A Better Way

[catherine]

Coincidentally, today I was made aware of two awesome things:

#1 Dan Price, the CEO of Gravity Payments who gave everyone in his company a minimum wage of $70k.

https://buff.ly/32lfKnA?fbclid=IwAR0jWhZ1D_ZQ7aMZ74c4LdYPcFeU8uCqh 4e9vE-8lkEFP1W2X22X80czI4o

He felt it was ridiculous for a CEO to earn 300x what the lowest-paid worker gets, so he evened out that ratio quite a bit. Watch the video in this link where the employees are so grateful to him they give him a Tesla.

#2 Yesterday, my DS35 and I were looking for a particular miniature horse farm, because he wants to provide one to his sister for her wedding. We were a little lost, but we saw someone working on his tractor next to his farm stand. We asked where the miniature horse farm was, and he pointed us in the right direction. I told my son that I felt bad that I didn't buy anything from his farm stand. Well, coincidentally, on FB, someone shared a post: it was the SAME farm that guided us to the miniature horse farm. AND as it turns out, they have a Charles Eisenstein philosophy of a giving economy/paying what you can. Now I feel REALLY bad I didn't buy from them. But they are not far away, and I will definitely go back.

I can't link to that post, but I can copy/paste the text:

Welcome to Diamond Hill Farm! We are so excited to finally have some produce available for the community. This year we are starting out small but next year you can expect to see our production start to ramp up! Farmers market appearances and CSA shares will be available next season but for now please come check out our little farm stand at xxx in Milton! We have a limited selection right now but dozens of other produce will be ready soon. We’re talking heirloom tomatoes, tomatillos, eggplants, sweet corn, ground cherries and many many more.
•TAKE WHAT YOU NEED AND PAY ONLY WHAT YOU ARE ABLE •
even if that maybe means nothing, seriously! We are here for the community and can’t wait to meet y’all!


We think that self-interest and capitalism is the only way. We think that "socialism" will doom us. I would love for more looking beyond this to what the possibilities are for a more cooperative future. Whether it's through the inspiration of a founder of a successful financial enterprise, or a simple Vermont farmer, we can find a better way, if we open our eyes.

[JaneV2.0]

It's becoming obvious to many of us that capitalism isn't the way.

[happystuff]

Very awesome!!

[Rogar]

I like hearing stories like that.

Our local news featured a larger sized coffee shop who has opted to pay all of their employees a living wage. In this case 50K a year. They said one reason was because the typical coffee shop wage was less than unemployment benefits and they was having trouble keeping help. But also, it just was the right way to run a business. One of the employees that interviewed was just delighted. He said his life was more stable than it had been for years. The going price for a latte was $6.75 compared to the same at Starbucks for $3.75. Tipping is discouraged. They gave reports of a bustling business.

[happystuff]

We think that self-interest and capitalism is the only way. We think that "socialism" will doom us. I would love for more looking beyond this to what the possibilities are for a more cooperative future. Whether it's through the inspiration of a founder of a successful financial enterprise, or a simple Vermont farmer, we can find a better way, if we open our eyes.

This is so well put and has stuck in my mind ever since you posted it. "A more cooperative future" - seems like an impossibility in today's world where people don't seem to be able to simply "be nice".

But, as Mahatma Gandhi said, I'll just have to be the change I wish to see in the world. If a CEO and some Vermont farmers can do it, I can try to do better, too. Even if it is on a smaller scale - one person at a time. :)

[ApatheticNoMore]

This is so well put and has stuck in my mind ever since you posted it. "A more cooperative future" - seems like an impossibility in today's world where people don't seem to be able to simply "be nice".

much of the jadedness probably comes from living in a society as dysfunctional as the current U.S. - collapse of empires is ugly I guess. And if one lived somewhere more functional they probably wouldn't think so so much. This is not to assume that humans are saints anywhere or anywhere is utopia, but rather that living in SO MUCH dysfunction leads to an extreme level of jadedness, but it might not be universal everywhere.

[happystuff]

much of the jadedness probably comes from living in a society as dysfunctional as the current U.S. - collapse of empires is ugly I guess. And if one lived somewhere more functional they probably wouldn't think so so much. This is not to assume that humans are saints anywhere or anywhere is utopia, but rather that living in SO MUCH dysfunction leads to an extreme level of jadedness, but it might not be universal everywhere.

Well, we know the jadedness is not universal everywhere simply based on the OP. There are nice people even in a dysfunctional society. I believe it comes down to an individual's choice - be nice or not. It's surprising how many people choose "not", even in simple little things. Again, fortunately, there are a lot of people that do choose "nice" and beyond.

[catherine]

Thanks for your thoughts. And I think its more than "choosing nice" although that is definitely an element--it's also recognizing that just as people believe we are evolutionarily hard-wired for social Darwinism and thus the competitive dog-eat-dog life is "our nature", other scientists have proven that in fact, we are hard-wired for cooperation, compassion and kindness, so a political-economic system can be created to support that belief just as easily as it has been created to support the belief in our self-interest.

[happystuff]

Thanks for your thoughts. And I think its more than "choosing nice" although that is definitely an element--it's also recognizing that just as people believe we are evolutionarily hard-wired for social Darwinism and thus the competitive dog-eat-dog life is "our nature", other scientists have proven that in fact, we are hard-wired for cooperation, compassion and kindness, so a political-economic system can be created to support that belief just as easily as it has been created to support the belief in our self-interest.

