Benefits of Co-operative Economy and Co-ownership Networks

Famous video about the Benefits of Co-operative Economy and Co-ownership Networks.

This free video about the benefits of co-operative economy and co-ownership was created for you by epSos.de

Communism and social Capitalism are not the only social solutions that are available today. They are both rather obsolete. Quite funny that the majority of people did not get the idea that modern Technology is enabling new and better structures for society.

Many social and personal problems can be solved with free and open source designs, because people do not provide services at large scale anymore. It is the technology that does create goods and serve us more than any government, elected person or public office.

Surprisingly, the good technology is not the only answer to social problems. If everybody has got a car, we would have 9 billion cars on the roads some day, which is super impossible to digest for the planet. The air would be burned during production of those cars and the resources to construct them would be eating up valuable areas of the earth.

Scarcity and poverty can be resolved by alternative ownership models and social understanding of why it is not necessary to own stuff, if we can rent very fast or co-own objects in public libraries with 100 times cheaper membership fees than the price of ownership of unused objects.

Let's say everybody wants to have a piano. There is no need to own a piano for everyone, who wants to play it once a week. We need new social structures and self-organized libraries, where people can have cheap access and share dishwasher-cleaned goods with others, instead of paying a high price of unnecessary ownership for dusty stuff that we rarely use.

Another example could be the health screening service. Such a service could be done by an automated health booth where people enter and get screened for health metrics. Those people need data and information about their physical state, but they surely do not need to own the device that scans them once a week, if they can pay a group membership fee that is 100 times smaller than the price of this health screening device. We can be sure that 100 people can agree to co-own a device that is located near to them and provides access for cheap health screening on a daily basis, instead of paying a doctor who is not able to do the daily screening of 100 people per day for all days of the week.

We need great co-ownership models and object library systems that solve the scarcity problem, otherwise we will destroy the earth by breaking it apart for resources that are needed to produce the new technologies that we will encounter in the future.

A good ideology is the hardest part of the solution. People do not change as fast as superior technology does change the world. Open and free design will enable real world solutions that will lead to real world changes as quickly as they are used by real world manufactures of products that exist today and do not need to appear magically in a distant future.

Large scale co-operation and distributed co-ownership is much more possible than it was 10 years ago. A better style of co-operativism is much more possible now, because the Internet is making a lot more possible than was possible at the time, when communism was pop. The Internet itself is a good example of a new breed of co-operativism and distributed collaboration that is at the natural core of the human spirit.

Collective communism was a system where everybody is owned by all and nobody owns anything substantial to look after. Enforced collectivism is bad, because nobody feels responsible. That is how the USSR broke down. In the co-operativism network everybody is involved and benefits from sharing and co-owning parts of the network. That is how Linux was build and that is how the Internet was made possible by it.

The underlying technologies of the Internet are the result of the real world co-operativism. We would love to see something comparable that capitalism or communism can claim to have produced.

There are co-ownership societies that build housing. There are co-owned co-operatives that produce goods. It just is that the efforts from the disconnected co-operations did not result into a decentralized organization or a country-wide system just yet. The decentralized, digital co-operation between people is just the starting point which will build new thinking patterns between people and emerge into the physical world at an increasing rate.

Collectivism and Capitalism has no chance in the connected world of people who co-operate and co-own together.

Imagine what would happen, if we as a group design openly and publicly all the objects and technology around us. Imagine what would happen, if people in all countries could have access to open source designs that their local manufactures would be able to build and sell at local levels of afford-ability. We would transition to a more stable state of social development, where organized fiat crooks are less important and can be removed faster from our life.

Today and now, people do compete for stuff against each-other. Property developers do create new spaces all the time. Living Space is not yet a problem for humanity, but the well connected space of the big cities is already limited. There will be time when everybody has enough and there will be time when conflicts arise. Then there will be time when people re-settle to other planets, because of the strong competition for depleted resources. Then there will be enough for them again. But the cycles of competition and struggle do stay with us all the time.

