A Better Way

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tybee

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...of-transition/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by catherine

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...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.

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.

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

https://capitalresearch.org/article/...periment-fail/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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.

---

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tradd

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

https://capitalresearch.org/article/...periment-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.

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.

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.

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by happystuff

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.

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.

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LDAHL

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.

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

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ApatheticNoMore

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rosarugosa

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by catherine

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".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by happystuff

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by catherine

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.

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LDAHL

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.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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.

---

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".

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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.

---

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.

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by happystuff

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?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by catherine

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! ;)

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

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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.

---

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

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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.

---

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LDAHL

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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.

---

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by catherine

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...ess-180963638/

How cool about the balconies moving forward a foot!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tybee

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...ess-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

Wow, no I have not, and thank you!

Both links were really interesting. Thank you!