Bo Rothstein suggests (taking his cue from David Ellerman) that capitalism is a system where capital hires labour, and thus governs, but that it would be possible with a system where labour hires capital. That would be a cooperative system. Equally dependent om markets as the capitalist system, perhaps more dependent, since capitalists do whatever they can to fight against markets to dominate them, as Immanuel Wallerstein posed it.
The question is if it is practically possible. Branko Milanovic thought not, seeing the result of Yugoslavia, but possibly cooperatives must be at least as supplemented by a developmentalist state (see Luiz Carlos Bresser Ferreira about what that is) as capitalist businesses are, not to rot. And I have never heard that Yugoslavia was particularly developmentalist.
Another question is how to come there. The present system must be challenged by very determined and well-organized people. Perhaps that would be theoretically possible the next financial crisis, provided that trade unions and other organizations in the productive sphere deem it necessary. But that would require a revolution within, since in a cooperative society the trade union employees who now control that system would have a very small place indeed.
I guess that a typical small business is often in that position, being labour which "hires capital". I think the weak point in this is that hiring capital means paying a rent, which still would make the capital owner richer and richer over time. Or did you mean something else in hiring capital?
unsystematized barter combined with gifting (which naturally arrises in any community that employs barter) gets the job done if: the area and population are large enough and resource-rich enough, including human capability. A severely diminished and industrially-dependent resource-base is one of our biggest challenges going forward. Often there is a distribution problem such as land availability, based on legacy ownership patterns. Diminished fresh-water resources and blocked rivers are other examples of legacy barriers to future prosperity/survival. However as we must necessarily work with what we have, salvage, local production of food/energy/water/materials and functional trade-capability (mobile traders) & most importantly collectivity education (priority of the common good which includes all our relations) will see us fed/clothed/sheltered/healed/loved/cared-for in mind/body/emotion/spirit.
Charles Eisenstein has a book Sacred Economics which explores this conundrum in depth, offering alternatives. Can be read for free. Just click on “Introduction” “Chapter 1” and so on to read it in English, other languages are available also. You can download the PDF. Or order on Amazon.
I continue to put this subject into a context of what the sdgs/net zero/digitalisation are about.
It is not discussed in msm, most people don.t have a clue the system that is built around us as we speak. Social impact bonds it is a dystopian capitalistic nightmare. Powerty management by transhumanist trillionaires calling themselves Philantropists. If powerty is a opportunity for profit, do you think it is likely powerty will be faught or promoted? This is an australian woman describing the system being put in place in Australia, but the agenda is global. Playing in to the agenda2030 and the so called sustainable development goals is the same as promoting a global technocratic fascism. They 2024 call i G3P or PPP as in Public private partnership. The video in the beginning is relativly short intro to this huge subject. https://kate739.substack.com/p/democracy-20-capitalism-20
One has to excuse them for all the "you know's", and I don't know about bitcoin as any solution. But Whitney is sharp! Natural asssets include our genes, our behaviour.. This is what "smart" cities, rewilding, Internet of things, internet of boddies.. Is all about.
Also Distributism as a guiding philosophy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributism There has never been a truly free market and economy there have also been restrictions and rules on what happens. Yes, the dark side of private property and the market system is the concentration of ownership, production and wealth over time. Distributism is a principle to guard against that and yet keep the blessing/freedom side of free enterprise, private property, and the market, a call for the application of love and wisdom. But we are late in the game and the dark side of the market economy has metastasized. Distributism was developed over a hundred years ago and that’s when it needed to be applied. Unfortunately we are headed to a system collapse IMO.
Yes, in the Middle Ages besides the supposed banning of usury, there was discussion of what was a just and fair profit. I can see how a shareholder’s expectation of a dividend or share in the profits would operate as usury, especially as since the usual shareholder of today did not make an initial investment in the business they are receiving dividends from.
Bo Rothstein suggests (taking his cue from David Ellerman) that capitalism is a system where capital hires labour, and thus governs, but that it would be possible with a system where labour hires capital. That would be a cooperative system. Equally dependent om markets as the capitalist system, perhaps more dependent, since capitalists do whatever they can to fight against markets to dominate them, as Immanuel Wallerstein posed it.
