Sunday, February 23, 2014

the commons

The law locks up the man or woman Who steals the goose from off the common
But leaves the greater villain loose Who steals the common from off the goose.
The law demands that we atone When we take things we do not own
But leaves the lords and ladies Alone Who take things that are yours and mine.
The poor and wretched don’t escapeIf they conspire the law to break;
This must be so but they endure Those who conspire to make the law.
The law locks up the man or woman Who steals the goose from off the common
And geese will still a common lackTill they go and steal it back.
(UNKNOWN AUTHOR)
This folk poem (a common in itself) dates to seven-teenth century England and was a protest directed at the privatisation of common land on a nation-wide scale known as the Enclosure Movement.

scribd | Freerange Vol.7 is being edited by Jessie Moss, Joe Cederwall and Tim Gregory.

This edition will aim to explore the issue of “The Commons” from many different angles, perspectives, disciplines and media. The concept of ‘the commons’ has particular relevance in light of the multiple crises we face for the environmental, financial and social future of our planet. We want this edition to be an exploration of how the commons are actually being utilised and engaged by communities in reality in today’s transforming society. We want to get down to the nitty gritty of the concept and look at workable commons models both past and future. It will be a celebration and exploration of this transformative vision as applied in practice all around us.

A succinct definition of ‘the commons’ is elusive, but the following is as good an attempt as any by commons academic David Bollier:
‘The commons is….
  • A social system for the long-term stewardship of resources that preserves shared values and community identity.
  • A self-organized system by which communities manage resources (both depletable and and replenishable) with minimal or no reliance on the Market or State.
  • The wealth that we inherit or create together and must pass on, undiminished or enhanced, to our children.  Our collective wealth includes the gifts of nature, civic infrastructure, cultural works and traditions, and knowledge.
  • A sector of the economy (and life!) that generates value in ways that are often taken for granted – and often jeopardized by the Market-State.’Full article
The concept is very broad and has relevance to topics as diverse as Architecture and design / Art and culture / Intellectual property / The open internet / Community control / Sustainability and environment / Resilience / Politics / Gender / History / Town planning / History / Architecture / Anthropology / Sociology & Psychology / Intellectual property / Indigenous culture / The local food movement / Academia / Science.

We are happy to work with contributors to find or refine a topic to suit the overall blend.

Further suggested reading for inspiration:

42 comments:

woodensplinter said...

Speaking of masking, reptilians, and Big Don's "sorriness" - you have to love the graphic that accompanies this article.

Vic78 said...

It's New York Times so you already know the job is to lick the hands that feed them. This "research" is so much better than past fuckery. Who would've thought people with last names like Vanderbilt are doing alright today. This asshole's trying to justify today's inequality by saying there's a genetic component to it. It's called a platinum spoon. These people are getting tired now.

BigDonOne said...

This is *NOT* some kind of unfairness at work, as it appears might be being implied.


It is genetic.


Smart folks tend to do well, and since smartness is highly heritable, it is to be expected that their offspring will also tend to do well. And smart folks tend to have strong family values (FTO), stay married, father's stick around, groom their children for success, and tend to see that their families do well. So it is perfectly reasonable and to-be-expected that success runs along ancestral lines. And the converse is true for the least smart -- inherited dumbness, repeated bad outcomes, jail. unwed parenthood, welfare dependency. All discussed in solid detail, a thousand or so unrefuted PRR citations worth in TBC......

CNu said...

lol, gottdayyum....., wealth, and all that that entails, is even more and more certainly highly heritable. Before you and I have our terminal excursion together out into the woods, you know, two go out, one comes back, are you really as dense as your online avatar makes you out to be?

BigDonOne said...

