In shared income communities, the decision making system is much more important than in individual income communities. Every purchase must go through the decision making system, which makes it a much bigger problem if the system isn't right. People often say that in a shared income commune, people do not have individual freedom, which was actually true in the past. Now, however, we have a new system, which will create much more individual freedom than exists in Capitalism. We often think an intelligent person, is a person who comes up with a lot of new ideas. The same is true of a society. A society must give its people freedom to think, and pursue their thoughts and dreams in multiple directions. It must not force all its people into one direction, such as the democratic decision making system does. A commune is a sort of worker controlled company. Therefore, it must produce income. To produce income, it needs to be able to persue multiple ideas simulaniously. It needs new ideas, and allow changes freely. It must allow people to make decisions as individuals. We do that (although badly) in Capitalism. Why can't we do the same thing in a shared income commune? In doing so, we'd effectively capture all the good of a commune, and add to that high technology and extremely fast growth. We use the word "love" to describe shared income communes, 'cause it creates an atmosphere of people caring for the good of all, not for themselves, as they do in Capitalism. It would not be impossible to create a commune with 100 people or so. Once set up, if it works according to theory, it will grow extremely fast. Here's my website, which tells more about this idea: http://conceivia.com Tony
well i looked at the site and it might have been there but i sure didnt find it so ill ask here. you have this nice idea of your system will acomplish but what is the idea? how is it supposed to be achieved? you say "Once set up, if it works according to theory, it will grow extremely fast." ok great but how?
Perhaps you are vaguely aware that during the 1960's, a wave of new communes started, all over the USA. That wave only lasted a short time, and most of those communes died out soon afterwards. The problem was the system they had just didn't work very well. That wave was from word of mouth growth. There are two main types of growth, one is word of mouth, the other is actual growth from producing profit. If a commune can produce income. Start new businesses, develop new products, etc. If a commune can do that, it will make profit. Potentially as much money per person as a company in the US would make, which would be $50,000 a year per person or so. A commune doesn't give that money to its people. It all goes back into the commune. A commune uses that money to build homes for its people, buy tools and machines, buy seeds to grow food, buy some food and luxuries, etc. In a commune, the cost of living per person is much less, probably 1/4th the cost of living in Capitalism. In a commune, $5,000 to 10,000 would be spent on living, and $40,000 would be spent on building more homes and buying more tools and equipment and stuff. A commune can run almost entirely self reliant, fairly easily. It can grow almost all of its own food. If it doesn't have enough work for its people, it has them growing food, so it spends less. In a poor country, people work often for only $50 a month. A commune can hire such people to build buildings and do farming, if need be, to support the fast growth rate needed. In such an environment, $40,000 a year per person can buy a lot of housing. Of course, we don't just hire people. We also give those people the choice to join. We automatically prevent the commune from spending excessive money on luxuries, by simply forcing it to accept new members as fast as they come. If the commune is prospering and people are living good, more people will want to join. If the commune is suffering, people will want to leave. When we need to buy food, we do so by contracting, and we do that in such a way as to draw the farmers into our society. We create a sort of sharing contract. We allow them to use our equipment, which means they'll produce more and prosper. We then draw a percentage of that extra income they produce, resulting in more for the commune. Don't forget that a commune is a community which taxes 100%. There is nothing wrong with tax, if you get something for it. These are people who are seriously struggling to make ends meet. We'll improve their situation, and give them a taste of a better life. This in turn, will make them think about living in the commune. How fast the growth will be is anyone's guess. The growth will be basically logrithmic, which means if we start with 100 and double every six months, we get 102400 in 5 years. That growth adds to the word of mouth growth, which also runs basically logrithmic. At the moment, this is just text. Text is not so interesting. People can say anything in text, and people really don't understand it in text form. People need to see it to believe it. They need to be able to go visit a community, before they are willing to help. How much interest would people have, if they see a network of communes all over the world, which started just 5 years ago with 100 people, and now is 100,000 people? Wouldn't that draw a little more attention than a website with no communes? Of course it would. Advertising would grow. Word of mouth would grow. There is a whole lot of people who believe in this sort of thing, who are despirately looking for a solution to what is going on in the world right now. Such interest could start a new wave like there was in the 1960's at the drop of a hat. If that wave was backed up by a system of society which actually worked, that wave wouldn't loose momentum, but would continue till 50% or more of the world's population was in communes. Here's the page which talks about the growth rate. http://conceivia.com/about-us/growth-rate-explained/ Communes come very close to working. The new system is just a small change, which might look insignificant. Insignificant looking changes though, often make huge differences. It is a simple matter of allowing individuals the freedom to make decisions, which allows a commune to produce income. That alone would turn a dirt poor stuggling commune into a seriously wealthy fast growing commune. Tony