Yes, I agree it is more than "choosing nice", but it is such an easy place to start. :)

I also find it interesting that the idea that humans are "hard-wired for social Darwinism" is actually starting to be widely discredited/questioned. I like the Buddhist way of thinking about self-interest - you take care of yourself so that you are able to take care of others. (my paraphrasing, of course - lol). Even the Bible states Jesus said caring for others is 2nd of the Commandments: "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets." (Matthew 22:37-40)."

[razz]

I have been thinking about just this issue for decades so glad this thread made me consider it some more. To me, it still comes down to individualism and the individual's choice that the US values so highly. There are individuals who see others as the enemy or competitor to be compared to or defeated and there are individuals who see partners sharing a lifetime. It comes down to our individual thought each minute of each day.

I like an analogy to swimmers struggling in a tide. There are lifeguards for most but some swimmers focus on the shoulders of the whatever is available to save themselves alone; some extend and grab a lifebuoy sharing a rescue. It is all governed by our individual thought.

[happystuff]

It is all governed by our individual thought.

I agree with your post. Concerning the above, yes, and I would add that we (humans) have the ability to train our thoughts! Just like a martial arts practitioner can train their body to react instinctively, we can train our minds/thoughts the same way. I don't have links, but one can go out to His Holiness the Dalai Lama website to listen to discussions and read about the mind studies that have been and continue to be conducted. It's all very interesting. And, as you said, it is governed by each individual's thoughts, AND each individual has the ability to change/shape their own thoughts.

I think a lot of people don't want the onus of having to do such "work" themselves. It's easier to place the onus on someone or something else, than to have to come to the realization of how/what they really think and do... what the true motivations are behind their thoughts and actions. And, yes, I am also guilty of this! But, I'm trying!

[iris lilies]

I think Dan Price’s action was interesting and I’m glad his company is still thriving. I wasn’t sure so sure that was gonna happen, but good for him.

I’m not so sure Roger’s reference coffee shop will survive, this economy is brutal for food and beverage, so if it doesn’t survive it won’t necessarily be because of the high prices but because it’s just capitalism acting on a very shrunk market.

The Panera/st louis bread co store here that operated on essentially donations closed last year. But it was a success for eight years, so it did pan out.

https://apnews.com/2a9eacaf24ba4e34943b5a5199171e81/Panera-Bread-pay-what-you-want-cafe-in-Missouri-to-close

But back to Roger’s coffee shop: Perhaps you all would be in favor of the government regulating coffee shop so that every latte cost $6.75. Would you all like that?

[catherine]

But back to Roger’s coffee shop: Perhaps you all would be in favor of the government regulating coffee shop so that every latte cost $6.75. Would you all like that?

Not at all! That would defeat the point, which as razz and happystuff pointed out, is an individual choice; plus the idea of a gift economy is to give the individual patrons the option of what to pay. So there is MORE freedom in that model, not less.

[happystuff]

But back to Roger’s coffee shop: Perhaps you all would be in favor of the government regulating coffee shop so that every latte cost $6.75. Would you all like that?

That's just the same old "all or nothing" argument that usually ends up going nowhere. You want to try government regulation - sure let's try it! That also provides the "someone else to blame" if it doesn't work.

The OP was talking about looking for "a better way, if we open our eyes". And things can and are being done on the individual level - "through the inspiration of a founder of a successful financial enterprise, or a simple Vermont farmer". People stepping up and doing/trying and succeeding.

Edited to add: Government regulation is not a requirement for this to work - as has clearly been proven by just the two examples presented. I would hazard a guess that there are many more like situations that currently exist as well.

[Rogar]

I’m not so sure Roger’s reference coffee shop will survive, this economy is brutal for food and beverage, so if it doesn’t survive it won’t necessarily be because of the high prices but because it’s just capitalism acting on a very shrunk market.


But back to Roger’s coffee shop: Perhaps you all would be in favor of the government regulating coffee shop so that every latte cost $6.75. Would you all like that?

I think there will be niche markets for some businesses that offer some community responsibility and high quality products, at a price. Like Patagonia. I've followed a few local certified "B" corps. Some prosper and a couple have gone belly up. My take is that there is a large portion of the population that favors lower quality and high quantity for a lower cost. I guess that capitalism gives us that choice.

I don't agree with government regulation, but it seems like there could be government incentives for responsible behavior. That would probably be a quagmire of politics and bureaucracy, so maybe it's out there in Bernie land somewhere.

[SteveinMN]

My experience over the decades is that regulation and bureaucracy exist (in government as well as in the private sector) as an institutional reaction to people who do not treat others as they would want to be treated and an institutional failure in addressing those specific people. The person who embezzles from his/her company by falsifying his/her expense account gives rise to a bunch of Mickey Mouse rules about which expenses are allowed and how many eyes and hands have to pass judgement on a submitted report. There are regulations about taking off your shoes at the airport security line because we cannot allow the kind of profiling done by other countries. Sometimes regulation is a power grab. But, often, it's an oversized reaction to someone who didn't want to play well with others.

[iris lilies]

Not at all! That would defeat the point, which as razz and happystuff pointed out, is an individual choice; plus the idea of a gift economy is to give the individual patrons the option of what to pay. So there is MORE freedom in that model, not less.
I agree, Just wasn’t sure what your take on it would be.

[happystuff]

My experience over the decades is that regulation and bureaucracy exist (in government as well as in the private sector) as an institutional reaction to people who do not treat others as they would want to be treated and an institutional failure in addressing those specific people. The person who embezzles from his/her company by falsifying his/her expense account gives rise to a bunch of Mickey Mouse rules about which expenses are allowed and how many eyes and hands have to pass judgement on a submitted report. There are regulations about taking off your shoes at the airport security line because we cannot allow the kind of profiling done by other countries. Sometimes regulation is a power grab. But, often, it's an oversized reaction to someone who didn't want to play well with others.