We are able to afford lesser children than our grandparents did, and the capitalists on TV call it prosperity and wealth. It is more like strategic genocide, when we look at the numbers objectively. We are living in the time where more people than ever are suffering from hunger, who are slaves, who are ill, who are homeless, because there are simply many more people than at any time of history before us.

If the negative sides of capitalism are not in your country, it does not mean that they do not exist. Ask yourself: How many children were your grandparents able to afford. How many are you able to afford ??? Do you feel more wealthy, if you would know that we on the average have lesser personal freedom of choice in terms of family size than our grandparents did ?

For example: Health insurance is mandatory in Germany, since 2007. A family with 2 kids has to pay around 500 Euros per month for their basic health insurance. There is no choice. They can pay or they will face charges and are not allowed to work. Financial freedom is not existent in Germany. Basic income is not provided without conditions, but the mandatory spending is enforced upon people with all the available legal brutality. It is this mandatory spending that is driving fertility rates lower in capitalistic societies.

In modern capitalism, No useful medicine for chronic illness are on the market, because it is not profitable to cure chronic illness. It is profitable to maintain the illness and keep selling pills. The drug companies do not want to develop effective pills for chronic illnesses. They want to sell pills that bring symptoms under control, but keep the profitable illness alive.

In egoistic capitalism, it is not possible to sell pills that cure chronic illness, because capitalism does not allow a company to exist, when it is destroying its own market. That is why it is very expensive to find profitable treatments that do cure the symptoms, but keep the chronic illness alive.

Look at Spain. One super advanced thing that Spain has now, is the political transition to co-operative and co-ownership society. It is not like communism nor is it related to egoistic capitalism, but is more like a new style of decentralized co-operativism. Spain is heading into co-operativism, sharing economy and new forms of collective ownership. They inspired the Occupy Movement, they started the distributed co-operativism in Catalonia. There are a lot of positive political and social innovations in Spain at the moment, that other countries can only dream about. And those innovations come not from the main media or politicians, but from the educated young people.

In Co-operativism and co-ownership, we do not need to have common rule over individuals, because nobody is competing against others like in the egomaniac capitalism game. The future is decentralized and based on co-operation and voluntary sharing like we already do with free software and the creative commons media.

We will build rental malls around the globe. Those rental malls are going to rent out dishwasher-cleaned goods to local members, instead of selling expensive products to them. This is how we will replace endless consumption and save our planet. One rental mall at the time. People would stop shopping and would focus on really important things in life, while reducing the consumption of the planetary resources.

Good women would love to live in great co-operative housing. Efficient and clean co-owned buildings with great designs would be possible, if we could build them for cheap and the inhabitants would be able to cover the cost in shares and voluntary work. As of now. Random banks buy land, build property, give out loans for 30 to 40 years and milk the people for those 30+ years. It is not a good way to live, when we have to worry about covering the cost of life for 30 years, for every month in stress and fear about the future payments.

In the collaborative networks, the people will be able to print metal frames for co-owned buildings. People will build and design homes together and for each-other, if this technology is free and open.

Today and now, the central banks are creating free money, they give the free money to commercial bankers for investing into society. But the commercial banks do not invest into society, they play the financial markets for profit. We need Direct Internet Democracy, if we ever want to be free from that injustice.

In reality, there would be no harm, if the kindergartens and food in them would be free for the children. Kindergartens provide a lot of benefits, without creating any risk for inflation of assets. The government could get free money from the central bank to open free kindergartens, but they do not do it, because the current fiat system is set up to serve the private bankers first and everybody else second.

The brutal game of the bankers is to ruin markets and to grab assets, because it is more profitable for them, than funding new companies or economic stability in which they can not provide expensive loans or compete with real people who want to buy assets for good use.