If it was *really* about Who_Got_It_First and monopolized on all that wealth downstream, then today Africa, which had a 100,000-year head start, would be one giant wealth-oozing Dubai-like skyscraper laden continent - after having invented automobiles, airplanes, electronics, and colonized and ripped off the rest of the lesser-developed world. But that DId_Not_Happen because there were no smart genes for leadership, planning, or invention. Even when *handed* thriving countries on a silver platter, they turned them to Sht in a few years (RSA, Zimbabwe)......

CNu said...

lol, your simple ass extols the mechanism of the anthropocene extinction as the zenith of human evolutionary achievement.

I couldn't make that shit up if I had to....,

Vic78 said...

You rednecks are easy money...

Constructive_Feedback said...

Brother CNu:


Question for you.


Do YOU believe that it is contrived that the very same forces who are most successful at compelling "The Least Of These" to INVEST THEIR VALUABLES into their BRAND - as their HOPED FOR SALVATION (Development, Education, Protection), yet, despite their success in gaining political power over the LOCAL HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTIONS - yet failing to provide sufficient UPWARD THRUST - these same forces reserve the right to highlight GROWING INEQUALITY - all the while few people make note of their ESTABLISHMENT POWER and their failed upward trust?


Why is it that you appear to be contented in inspecting the accounts of "The 1%" but not the UPWARD THRUST provided by the vessel that the aggrieved masses agreed to hop upon?


A few days ago a FREMIUM text messaging product (Whats App) for $19 BILLION.
Most of WhatsApp users use the free service for the first year and then $0.99 per year thereafter.


We see that a Multi-Million Dollar USER BASE and a DISRUPTIVE PRODUCT is valued at billions.


Isn't the "Anarco-Capitalist" all about MARKET DISRUPTION?


All the while some people are reading to fight the political fight over $10-$15 per hour - IT IS CLEAR that they are merely consumers in a larger scheme that is unfolding around them.


Atlanta, like Chicago is an "Income Inequality City" YET - the poor have succeeded POLITICALLY but this has not provided the promised UPLIFT. I see no evidence of the people who INVESTED THEIR VALUABLES to put the present establishment power into power now turning to them and asking "Where Is The Money That I Gave To You For My Development"?


Is it possible, sir, that the observation of INCOME INEQUALITY is merely being done to shift these "Investors" attention from the LOCAL THEATERS that have favorable people in them already, up to the NATIONAL battle - where their enemies reside for yet another fight - as THE TEAM regroups and thus each member is told "asking questions of the team leadership at the time of battle is DISLOYALTY"?

CNu said...

Um, I'm going to say that I point my laser pointer where I point it because the 1% own all the little red hotels blanking out every side of the monopoly game board, while the "vessels" don't.


And, I'm indifferent toward markets predicated on apps, when there are markets predicated on food, energy and irreplaceable natural material resources.

ken said...

"And smart folks tend to have strong family values (FTO), stay married, father's stick around, groom their children for success, and tend to see that their families do well.

I would phrase it "wise folks" tend to have strong family values....

With your IQ ideas, and its ability to predict outcomes, can you connect these two observations for me?

"The proportion of all births to unmarried women increased to 40.6% in 2008, up from 39.7% in 2007. This proportion increased for all race and Hispanic origin population groups except for API women."
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr58/nvsr58_16.pdf

"The trend in the illegitimacy rate over the past four and a half decades has been startling. Out-of-wedlock births comprised 5.3 percent of total births in 1960,

And this one: "Advanced nations like the U.S. have experienced massive IQ gains over time (a phenomenon that I first noted in a 1984 study and is now known as the "Flynn Effect"). From the early 1900s to today, Americans have gained three IQ points per decade on both the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales and the Wechsler Intelligence Scales."
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10000872396390444032404578006612858486012

ken said...

How much of the economic growth is stock market related?

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2013/09/06/1978-vs-2013-last-time-so-few-people-were-in-work-force/

ken said...

Does anybody get a sense as to how much of the income growth is stock market related?

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2013/09/06/1978-vs-2013-last-time-so-few-people-were-in-work-force/

Vic78 said...