I must say, this is one of the better explanations I've read re:government regulations. Thanks for sharing.

[catherine]

I must say, this is one of the better explanations I've read re:government regulations. Thanks for sharing.

I agree. If we would only volunteer to do the right thing, we wouldn't need laws at all.

[pinkytoe]

Sometimes when I see inexplicable selfish behavior, I wonder if it doesn't go back to how we are parented. However, if you observe young toddlers, some are naturally willing/wanting to share and others are trying to grab for themselves. Can respect for others and cooperation be taught? I think my Catholic upbringing certainly molded me to be more empathetic than the average bear even though I am no longer religious.

[happystuff]

Sometimes when I see inexplicable selfish behavior, I wonder if it doesn't go back to how we are parented. However, if you observe young toddlers, some are naturally willing/wanting to share and others are trying to grab for themselves. Can respect for others and cooperation be taught? I think my Catholic upbringing certainly molded me to be more empathetic than the average bear even though I am no longer religious.

I think they most definitely can be taught. Whether an individual chooses to learn these things and/or put them into practise, I think is a different thing.

I don't know that I would hold a lot to how we are parented - which, yes, I believe makes an impact - but every person comes to a time/age when they must choose for themselves what they believe, how to behave, what they value, etc. Again, it is that all-powerful individual "choice".

[iris lilies]

I agree. If we would only volunteer to do the right thing, we wouldn't need laws at all.
While I don’t disagree with Steve’s assessment of government regulation, I think we have to recognize that there are different values represented in “the right thing.”


I mean, we talk about that here in this forum. Rob values different things than what I value.



Values matter in making decisions. Values are not universal. We all operate according to our values. Or at least, we try to operate according to that which we value, sometimes we fall down.

[Tybee]

Yes, we operate according to our values, and some people are born trying to grab things from others, like the toddlers pinkytoe speaks of. All my life, if I had something, my brother would take it. So there are reticent people and pushy people, and bullies and victims. My grandmother had 10 brothers and sisters. One of her brothers cheated her out of her inheritance. He probably cheated other brothers and sisters as well. He ended up rich; she lived on social security and her teacher's pension in a house without airconditioning in Florida. Another was cruel and ended up running a numbers operation in Miami. Another was a minister and saved all his life to go up to Alaska and baptise Eskimos.

These are people raised in the same homes, with very different reactions. So much of behavior is hard-wired. So much of behavior is cultural--eldest sons appropriate everything, get everything given to them. Generations of patriarchy.

I am always wondering how this will affect the implementation of any new system, whether it will work well, or whether some animals will be more equal than others.

[happystuff]

I am always wondering how this will affect the implementation of any new system, whether it will work well, or whether some animals will be more equal than others.

I think the problem may be expecting that the implementation of a new system will "automatically" make things better (or worse, as the case may be). I think the kind of change being talked about in the OP and subsequent posts have to do with changes in thought and behavior on an internal basis, not through being mandated. Attitudes and beliefs, for example, are taught and learned, but can be changed. Seeing an actual, internal, massive change in any one direction by the majority members of a society, I think takes time - time for the old attitudes and beliefs to "die off", so to speak. Start with one, then two, the four, then eight, etc. people making these internal positive choices for themselves and others, and change does occur. Sorry - don't know if I'm expressing this well or not.

The only example I can come up with to relate to current times is "mask wearing". In US society right now, the attitude of mask wearing is sort of all over the place! It's a new thing for us to have to even think about, let alone put into practice or have ingrained into our habits and norms. Yet, for most South Koreans wearing a mask is a norm, it is a behavior that has been deemed as beneficial for both the individual and society as a whole. This did not occur for the South Koreans with the COVID-19 virus, but with previous events within their country. An evolution, I suppose.

Again, sorry if I'm adding confusion instead of understanding. :(

[Alan]

So much of behavior is cultural--eldest sons appropriate everything, get everything given to them. Generations of patriarchy.I'm the eldest son in a family of 5 sons, no daughters. I don't recognize this generalization.

[iris lilies]

I'm the eldest son in a family of 5 sons, no daughters. I don't recognize this generalization.
My DH, eldest son, is a get-along-dont-ruffle -feathers guy with his siblings.

[bae]

I'm the eldest son in a family of 5 sons, no daughters. I don't recognize this generalization.

I'm the eldest son in my family. I had to buy my own first car, when I was 20. I had to pay rent at home when I was a teenager, and contribute to the grocery bill. I had to pay for most of my college education myself, graduating with large loans. When I was a little kid, I had an "allowance", for which I had to work doing actual labor around the home, labor which would probably be in violation of today's child-labor laws. My "wages" in my allowance were a pittance compared to what I earned doing exactly the same work for neighbors...

My sibling received her first car, a fully-restored classic Mustang, on her 16th birthday. She never had to pay rent at home. She received a generous allowance, for which she had to do absolutely nothing around the home. Parents gave her, over and over, funds and resources to get her life off the ground. She's currently living, rent-free, in a home I own. Right next to my Mom, in another house I own. I do not expect to inherit anything from my parents. The sister will get the entirety of the parents' estates.

Go Patriarchy!

[iris lilies]

Not at all! That would defeat the point, which as razz and happystuff pointed out, is an individual choice; plus the idea of a gift economy is to give the individual patrons the option of what to pay. So there is MORE freedom in that model, not less.
Why dont you elsborate on “the gift economy” since that is Something you talk about but it is unclear to me what it is, if money is indeed allowed to change hands in it. I had assumed gift economy meant bartering, no money.

