for the real
costs of production and for those who pay for the expansion of that
entity.  That is the consumer in both cases.

>
> If the argument is against profit as reward, you will lose.

I'm not petitioning a government.  I don't have enough Federal Reserve
Notes to purchase such legislation.

We don't need to beg the actors in the theatre called 'government'.
They won't and even *can't* help us because for-profit corporations
are the only ones currently getting anything done!

We can solve this by organizing for ourselves.  We could do this as a
Corporation, but that isn't strictly necessary.

That organization must be operated under a special Terms of Operation
that designates the proper treatment of profit as a payer's
investment.  That organization will then grow and cause Capitalist to
become unimportant.

Such an organization is certain to outcompete all others since it will
not be required to keep price above cost (investors as consumers are
paid in product, not profit).

We should probably allow prices to float close to what the "market
will bear", but only for the purpose of helping those latecoming
payers to gain co-ownership in the physical sources needed for that
production.

As prices approach costs, our organization will not fail or even be
concerned, since that only indicates that those participants are
gaining sufficient ownership in the sources of production as they
should.

We can easily endure a lack of profit.  Profit should be used for
growth, and when that growth is owned by those who need the outputs
thereof, then profit is naturally reduced.

When profit reaches zero, it will be time for celebration, not for
tears, for it is one of our goals that prices should meet costs so
that everyone can enjoy the things they need without paying tribute to
other owners.


> What is needed is more technology
> evolving faster and faster.
> Ownership then becomes moot.

Yes I know many people dream of the day when robots will do all of the work.

But most people will not be able to afford those new technologies anyway.

We need a better Operating System, not more hardware.