I found a friend for you, Big Don.

http://www.anonboard.com/bbs/show_topic/911153

BigDonOne said...

@Ken -- Your last paragraph is totally false, those cited measurements are simply inaccurate. Higher unmarried births are, in fact, indicative of the overall DumbingDown of America resulting from paying of lesser-smart parasites to go forth and OOWbreed more of their useless ObamaPhoning and EBT-swiping selves. It's all clearly visible in the repeatedly "re-normed" SAT scores over the last couple of generations, with no improvement in averages. That's the vivid undeniable RealTruth.

Constructive_Feedback said...

[quote]when there are markets predicated on food, energy and irreplaceable natural material resources.[/quote]


As I listened to Black (Progressive) Nationalist Radio over the weekend a "food culturalist" pointed to a rice cake made from leftover grains of rice from "Massa" plate that they made into a baked item. They were "allowed" to leave the plantation on the weekends and sell these rice cakes, retaining the money for themselves.


FROM THIS - they purchased the "freedom" of loved ones. This cultural artifact was born based upon the satisfaction of the buyer's tastes as the seller's desire for freedom drew nigh, upon each sale.


THINK FOR A SECOND CNU.
During 'Black History Month' we are asked to remember "Black Food CULTURE" in the form of this little rice cake out of New Orleans (Creole) - yet the story about the part that this ORGANIC CULTURAL ITEM played in the ECONOMIC MOTION to secure the FREEDOM of a loved one was told in passing.


TODAY (don't know if you saw the NAACP Awards over the weekend) we have the BLACK ELITE who are making millions by branding their CULTURE as legitimately "Black" yet few among this coiffed and close cropped circle with a homogeneous ideology which includes academics, journalists and activists looked upon the stage full of "Black 1%er" and saw them as CAPITALISTIC PROFITEERS.


Worse yet, Bro CNu - as I watched certain portions of this "Black Faced Hollywood Red Carpet - Idol Worship Ritual" - I thought to myself - "Not ONE of these bejeweled Negroes will protest the projection of INFERIORITY when their political propaganda machine heats up in a few months, proclaiming that THE AMERICANIZED NEGRO is being made 'Slave-Like' by the right wing enemy" - as the congregation is riled up to FIGHT FOR "BLACK PEOPLE" via voting for Progressive Public Policy".


INDEED, SIR, the Americanized Negro is for sale in the market of American Capitalism & Political Opportunism


I say this (and take a slight detour) to note that the CORPORATE ESTABLISHMENT that are frequently talked about (Wall Street, Power Generation, Heavy Industry, Defense Industry) operate off of the very same motives that those who purport to represent THE LEAST OF THESE are ultimately driven from. The millionaire entertainment class merely KNOW that they will escape the wrath of being labeled "The 1%" IF they VOICE the words of the activists and use their power to fight against these other set of oligarchs.


My question to you is: "Are you ultimately interested in EQUALIZING THE AMOUNT OF LOOT that each respective party in the grand scheme has in their possession by.............


1) Going against those with greater holdings and shifting it via policy mandate to "those who were left out" - thus generating appreciation among "The Least Of These" yet they remain incompetent at producing wealth up from their organic economic activities


OR


2) Is it more insightful to attack the fundamental ETHOS that ALL of them operate upon (those who are today's 1% and those who pretend that they are on the outside but who want to promote their own figures into the 1%) - FAILING TO DO SO - those who feel as if they are on the OUTSIDE will operate with the same oligarchical ways once they are the ESTABLISHMENT - the Least of these STILL GET SCREWED - but are PROUD that "Their Guys" are now in power?




FOR ME - I choose NEITHER.
Protection of my virtual circle of partners from the exploits of ALL OF THE BASTARDS ABOVE is the best strategy. Reducing your dependency upon them is the best way to reduce the "attack surface"

CNu said...