[Tammy]

Bae - our stories are similar.

I’m the oldest of 4. My dad apologizes to me lately that he helped the other 3 a lot more than he did me. I left home and got married at 19 and did lots of things that he disagreed with. The others followed his direction and got married a lot later and he paid for their college, grad school, and helped one get started in farming. He is trying to make it fair now and I have 80 acres in my name in Ohio since he recently signed over his land equally to the 4 kids. He is focused on none of us taking more than our share after his death.

But there is something about the freedom I’ve had all these years. I wouldn’t change anything if I had to do it over. Even though I lived through many years of barely making it financially ...

Earlier in this thread there was talk of whether humans are basically selfish or basically altruistic. The research I’ve read says both are true. A balance between the two is needed to maintain society as we know it. They serve disparate purposes but both are necessary.

[happystuff]

These are people raised in the same homes, with very different reactions.

I am one of eight children; ask any one of us about growing up and you will get eight different stories and with eight different reactions. :)

[Alan]

I'm the eldest son in my family. I had to buy my own first car, when I was 20......I bought my first car at 16 for $300 which I paid off making $25 per week payments, my dad later sold it and kept the money. Being the oldest of 5, I was expected to be the responsible one so taking that to heart, I left home at 17 and never went back. I've never received a dime from my parents although I have made several loans to family that have never been repaid and I suspect never will. No biggie! All the 'privilege' and 'patriarchy' generalizations amuses me.

[razz]

I am one of eight children; ask any one of us about growing up and you will get eight different stories and with eight different reactions. :)
.
True in my family of 4 kids as well. Oldest, my only brother could do no wrong in my mother's eyes and harmed him as a result. He did sort of get his act together after significant challenges and a wonderful second wife. My mother apologized for being so hard on me as the first daughter in her mid 70's. I agree that making my own way was both a benefit and motivator to me now. I have no regrets.
I am with Cath and Happy stuff about the 'better way' and have chosen that route all my life. I am responsible for my thinking, choices and behaviour.

[bae]

I bought my first car at 16 for $300.

I believe mine was also $300, a ~20 year old Datsun 510 station wagon with many mechanical and body issues, and bald tires. I spent more than $300 the next day on my brand-new Sears charge card purchasing tools and tires to get it road-worthy, then drove it to SF from San Diego to work like a techno-serf the entire summer to generate income to pay for the next year of college.

I think my sister spent that summer at the mall buying stuff.

[Tammy]

Alan - another oldest who left home ASAP like me. Interesting ...

[happystuff]

I believe mine was also $300, a ~20 year old Datsun 510 station wagon with many mechanical and body issues, and bald tires.

$700 for a '70 VW Bug... with a sunroof!!! Loved that car and went on many a road trips. LOL. Sold it to one of my sisters upon enlisting and she blew out the engine. Yes! A car needs oil!!! ROFLOL

[happystuff]

I am with Cath and Happy stuff about the 'better way' and have chosen that route all my life. I am responsible for my thinking, choices and behaviour.

That's three! We're on a roll. ;)

[catherine]

My first car was $100--a really beat-up Chevy Vega that my cousin had traveled across the country with with a bunch of Hare Krishnas.

My sons had a very sad assortment of beaters: an ancient Audi that had a horn that would just start blaring with no warning; a Ford Probe that had a radio that wouldn't work unless the passenger door was open; a hand-me-down Pulsar that was so rotted the muffler was held up with wire. The "baby" of the family, my daughter got a 4-year old VW Beetle, and I have to say, DH and I heard about that from the boys. My DH said he was more concerned about the safety of the girl than the boys. Lame excuse.

But as far as the "selfish" gene vs the "selfless" gene, I can't say that any of my kids feel more entitled than the other. Same with my brothers in my FOO. Maybe because neither families had much more than a pot to piss in or fight over.

[catherine]

Why dont you elsborate on “the gift economy” since that is Something you talk about but it is unclear to me what it is, if money is indeed allowed to change hands in it. I had assumed gift economy meant bartering, no money.

You are not wrong--bartering is part of it. Money can change hands, but there is no expectation, and neither is there a specific value ascribed to the product or service.

I think the major component of The Gift Economy is that it is founded on trust and community. You don't EXPECT a certain amount of money. The economy is based on the relationships among the people, not on the specific dollars and cents.

So, the gift economy can be a website designer who designs a website for free, or accepts whatever the client is willing to pay, or barter, or simply have NO expectation for reciprocity--they may have more of an expectation that things will come around in a "pay it forward" kind of way. That's why it takes a lot of trust to embark on it.

Daniel Suelo, the Man Who Quit Money (name of the book by Mark Sundeen), uses the analogy of a bear who picks raspberries off a bush in the forest and eats them. The raspberry bush doesn't say, "You owe me for those raspberries." And then the bear poops out the raspberries and "pays" the forest floor with the manure, which becomes enriched with nutrients and grows more vegetation and feeds the raspberry bush. Very simplistic way to say "it's an eco-system"--but the sad thing is, our current monetary system ignores the natural reciprocity that takes place in nature, which leads to a huge imbalance on many levels--economic, environmental, psychological, sociological.

That's my perception of the Gift Economy, anyway. Others may disagree or have other ideas about it.

[Tybee]

Thanks, Catherine, that's a good explanation. I know nothing about it, so I appreciated that.