The question is if it is practically possible. Branko Milanovic thought not, seeing the result of Yugoslavia, but possibly cooperatives must be at least as supplemented by a developmentalist state (see Luiz Carlos Bresser Ferreira about what that is) as capitalist businesses are, not to rot. And I have never heard that Yugoslavia was particularly developmentalist.
Another question is how to come there. The present system must be challenged by very determined and well-organized people. Perhaps that would be theoretically possible the next financial crisis, provided that trade unions and other organizations in the productive sphere deem it necessary. But that would require a revolution within, since in a cooperative society the trade union employees who now control that system would have a very small place indeed.
I guess that a typical small business is often in that position, being labour which "hires capital". I think the weak point in this is that hiring capital means paying a rent, which still would make the capital owner richer and richer over time. Or did you mean something else in hiring capital?
That, of course, depend on who has the power to set the conditions.
unsystematized barter combined with gifting (which naturally arrises in any community that employs barter) gets the job done if: the area and population are large enough and resource-rich enough, including human capability. A severely diminished and industrially-dependent resource-base is one of our biggest challenges going forward. Often there is a distribution problem such as land availability, based on legacy ownership patterns. Diminished fresh-water resources and blocked rivers are other examples of legacy barriers to future prosperity/survival. However as we must necessarily work with what we have, salvage, local production of food/energy/water/materials and functional trade-capability (mobile traders) & most importantly collectivity education (priority of the common good which includes all our relations) will see us fed/clothed/sheltered/healed/loved/cared-for in mind/body/emotion/spirit.
Charles Eisenstein has a book Sacred Economics which explores this conundrum in depth, offering alternatives. Can be read for free. Just click on “Introduction” “Chapter 1” and so on to read it in English, other languages are available also. You can download the PDF. Or order on Amazon.
https://sacred-economics.com/read-online/
I continue to put this subject into a context of what the sdgs/net zero/digitalisation are about.
It is not discussed in msm, most people don.t have a clue the system that is built around us as we speak. Social impact bonds it is a dystopian capitalistic nightmare. Powerty management by transhumanist trillionaires calling themselves Philantropists. If powerty is a opportunity for profit, do you think it is likely powerty will be faught or promoted? This is an australian woman describing the system being put in place in Australia, but the agenda is global. Playing in to the agenda2030 and the so called sustainable development goals is the same as promoting a global technocratic fascism. They 2024 call i G3P or PPP as in Public private partnership. The video in the beginning is relativly short intro to this huge subject. https://kate739.substack.com/p/democracy-20-capitalism-20
Om våra "digital twins", att sätta samman med föregående länk om natural asset companies/NAC.
https://youtu.be/lv-jHH8u1-E?si=-UZ087deH_Kv-sH-
https://rumble.com/v3yptkd-the-great-taking-documentary.html
One has to excuse them for all the "you know's", and I don't know about bitcoin as any solution. But Whitney is sharp! Natural asssets include our genes, our behaviour.. This is what "smart" cities, rewilding, Internet of things, internet of boddies.. Is all about.
https://youtu.be/wUP229ZPsV4?si=6QGAQixKdpPIcDw9
I think this article by Paul Cudenec very intersting trying to get a grip on capitalism/industrialism and the fluffy word "development".
https://winteroak.org.uk/2024/07/19/deliberate-dispossession-and-our-struggle-for-autonomy/
Thanks for links, seems very relevant and interesting
Part of the process would be the end of interest (usury) and an alternative money system as described here
https://charleseisenstein.org/essays/money-a-new-beginning-part-1/
https://charleseisenstein.org/essays/money-a-new-beginning-part-2/
Also Distributism as a guiding philosophy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributism There has never been a truly free market and economy there have also been restrictions and rules on what happens. Yes, the dark side of private property and the market system is the concentration of ownership, production and wealth over time. Distributism is a principle to guard against that and yet keep the blessing/freedom side of free enterprise, private property, and the market, a call for the application of love and wisdom. But we are late in the game and the dark side of the market economy has metastasized. Distributism was developed over a hundred years ago and that’s when it needed to be applied. Unfortunately we are headed to a system collapse IMO.
I do believe that "profit" works in the same way as usury, and actually on a larger scale in today's world.
Yes, in the Middle Ages besides the supposed banning of usury, there was discussion of what was a just and fair profit. I can see how a shareholder’s expectation of a dividend or share in the profits would operate as usury, especially as since the usual shareholder of today did not make an initial investment in the business they are receiving dividends from.