Are you ultimately interested in EQUALIZING THE AMOUNT OF LOOT that
each respective party in the grand scheme has in their possession
by.............I'm developing a charter school that seeks to more fully democratize access to costly in-depth coaching and instruction. My goal is to foster specific cultures of competence.

Dale Asberry said...

And we take this simply on your say-so, Don?
So the broken record skips back to the start... Where's the evidence to back your claims? Just saying something over and over doesn't make it true (although repetition=truth is a human cognitive failure. )

Vic78 said...

The kids is learning. It's taking a while, but some progress is better than zero.

http://billmoyers.com/2014/02/21/anatomy-of-the-deep-state/

CNu said...

lol, BD is like a drunk uncle. Before he shows up at the gathering, you already know what he's going to say, and, exactly how he's going to say it. Ain't nobody worried about BD. OTOH - the NYTimes giving a podium to a character perfectly at ease dropping this bon mot Our findings suggest, however, that the compulsion to strive, the talent
to prosper and the ability to overcome failure are strongly inherited.
We can’t know for certain what the mechanism of that inheritance is,
though we know that genetics plays a surprisingly strong role.
Alternative explanations that are in vogue — cultural traits, family
economic resources, social networks — don’t hold up to scrutiny.with no more evidence for his claim than old uncle Don can muster, well...., that's a whole nother sort of ballgame. Unsurprisingly, this author is an economist and his book perfectly exemplifies Hanson's first principle:*First Principle:* economics is an expression of political agendas that are hidden within known-false assumptions. If one accepts those false assumptions, then one accepts those hidden political agendas.

umbrarchist said...

Yeah, it is too difficult for educators to think of in 50 years.

Reading a book a day for 80 years comes to almost 30,000 books. That would fit on a 32 gig microSD. What would that do to education if it was a really good list? Do a lot of people have a motive for not spreading it? How much real estate value is supposedly connected to "good schools"?

CNu said...

lol, there's the whole and entire problem in a nutshell umbra. This IS YOUR IDEA!!! Why must educators or anyone else think of and implement YOUR IDEA instead of you making the first move and then moving the crowd?



Those no conspiracy afoot here, and nothing preventing you from taking action except air, opportunity, and inertia.

BigDonOne said...

@Dale -- "Where's the evidence..."
Evidence---> http://nypost.com/2014/02/23/students-defend-murry-bergtraum-hs-in-error-filled-letters/

Constructive_Feedback said...

Brother CNu - with all due respect THIS AIN'T ABOUT YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


I am not taking anything away from your positive effort but the Black community that has been compelled to INVEST ITS VALUABLES with the promises of DEVELOPMENT - need more wholesale and scalable SOLUTIONS.


Ironically your "solution" is being erected at the time period of the SOLUTION STATE from the promises and imagery crafted from 50 years ago that compelled the Americanized Negro to INVEST HIS VALUABLES. Many, during the 1960's pointed to the year 2000 as the tipping point by which all of their investments in the Bayard Rustin "Vote For Your Community Salvation" scheme would bear fruit.


THE TWO ARGUMENTS AT HAND ARE THE SAME.


* INDEED The "1%" seek to manipulate the system for their advantage.


IT IS ALSO TRUE, that the "New Establishment Power" like to use their POPULARIST mandate of "Helping The Poor" to GAIN POWER AND MONEY for themselves. Then they look at the broken system, point to their ENEMY and then ask their congregation for continued unity - THE ENEMY is profiting at their expense.


It is clear that greater than "Income Inequality" is the evidence of the STOLEN UPWARD THRUST that has been diverted from the "rocketship", and worse,the occupants of the ship are complicit in the usurpation.


How do you force a member of "The least of these" to agree to PROTECT HIS OWN VALUABLES, resisting ATTENTION DIVERSION SCHEMES that rile him up against (key distinction coming up) the portion of The 1% that disagree with them ideologically while they live vicariously through the wealth and majesty of the 1% that they agree with.

ken said...