[ApatheticNoMore]

I am the oldest and the responsible, whatever money parents may or may not give one growing up they also never gave me much guidance as a kid either to navigate either the childhood or the adult world, so you kind of raise yourself with neglectful parents (not just permissive neglectful so not much limits and not much on the affection and emotional support side either). And you don't even know what exists out there all that much when young and never having really been given any input, and take whatever advice you can get from whereever. But that part may be universal for the young although some may be given some lay of the land. But yea generally neglectful all that can be said is they did meet our bare physical needs like food, and were smart well educated people who never wanted to parent but one can absorb some things that way.

And as for what is expected of me? Oh that depends on the mood of the day - many contradictory things - one day what they want is for me to go to college, the next day it's for me to drop out of high school and support myself already!, the next day I'm too young to look for a part time job, I should be studying.

And yes everything my parents had doesn't go to me and that part is objectively unfair. It came like a shock and a gut punch to learn that only squeeky wheels get grease, but I've accepted it, with resentment you bet, but.

[catherine]

Thanks, Catherine, that's a good explanation. I know nothing about it, so I appreciated that.

I just found this link by Charles Eisenstein who explains it far better than I can. If you're interested, Sacred Economics is an awesome book.

https://charleseisenstein.org/essays/sacred-economics-money-the-gift-and-society-in-the-age-of-transition/

[happystuff]

I just found this link by Charles Eisenstein who explains it far better than I can. If you're interested, Sacred Economics is an awesome book.

https://charleseisenstein.org/essays/sacred-economics-money-the-gift-and-society-in-the-age-of-transition/

Excellent - thanks for your explanation, which is great! And for this one.

I appreciate that there is the idea of "gratitude" in all of this as well. I think some people these days feel more of a sense of "entitlement" versus "gratitude". The way I figure it - I came into this world with nothing, I'll leave with nothing, so I'm trying to be grateful for everything in between.

[SteveinMN]

My parents were scrupulous about not favoring one kid over another. My sister got somewhat different treatment for being the only girl. She and I (I'm the oldest; she's next) will tell you that my parents were somewhat easier on my brother than they were on us. But that was in part because he had to deal with the expectations of teachers and others after having had both me and my sister in classes -- his personality is quite different from ours and schoolwork was not #1 on his list as it was on ours.

Financially, we've all been treated pretty much equally, as well. My brother probably got a little more "bailed out" than my sister and I have because he chose the lowest-paying career and then got hit with his progressive neuromuscular disease. There's not going to be an "estate" when my mom passes. I'm kind of hoping she speeds up some of her "Swedish Death Cleaning" before it falls to my sister and me along with figuring out where my brother will have to move.

I guess I don't see any patriarchy here, either.

[Tradd]

Panera tried some “pay what you can” locations. It was not a successful experiment.

https://capitalresearch.org/article/why-did-paneras-pay-what-you-can-social-experiment-fail/

[Tybee]

My parents were scrupulous about not favoring one kid over another. My sister got somewhat different treatment for being the only girl. She and I (I'm the oldest; she's next) will tell you that my parents were somewhat easier on my brother than they were on us. But that was in part because he had to deal with the expectations of teachers and others after having had both me and my sister in classes -- his personality is quite different from ours and schoolwork was not #1 on his list as it was on ours.

Financially, we've all been treated pretty much equally, as well. My brother probably got a little more "bailed out" than my sister and I have because he chose the lowest-paying career and then got hit with his progressive neuromuscular disease. There's not going to be an "estate" when my mom passes. I'm kind of hoping she speeds up some of her "Swedish Death Cleaning" before it falls to my sister and me along with figuring out where my brother will have to move.

I guess I don't see any patriarchy here, either.

I hear you all. Glad your world is not like the one I experienced, bowing out of this topic, catherine, interesting topic and hope the world moves closer to .this new paradigm.

[iris lilies]

Panera tried some “pay what you can” locations. It was not a successful experiment.

https://capitalresearch.org/article/why-did-paneras-pay-what-you-can-social-experiment-fail/


The St. Louis pay pay-what-you-can Panera lasted eight years so I’m not sure I would consider that unsuccessful.


I know that I personally do not like Panera food, I think it’s pretty crappy. It’s overrated. And I would be annoyed to walk in to one of these places and find no prices. However, the one in St. Louis had “suggested prices” so I would’ve been fine with that.

[Teacher Terry]

We were all treated the same and had lots of love and attention. There were 3 of us and being the youngest my parents were more easy going. My mom lived so long that she spent her money traveling which we encouraged her to do. Didn’t leave any debts either and paid for her funeral plus planned it including asking people to sing, etc.

[dmc]

I’m the oldest, I have one sister. I worked for my dads construction company during the summers starting around 15, my sister stayed home. I was paid and had new company trucks to drive as I wanted thru college, my sister didn’t receive a car till she started college. We were treated a little differently, but it was more being boy and girl than I was 2 years older.

I bought my first car with my own money when I was 22, it was a 1966 Chevy Corvette convertable. When I got out of college one of the benefits I received was a company vehicle, so I could buy a fun car for myself. My dad had given me a nice truck when I turned 21, I traded that truck in for a new car for my wife, I also got married when I was 22.

I did not work for my dad after college.

[rosarugosa]

The whole idea of a "gift economy" doesn't sound viable to me as a large-scale economic system.

[razz]

I appreciate that there is the idea of "gratitude" in all of this as well. I think some people these days feel more of a sense of "entitlement" versus "gratitude". The way I figure it - I came into this world with nothing, I'll leave with nothing, so I'm trying to be grateful for everything in between.

I agree.
From August 1-November each year, I am filled with gratitude to my parents who had the foresight, wisdom and courage to move to Canada arriving in the month of August to give all their children an opportunity and freedom from political, cultural and social strata issues. I obtained an excellent education, employment, married a remarkable delightful partner, had two healthy children, scanty at times but sufficient resources and along the way, I have met good neighbours with whom is exchanged support freely. Gratitude is a way of life throughout my life.