well again you keep talking about the new system, growth rates and so on but how do you achieve these goals you still havent said. you say its all text now you wanna give it a try in real world and see if it holds true? we have an empty piece of land your welcome to use. if your ideas work then great just share the wealth or buy the land from us in 5 years. if it dont then you will know atleast. but truthfully i dont think a commune making money is what attracks people to it. and if the only reason they were there was for money im not sure i would want to be there. just a few short years ago we were basically homesteading on goverment land. got caught on it and they really didnt care but wanted to know who was using it so they ended up leasing it to US for a great price. then up the road off our land a developer built a hotel that increased the turist traffic and such to where we have all but abandoned that property. and now spend nearly all our time on another much smaller property that we all seem to love even more. on this small property is where we found gold in the river. that gold has allowed us to purchases other property in different locations. so money really isnt an issue with us anymore if we all decide we want or need sometyhing we just get it. but the work involved turns off alot of new people. i mean on this land we all have kids kids have chore the adults have chores and daily things that just need to be taken care of before we even think about doing the actual work. getting closths washed kids to and from school gathering daily food items for a meal tending to the animals or what ever. i guess with the river producing gold we could just hire and keep what would basically be full time employees around to do the work but thats not a communitity sounds more like a labor camp or migrant farmer camp of sorts. well sorry i rambled on i would love to talk more, maybe more after a responce.
I think you need to see the wizard cause the tin man hasn't got a heart. No pulse, no beat. It's devoid of inspiration.
Ants use a system where all the individuals go out looking for food, each having individual freedom to choose where to go. Then, when they find food, to communicate it to the others, so they collaborate on bringing the food home. That is basically what my system is about. It is all about individual freedom. Those that are inspired to go fishing, can go fishing and bring fish home. Those that are inspired to play guitar 8 hours a day, play guitar and entertain others. We all have something which inspires us. We all want to feel useful. When people are doing work that inspires them, they work several times harder than someone who doesn't like the work. We need to allow people to do the work which inspires them. If 10 people want to use one computer controlled machine, we find a way for all 10 of them to use it. Let them take turns or whatever, 'cause it really is not healthy for a person to do one thing all the time anyway. Often, the fun work, is the high tech work, which is very important. That is the work which produces a lot of income, 'cause it is automation based. The more boring work, is stuff like repeatative work. That kind of work can very often be done by robots, if you have enough people who know how to build and operate robots. That is fun work, so you can replace much of the boring work with fun work, if the system allows individual decision making. Basically, the sharing model in communes is a very good system, but the democratic decision making runs into a bottle neck in the decision making area. We simply open up that bottle neck, and things will flow much more smoothly. The political crap breaks down people's motivation, and often makes people bleed the system out of resent. If people can't get the things they want, they become unhappy, and unhappy people don't work well. Anyway, you can't have people operating robots and computer controlled machines, if the community doesn't have any. You can't expect to ever get any, in a community which does everything by majority vote. The people who like to use automatic machines are a minority. A system of majority rule will not cater to the needs of these people. Only a system which allows more individual freedom will cater to these people. That is the real difference, that minorities have major power in this system. We are all minorities in one way or another. Our minority needs must be met. Tony
so you think people should only do what they want to do and not have other taskes to complete? cause id surely be the 1st one to stop mucking stalls if it was possible. and the person sitting around playing the guitar all day wouldnt fly well, you said they would be entertaining others with all these people laying around listening to music who is doing the chores? and high tech work isnt the funnest for all of us i actually make horse drawn equipment mostly out of wood and some metal parts. hand forged when possible, ( just started that when we had lotts of left over iron ore from smelting processes) and i find it very enjoyable to do those repedative tasks such as hammering nails, cutting wood and pounding iron into something usefull. i think you have this wonderfull theroy but havent really thought it out. say you have 15 people 5 people over 16, two at 16, and 8 kids ranging from 3 to 15. you have to get everybody up and going for the day. daily morning chores such as collecting eggs watering animals . preparing breakfast. getting kids ready for schooling getting yourself ready for the day. hitching the horses up to the wagon. and taking kids to school. and thats all before 7:30 am none of those are tasks we have a choice in its just things that must be done. what we do is take turns with the chores. none of us want to cook a meal for 15 people, so we take turns the meal is chefs choice from availble ingredients. none of us want to get up at 4am and start the day off running so we take turns. and all the chores are like that.so oneday you may be doing all the cooking which belive me is a job inits self. and the next day getting up early to feed and water livestock but not involved with the cooking. if we just sat at the table waiting for food to appear we would have all died off ages ago. if you ask me which you didnt but ill say it anyways. its not so much of the system that you use as it is the people involved, people of like mind on issues tend to get along. so if you consider yourself a minority group get with more like minded people create a new group where you are the majoritity.