I have been looking casually but haven't found a good stat, does anybody have how much of the growth of wealth from the top 1% is from stock market growth? The market was under 900 in 1979 and is 15000 plus now.

CNu said...

You don't even have to look casually to know beyond any sensible doubt that the overwhelming majority of the 1%'s disparate take comes directly from capital gains and tax cuts. This is conspicuously obvious to the casual observer. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United_States

CNu said...

I am not taking anything away from your positive effort but the Black community that has been compelled to INVEST ITS VALUABLES with the promises of DEVELOPMENT - need more wholesale and scalable SOLUTIONSrotflmbao...., stop playing Feed. There is no black "community" - and there hasn't been one since a looooong time before you were born. Don't believe me, listen to Dick Gregory spell it out for you in the first 10 minutes, or read a little Adolph Reed breaking it down for you and in fact echoing many of the claims you have made over the past few years http://youtu.be/GNFAwvBt_Dg How do you force a member of "The least of these"I don't. I hope they come to blows with one another sooner rather than later and that natural law sorts the victors from the losers in relatively short order.

ken said...

You mean tax cuts because capital gains are taxed differently than wage income. But I guess why I asked the question is because if capital gains is the bulk of the 1% growth, why is that such a bad thing? Certainly investing in the market is open to everyone who can invest more so than landing executive jobs. And the incentive this year for low income investors can't be much greater.

"The fiscal cliff negotiations of 2012 extended the 0% tax rate on long-term capital gains for taxpayers in the 10% and 15% tax brackets. That is, this year,married payers filing jointly with taxable income of less than $73,800 -- and single taxpayers at less than $36,900 -- pay no capital gains tax."

"Married couples with taxable income in excess of $73,800 but less than $457,600 -- and single payers making more than $36,900 but less than $405,100 -- pay capital gains at a rate of 15%."

Getting to 20%: It's when your married taxable income exceeds $457,600 -- or your single filer income passes the $405,100 mark -- that the maximum tax rate on long-term capital gains jumps from 15% to 20%. Here's an example: A married taxpayer filing jointly with wage income of, say, $400,000 plus long-term capital gains of $200,000 will pay a 15% income tax rate on the first $57,600 of long-term capital gains and 20% on the remaining $142,400.



Investing is taxed lower for everyone, especially the poor.

makheru bradley said...

This is just for one year: "The stock market grew by $4.7 trillion in 2013. The richest 1% owns about 38% of all stocks, or about $1.8 trillion of the 2013 gain."

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article37418.htm

On a related subject.

My theory of the event I call 9/15--the deliberate crash of the US economy is being validated

"Fed transcripts: Bernanke chose to let Lehman fail"

http://bit.ly/1fo4qup

At some point the reasons why the oligarchs meeting at the New York Fed, the weekend prior to 9/15/2008, chose to allow Lehman to fail will come to light.

CNu said...

lol, a veritable case study of deduction overwhelming empiricism and common sense.



The simple answer is that you have nothing left over to invest when you don't have a pot to piss in or a window to throw it from. While I'm sure there are feel good stories about little old ladies who amassed 7 figure portfolios and left it all to the benefit of education or their cats, out here in the real world, payday and internet loan sharking exist primarily because the poor are struggling to make it from paycheck to paycheck.

Tom said...

Ok this is the straw that broke the camel's back. I want Submariner back. This place isn't fun anymore.

CNu said...

That young man got too burned out carrying water for the Hon.Bro.Preznit and it's all I can do to keep from invading the social media at my daughter's university and causing panic and mayhem where his brother is a full professor of Cathedralistic mis-education.

makheru bradley said...

"The stock market grew by $4.7 trillion in 2013. The richest 1% owns about 38% of all stocks, or about $1.8 trillion of the 2013 gain."