[JaneV2.0]

My parents honeymooned in Victoria; I like to imagine I was conceived there. I often wish they had fallen in love with the area and stayed.

[LDAHL]

I thought gift economies functioned to maintain social hierarchies by creating obligations for the recipients. Personally, I prefer capitalism, which functions to create new wealth rather than some closed system of reciprocal redistribution.

[catherine]

I thought gift economies functioned to maintain social hierarchies by creating obligations for the recipients.

Not from what I understand. The idea is we all have gifts to give. No one's contribution is valued more highly than the other. You don't have teachers making a pittance and sports stars earning millions. It's true that we have to redefine "wealth" if we are to start to think about the gift economy.

[Alan]

How does manufacturing or supply chains work in a gift economy. Do refrigerators or cars, TV's or mobile phones exist there?

[ApatheticNoMore]

I thought gift economies functioned to maintain social hierarchies by creating obligations for the recipients. Personally, I prefer capitalism, which functions to create new wealth rather than some closed system of reciprocal redistribution.

the question isn't is their hierarchy, I mean I believe ideally not much, but assuming there is, whether there is mutual obligation between those in different positions of the hierarchy. Now it seems we live in a hierarchy where most of the population is considered disposable. Not the first time I suppose but not a good development.

Capitalism especially as practiced in the U.S. is as hierarchical as it comes, so hardly an argument against less capitalist forms of also hierarchy (like village chiefs or whatever)

There isn't actually "new wealth", there is mostly living beyond sustainability (borrowing from the future - hello environmental destruction), and sometimes better uses of of existing resources. Currently we lean heavily on the former, but the latter may exist in some element to, and only the later could be called new wealth in any real sense. There is the distribution of wealth but the rich getting richer isn't actually new wealth either.

[catherine]

the question isn't is their hierarchy, I mean I believe ideally not much, but assuming there is, whether there is mutual obligation between those in different positions of the hierarchy. Now it seems we live in a hierarchy where most of the population is considered disposable. Not the first time I suppose but not a good development.

Capitalism especially as practiced in the U.S. is as hierarchical as it comes, so hardly an argument against less capitalist forms of also hierarchy (like village chiefs or whatever)

There isn't actually "new wealth", there is mostly living beyond sustainability (borrowing from the future - hello environmental destruction), and sometimes better uses of of existing resources. Currently we lean heavily on the former, but the latter may exist in some element to, and only the later could be called new wealth in any real sense. There is the distribution of wealth but the rich getting richer isn't actually new wealth either.

Well said, ANM.

[catherine]

The whole idea of a "gift economy" doesn't sound viable to me as a large-scale economic system.

This, and Alan's comment about refrigerators in the gift economy, is like saying in 1960 how could we ever walk on the moon.

We started with the space program by defining the values that were important to us and then we hired the engineers.

The economic system we have and the values that drive it have bankrupted our natural resources, handcuffed us to soul-sucking jobs, and dismantled our sense of community.

So, let's tinker with that model a bit and see if we can get back some of the things we've lost along the way.

[happystuff]

This, and Alan's comment about refrigerators in the gift economy, is like saying in 1960 how could we ever walk on the moon.

We started with the space program by defining the values that were important to us and then we hired the engineers.

The economic system we have and the values that drive it have bankrupted our natural resources, handcuffed us to soul-sucking jobs, and dismantled our sense of community.

So, let's tinker with that model a bit and see if we can get back some of the things we've lost along the way.

Agree with this and ANM.

In response to your question, Alan, "How does manufacturing or supply chains work in a gift economy. Do refrigerators or cars, TV's or mobile phones exist there? ", I think a good example of the "tinkering" catherine speaks of is exhibited in the CEO example in the OP.

I still don't understand why some people seem to be stuck on the "all or nothing" solutions, instead of taking what is "good" and working towards "better".

[Alan]

I still don't understand why some people seem to be stuck on the "all or nothing" solutions, instead of taking what is "good" and working towards "better".
I don't think anyone has suggested "all or nothing", I'm just trying to understand how a gift economy works at scale. It seems that no one else does either.

[happystuff]

I don't think anyone has suggested "all or nothing", I'm just trying to understand how a gift economy works at scale. It seems that no one else does either.

This is not meant to sound snarky or anything - but I'm thinking that until it does exist - at scale - you won't get a definitive answer.

[LDAHL]

This, and Alan's comment about refrigerators in the gift economy, is like saying in 1960 how could we ever walk on the moon.

We started with the space program by defining the values that were important to us and then we hired the engineers.

The economic system we have and the values that drive it have bankrupted our natural resources, handcuffed us to soul-sucking jobs, and dismantled our sense of community.

So, let's tinker with that model a bit and see if we can get back some of the things we've lost along the way.

I’m inclined to agree with Alan. It’s hard to see how a system of “you give what you want and I’ll give what I want” will somehow provide all the coronary bypasses, interstate highways and attack submarines we need. We started the space program by soliciting bids from corporations who had previously built up the needed expertise in the pursuit of profit.

I think maybe people are romanticizing “things we lost along the way” and underestimating the benefits of economic competition.

[bae]

A new cutting-edge semiconductor fabrication facility can run $15-$20 billion dollars, and require the coordinated efforts of large numbers of highly-skilled scientists, engineers and technicians.

I think we won't be seeing many next-generation iPhones in a gift economy.