This is hilarious, sorry, but it is, the site is all rhetoric. A lot of these Idea's/Ideals are good and sound in a eutopian society, the problem is if you have people making 50,000$ a year playing guitar for 8 hours a day why would they even want to live in a commune. If you have over 100000 people on land within 5 years unless they all pitch in 50000 when they join you won't have the resources/land/animals/building to support all of them. destroy those Ideas and start rebuilding them by planning goals. do a little more research, and redo the math. plug the holes in your voting system and you're on your way to a great way of life and I hope you can attract a lot of people to this movement. Good Luck.
A commune has to produce income, not live off entry fees. How do you think regular companies produce more than $50,000 per person per year on average? Simple, they have some people which produce $200,000 a year or more. The guitar player, was just an example. How many people do you know who play guitar 8 hours a day? I'd say a fair percentage of the people who are that inspired to play guitar, make fairly good money on it. Some make several million dollars a year. If you let those, that are that inspired, do it, you end up with a whole lot more producing money from it. If you force them to spend 40 or more hours a week on dead end jobs, trying to make enough money to survive, you have a bunch of people who are going nowhere. No commune start up with everyone making $50,000 a year. Communes always start struggling, barely having the income to survive. The question is where does a commune go from there. With the wrong system, it goes no where. With the right system, it creates new businesses, which bring in profits. As I said earlier, a website is just a bunch of words. Call it rhetoric if you want. Nobody believes in it at that stage. Once a community is created, it becomes fact. Then people start jumping over each other to join and start new ones. Tony
I hear a lot of people say I "haven't got everything figured out". Why should I? This is supposted to be a society where the people make the decisions, not a society where one person dictates. Would you rather live in a society which one person planned, or a society in which hundreds or thousands of minds created? There'll probably be some required work. |Anyway, a little required work is good for the soul. Tony
so take me up on my offer of the land use and prove your point. personally i dont think it would work but would be great if it did. we will just stand aside and let you do your thing there.... if you need some help here and there we would be happy to help you out but wont do it all for you.we are only 4 hours by horse or 20 min by car from that property. and your welcome to it if you are willing to put your ideas to the true test.
I'd really like to, but it is going to take some more people. I'm looking. Having land just might help the process along though, do you have some pictures of the place, you could send me? My e-mail is at the bottom of this page: http://conceivia.com/about-us/individual-decision-power/ or just add tony to the beginning of that domain. Tony
We often think an intelligent person, is a person who comes up with a lot of new ideas. I dont believe that. I know some people who come up with alot of ideas but they arent necessarily good ones. Coming up with ideas doesnt mean they are intelligent. Not in my eyes anyway.
I'm not saying it is the person who comes up with the most ideas. I'm saying it is the person (or group in this case) which respects the ideas of other people. If you respect other people, as having intelligent thoughts, then you are able to learn from those people. If not, you become stupid, 'cause you lack that source of knowledge. Tony
It is a system which gives power to the minorities Thats a quote off your site. I dont know how that works also said this is not a majority rule. OK Scenario me and another member of your group want to buy "xyz product" with the groups money. There are 100 people in your group. We bring up the idea at a group meeting. 98 people say thats a waste of money 2 people me and that other person think its a good idea. We win because we are minority and we get to buy "xyz product" with the groups money. May sound good to you if you are inthe minority but if you are in the majority it doesnt work for me LOL