No central bank is working for the people. If they would really do so, then they would fund science, street cleaning, kindergartens and schools, if they really wanted to distribute money into productive hands without creating inflation. Money stability would be OK, if kids could get free kindergartens, because kids do not run around and spend free money on valuable assets. The fiat based governments do lie all day long, just to pretend that their system is set up to serve us. Private banks do not provide direct social services, but they get free money from the publicly funded systems. Fiat-based capitalism failed ! We need Direct Internet Democracy or this abuse will never stop.

Fiat money is fake from the start. It is created by a press of a button and then given to private bankers, so that they can extract real assets from people. It will be totally OK to default on fiat money, since it is fake from the start. No physical value will be damaged, if the people default on fiat money systems, but a lot of real human value will be lost, if we continue to play the game of the value-extracting bankers.

Today and now, the banks are extracting productivity from the real people at no cost to them, because they get free fiat money from the central bank. Big banks get money from the central bank for free. They loan it at interest to the people and to the governments. Almost every product in society contains an inflated price that is set up to pay back the loans. There is no freedom or social progress, if the system is designed to keep people in debt. The fiat money distribution and creation is a global farce that is helping the current elite to stay on top and suppress any social progress.

Fiat Money is not friendly by design. People have some money, when richer people get more than average people, then the rest of the people becomes relatively poorer, because they can not compete on the price of real world assets. Math of fiat money systems is intended to make everyone to compete against everybody else for the price of goods, houses, food and services. It is bad. We need easy co-operative access instead of strict ownership for the rarely used goods, so that we do not compete senselessly for the stuff that is not in use most of the time. Egomaniac capitalism seems silly from the distance, because we all work and fight for money and then buy stuff, that we could rent for super cheap in the co-operative libraries of dishwasher-cleaned objects that we would be able to create, if we were wise enough to create them.

People have been exploited all the time in history, but there is more to it than we expect to see. It is not only the bad people, but the cold math behind the monetary system that is self-organizing against humans. Money and wealth are a closed loop of competition that is self-perpetual and destructive by design.

If you have more money and assets than others, then you are rich. If other people get more money than you are poorer in relative terms, because those other people are going to compete with you on the price of assets and force you to pay more to overbid them. So, the rich people are forced to get richer or to block others from getting money, savings, assets or good investments.

So, we the people are working against each-other in a monetary system, even if we do not want to do that, because being rich is a relative comparison to the poorness of others.

Co-ownership and co-operative sharing of objects in a publicly-served library system is a way out of this destructive cycle of being forced to pay more than others can afford, because we do not need to own all of the non-daily stuff, but just need to have an access to it, if we need to use something for a week or two. Tools are a perfect example of this logic. Some tools are used once a year for one week. So, 1 tool can be used by 52 people, if it was accessible from a near-by library of objects. We all would be richer, if we had access to 52 tools instead of just 1 tool, because the 52 people can buy 1 tool for each and share it through the public library system, if only the humanity would be smart enough to calculate numbers of cooperation, instead of playing the game of enforced competition.

Imagine that you are super rich, but have no access to a supermarket or a train or a pharmacy or a park. Wealth is not about ownership or numbers. True wealth is about having access to the stuff that we need daily and some personal luxury on top of that access. Ownership has a high price of storage space. True wealth is not ownership, true wealth is about having easy access to more goods and services than one could possibly own or manage alone.

Shared ownership of buildings, object libraries, tool libraries, toy libraries and even great wedding dress libraries can greatly increase the common wealth of the people. Co-ownership of multi-level buildings can lower the need for capital investment into apartments. There is no need for everyone to own an rarely-used object that can be borrowed from an object library and be returned a week or a month later. Most of the objects are not in use all the time anyway.

Providing access to tools, toys and other objects can greatly reduce the need for ownership of them, so that there would be no need to produce too much or to produce more than we do now. Let's say you have an electric fan. The fan is great and super durable. Then you suddenly do not need a fan, so you bring it to the library and some other person takes it for a year or two. So that there is one less fan to produce, if the old electric fan is as clean as the new one and a library is able to redistribute unneeded objects to the people who want them.