[happystuff]

I’m inclined to agree with Alan. It’s hard to see how a system of “you give what you want and I’ll give what I want” will somehow provide all the coronary bypasses, interstate highways and attack submarines we need. We started the space program by soliciting bids from corporations who had previously built up the needed expertise in the pursuit of profit.

I think maybe people are romanticizing “things we lost along the way” and underestimating the benefits of economic competition.


A new cutting-edge semiconductor fabrication facility can run $15-$20 billion dollars, and require the coordinated efforts of large numbers of highly-skilled scientists, engineers and technicians.

I think we won't be seeing many next-generation iPhones in a gift economy.

It's interesting that you all seem to present opposition by assuming that everything that exists now will somehow be gone. Again, capitalism, as it exists today, did not develop by immediate "declaration". What is happening on a very small scale in the OP is viewed by me (speaking only for myself) as a start to a possible, new, better and, yes, different future beyond the capitalistic system that CURRENTLY exists today. Nobody is going to declare "gift economy - give up any and all thoughts of progress in technology or anywhere else".

[iris lilies]

I always think of how barter economies break down so quickly. Great experiments with lots of enthusiasm going forward. But in the end there’s an over supply of hand crocheted items, music lessons, perennial plants, and essential oils.

And a great dearth of plumbing services, Physician treatment options, and masonry service and lumber products.

This is not even addressing the need in these economies for automobiles, microwave ovens and iPhones.

[catherine]

A new cutting-edge semiconductor fabrication facility can run $15-$20 billion dollars, and require the coordinated efforts of large numbers of highly-skilled scientists, engineers and technicians.

I think we won't be seeing many next-generation iPhones in a gift economy.

I think there's a reason Imagine is one of my favorite songs...

Of course, my Philosophy of Crisis professor used to mock Imagine by saying "Imagine no possessions. It's easy if you're rich." I get that, but I also enjoy challenging the status quo. Would life be SO much worse without the latest generation iPhone? Could we still have complex manufacturing with improved systems like worker co-ops or reduced ratios between the highest and lowest paid workers, a la Dan Price (with the benefit of vastly improved morale and loyalty)? Can we grow The Commons?

So many questions.

Sidebar note: I did happen to recall one situation when the "selfish" gene was apparent in my family, and I never got to the bottom of it. We had 6 people in the household. Every now and then, DH would bring home a dozen donuts from Dunkin' Donuts. Anyone can do the math: 12/6=2. Each member of the family gets 2 donuts, right? Well sure as anything, someone would go to get their second donut and the box would be empty. The victim would yell all night long, but no one would 'fess up. This happened more than once. Interestingly none of us felt compelled to stash our two as soon as the box came in. We always expected honesty from the others, and frankly, we were sometimes disappointed. Yet hope springs eternal.

[happystuff]

catherine, have you every read The Dispossessed by Ursula K Le Guin? Very relatable to this discussion.

[catherine]

catherine, have you every read The Dispossessed by Ursula K Le Guin? Very relatable to this discussion.

I just looked it up and it looks really interesting! I feel I have an anarchist inside me--there are so many shades of anarchism, and I've always admired Christian anarchists Dorothy Day and Peter Maurin. Maybe I could say I at least partially identify as a Christian anarchist with a pinch of anarcho-primitivsm. So, what candidate do I vote for in November?

[happystuff]

I just looked it up and it looks really interesting! I feel I have an anarchist inside me--there are so many shades of anarchism, and I've always admired Christian anarchists Dorothy Day and Peter Maurin. Maybe I could say I at least partially identify as a Christian anarchist with a pinch of anarcho-primitivsm. So, what candidate do I vote for in November?

Whichever one you want! ;)

[LDAHL]

If you really want to see what anarchy looks like, you need only turn on your television.

[rosarugosa]

Gifts are voluntary by definition. There is nothing currently stopping Jeff Bezos from sharing his wealth equally across his work force, yet he does not. I think the idea of the entire world running on a gift economy is a pleasant fantasy, much like peace on earth. Maybe it would work if there were no humans, and dogs were running the show.

[iris lilies]

Gifts are voluntary by definition. There is nothing currently stopping Jeff Bezos from sharing his wealth equally across his work force, yet he does not. I think the idea of the entire world running on a gift economy is a pleasant fantasy, much like peace on earth. Maybe it would work if there were no humans, and dogs were running the show.

Haha! But dogs are the territorial, resource-guarding creatures! I see Regular fights in my living room proving that.

[razz]

IMHO, the gift economy relies on the understanding of 'the common'. There are shared resources of land, services like water, power supply, the internet, etc and their operations and expenses are shared. I share the responsibility for the highways with all but am able to 'gift' a ride to another in need. I agree that there is no one size fits all. It seems that the perception is that there is and it is greed. Anything else is perceived as weakness. That approach is not sustainable for our earth.

[LDAHL]

Gifts are voluntary by definition. There is nothing currently stopping Jeff Bezos from sharing his wealth equally across his work force, yet he does not. I think the idea of the entire world running on a gift economy is a pleasant fantasy, much like peace on earth. Maybe it would work if there were no humans, and dogs were running the show.

If people weren’t people and angels instead, I doubt it would matter much what the economic system was. But I really wouldn’t want my dog in charge of resource allocation.

[catherine]

If people weren’t people and angels instead, I doubt it would matter much what the economic system was. But I really wouldn’t want my dog in charge of resource allocation.

I guess you'd want a wolf.

[catherine]

IMHO, the gift economy relies on the understanding of 'the common'. There are shared resources of land, services like water, power supply, the internet, etc and their operations and expenses are shared. I share the responsibility for the highways with all but am able to 'gift' a ride to another in need. I agree that there is no one size fits all. It seems that the perception is that there is and it is greed. Anything else is perceived as weakness. That approach is not sustainable for our earth.