An excellent example of co-ownership is an automatic, driver-less car that could cost little to co-own with 10 other people, who can use the car in a non-stop cycle of automated short trips with 2 to 3 cars for 15 people who live close to each-other. In such an arrangement you would own 20% of 3 automatic cars and share them among 15 other people who live close to you.

We all have heard the arguments against Direct Democracy. We just repeat, what we learned in School, TV or read from History. Our governments have made sure to destroy any positive image of the Direct Democracy in schools, because they are afraid of it. The argument that people are too silly for direct democracy is also valid for the representative politicians who are people that are too silly to run countries without a deficit or human rights violations.

Switzerland has Direct Democracy. Do you want to call them silly now ???

USA is abusing thousands of people for cheap gasoline. I bet the mob rule is far more human in comparison to US presidents who order forced mortality to get cheap oil or because their friends need to sell mortality products to the government.

Decentralized Direct Internet Democracy was technologically impossible until the end of 2008.

We live in a new world of Technological possibilities. Old examples of Direct Democracy are less relevant, because nobody did try to have Direct Internet Democracy on a massive scale with instant votes and massive collaboration and direct funding of social services.

I am not saying that it will work perfectly. I am not saying that it will be 2 times better than the corrupt and abusive representative democracy. But, I am saying that we should demand Direct Democracy and see how the established powers show their real face and admit that they are against democracy and freedom.

Demanding for Direct Democracy is a trap that no power can escape without showing their true face. If we ask for Direct Democracy, there is no easy escape from this demand, because it would mean that the Nay-sayers can be accused of public hate against democracy and voting.

We do not need the politicians to start direct Internet Democracy or any social change. Stop supporting the system ! Start your own Direct Internet Democracy. Elect your own people. Support projects and community development goals by direct investments, instead of passively supporting wars and violence with your taxes.

Why can we vote on cute cats on reddit.com, but are not allowed to make political and financial votes directly, which is 100% possible by the state of the current Internet Technology ?? Fighting the system will not help. It must be replaced and ignored, until nobody supports old power structures that keep innocent people in jail and destroy life in wars for cheap gasoline.

We live in disturbing times. Direct Internet Democracy is possible today. We could vote and decide directly on all political and economical ideas.Yet, the political system is behind the technological state, so the people are often raging. Why can we vote on cute cat pictures, but are not allowed to vote on tax system reforms in a direct way ? We could ignore the current system. Set up our own Direct Internet Democracy platform and just abandon to support the established system.

It is possible to create a small town with 3000 people. It is possible to vote locally for the mayor of that town. It is possible to set up direct democracy inside of this town. It is possible to refuse to obey central government in that town. It is super hard to do the same in a major city. Because people do treat outsiders very badly, because of inbuilt genetic behaviors. For example: if you go and complain about any government failure to the government employees, than you will run against a mental wall, because the government employees will feel that their tribe is under attack. Reason and facts will not help, as long as they do not admit wrong-doing. And that is a very hard process for any human.

The representative democracy is blocking cooperation by having representatives that do what the most paying bidder or a strategic group of voters are asking them to do. In Direct Internet Democracy, we all can co-operate and build without consent from a central authority.

If the technology is ready: We can vote, make crowd-sourced decisions and ignore the clowns in the government. People will vote on a massive scale, if it would be as easy as posting pictures to Facebook and pressing the like button in there.

Talk to the people around you. Find good people that want to co-operate. Good people, who want to share access to something that you all own as a group. Find good people who want to co-operate on decentralized design projects that bring us all closer to a better future without suffering.

Thank you for supporting the creative commons movement and remember that we are just getting warmed-up, before we wage a full scale battle for the decentralized democratic co-operativism !

transparent twitter icon free facebook icon logo free Google Plus icon logo

Be happy. Talk with people.

Thank you for sending !

website logo
Tweet me

Google+ me

«    Send this page