Here's an example of "A Better Way" and it relates to The Commons. My favorite town in NJ is Ocean Grove (I have become a snowbird to that town for 3 months a year). It was built in the mid-1800s by the Methodists, who purchased one square mile as a summer camp for their congregants. It was an intentional community back then, with the blocks laid out like a grid. A boardwalk lines the shoreline. The houses closest to the road on the shore are set back a bit on the postage-stamp sized lawns. The next-door neighbor's house is a foot more forward on the lawn, and the next guy's house is another foot or so, etc., so that when you have a balcony, no one is completely cutting off the view of the water from their neighbors. it is designed with the community in mind.

Then there's Atlantic City, NJ, where Trump and his ilk sued people who lived there for generations for eminent domain. Far better that rich people can look out the windows of their million dollar condos and penthouse suites than "poorer" people who are equally deserving of a good view and who actually have legitimate claims to the property to do so. Let's just kick them out, knock down their homes, and give the barrons of wealth whatever they want. Capitalism at its best.

But where would I rather live, regardless of my wealth?

True wealth is being surrounded by a community that considers you an equal member, regardless of your bank account.

[Tybee]

I guess you'd want a wolf.

I think it's really interesting to look at animal societies with respect to how they perceive fairness. Here is a link to a cool article in Smithsonian about wolves, dogs, and fairness:

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/wolves-and-dogs-both-have-sense-fairness-180963638/

[Tybee]

How cool about the balconies moving forward a foot!

[catherine]

I think it's really interesting to look at animal societies with respect to how they perceive fairness. Here is a link to a cool article in Smithsonian about wolves, dogs, and fairness:

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/wolves-and-dogs-both-have-sense-fairness-180963638/


Cool article! I actually have nothing against wolves at all... When I replied to LDAHL I was thinking metaphorically of the Wolf of Wall Street. In fact, have you seen this iconic video about how wolves change rivers?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysa5OBhXz-Q

[Tybee]

Wow, no I have not, and thank you!

[razz]

Both links were really interesting. Thank you!

[Tybee]

Check this one out, if you want to think about the gift economy in an even broader sense:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpxTCuc6kFc

[razz]

Really cute!

[happystuff]

LOL - that is so cute!

[happystuff]

Just got a chance to watch the wolf video. Wow!!! I know that cause and effect is pretty much endless, and this is a great example!

[razz]

Just got a chance to watch the wolf video. Wow!!! I know that cause and effect is pretty much endless, and this is a great example!

Agreed, it is amazing of how easily checks and balances get thrown out of kilter by seemingly unrelated issues.

[Tybee]

Agreed, it is amazing of how easily checks and balances get thrown out of kilter by seemingly unrelated issues.

Yeah, I posted the wolf and the monkey videos because I think Catherine's original post is asking questions that need a higher level of consciousness to solve than what we currently bring to economic structures. That higher level of consciousness must take into account the actual natural world we live in--how do we arrive at new ways to live peaceably on the earth, which I think is part of the bigger questions that the original post is asking.

[catherine]

Yeah, I posted the wolf and the monkey videos because I think Catherine's original post is asking questions that need a higher level of consciousness to solve than what we currently bring to economic structures. That higher level of consciousness must take into account the actual natural world we live in--how do we arrive at new ways to live peaceably on the earth, which I think is part of the bigger questions that the original post is asking.

Exactly, Tybee.

[jp1]

Studies about animals are endlessly fascinating. Years ago Freakanomics told the story about some researchers at Yale that had taught capuchin monkeys about money. Every day the researchers would bring a tray of coins into the monkey's compound, pass it out, and then sell the monkeys grapes and bananas and such. One day one of the monkeys performed a heist. As the researcher entered the enclosure the monkey knocked the tray of coins out of the researcher's hands and coins flew everywhere. In the same way the people witnessing a brinks truck spilling dollar bills everywhere would scramble to collect whatever they could the monkeys ran around and grabbed up the coins since they now had been trained of the value of money. One of the male monkeys then approached one of the female monkeys and offered her a coin. She took it and let him have sex with her. Once they were finished she presented her coin to the researcher to get a few grapes. And now apparently capuchin monkeys had discovered prostitution.

[nswef]

This made me laugh jp.

[iris lilies]

I realize a gift economy is a real real different way at looking at economics.

But I will say this. Every time I listen to real economists, PhD level people, they go into the weeds and I cannot understand what they are talking about. I think it’s because they make so many references to principles in their field that have names I do not recognize. But that’s only part of it. Truly the concepts have been beyond me.


This happened to me a couple times in the past year where I start into Podcasts and get lost within 10-15 minutes. Theoretical economists speak a different language. I mean it’s like chemists or physicists, but I expect those disciplines to be beyond me, not econ.

[happystuff]

Yeah, I posted the wolf and the monkey videos because I think Catherine's original post is asking questions that need a higher level of consciousness to solve than what we currently bring to economic structures. That higher level of consciousness must take into account the actual natural world we live in--how do we arrive at new ways to live peaceably on the earth, which I think is part of the bigger questions that the original post is asking.

Maybe that's the problem - "a higher level of consciousness" and "human beings" seem to be mutually exclusive - at least based on behaviors, attitudes, etc. currently circulating.

And I deleted most of this ranting post because it was just that - a ranting post. Suffice to say, I just don't understand why people can't be nice. Or, as the Dalai Lama has said, if you are not going to help, at least don't harm.