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article37418.htm

On a related subject. My theory of the event I call 9/15--the deliberate crash of the US economy is being validated

Fed transcripts: Bernanke chose to let Lehman fail

http://bit.ly/1fo4qup

At some point the reasons why the oligarchs meeting at the New York Fed, the weekend prior to 9/15, chose to allow Lehman to fail will come to light.

ken said...

"The simple answer is that you have nothing left over to invest when you don't have a pot to piss in or a window to throw it from."



The anchor post at the top appeared to be comparing the top 1% to the bottom 99%. 99% of Americans are not described in your simple answer. If we have moved the conversation to talking about the people who use payday loans, Pew research says that in 5 year 5.5% of American adults used payday loans. If the discussion was the top 1% verses the bottom 5%, the article should have discussed what benefits the bottom 5% are receiving from the government, for instance housing, food stamps, unemployment, medicaid, tax income credit, welfare, and offer proposals of what other programs would be helpful to make the bottom 5% lives better.

CNu said...

I didn't forget about this juicy, juicy morsel Vic. It's a lot to read and digest - thanks!

CNu said...

99% of Americans are not described in your simple answer.No, but the poor are specifically called out in your simple conclusion:Investing is taxed lower for everyone, especially the poor.

If the discussion was the top 1% verses the bottom 5%, the article
should have discussed what benefits the bottom 5% are receiving from the
government, for instance housing, food stamps, unemployment, medicaid,
tax income credit, welfare, and offer proposals of what other programs
would be helpful to make the bottom 5% lives better.lol, you can go do that at zachiaschupasperkinsverga.blogspot.com. Here, we have a more poleaxes for potatoheads orientation and flavor http://subrealism.blogspot.com/search?q=poleaxe

makheru bradley said...

On a related subject because of the number of people it pushed into poverty. My theory of the event I call 9/15--the deliberate crash of the US economy is being validated

Fed transcripts: Bernanke chose to let Lehman fail

http://bit.ly/1fo4qup

At some point the reasons why the oligarchs meeting at the New York Fed, the weekend prior to 9/15, chose to allow Lehman to fail will come to light.

"The stock market grew by $4.7 trillion in 2013. The richest 1% owns about 38% of all stocks, or about $1.8 trillion of the 2013 gain."

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article37418.htm

Vic78 said...

Moving that 100 billion isn't a bad idea. There's a lot one could do with that kind of money. It's time to get the complex under some kind of control. It's funny to hear conservatives howl when there's talk of defense cuts. They know that their districts will turn to ghost towns in less than six months without defense spending. Nobody getting those kind of defense dollars should ever complain about welfare.

CNu said...

The U.S. has been a warsocialist state since WW-II. If you even think about looking at the warsocialist entitlement paid to otherwise wholly unproductive and useless eaters, you invariably hear howls of nonsensical illogic about "defense is authorized by the constitution". Um..., defense is a very different thing than the massively bloated, entirely wasteful monstrosity that is the armed services of the U.S. Let's hope that Hagel can put this monster on its leash. There will be MUCH weeping and gnashing of teeth in the process.

Vic78 said...

I'm a little new to the site. Who are the Submariner and his brother?

CNu said...

I'm pretty serious about privacy and discretion, so beyond what he's written online, I'm not really at liberty to say but here are some examples from hereabouts http://subrealism.blogspot.com/search?q=submariner and here is the blog he put up for half a hot minute http://soulconviction.blogspot.com/

makheru bradley said...

"The stock market grew by $4.7 trillion in 2013. The richest 1% owns about 38% of all stocks, or about $1.8 trillion of the 2013 gain."

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article37418.htm

[The six Waltons on Forbes’ list of wealthiest Americans have a net worth of $144.7 billion. This fiscal year three Waltons—Rob, Jim, and Alice (and the various entities that they control)—will receive an estimated $3.1 billion in Walmart dividends from their majority stake in the company.

The Waltons aren’t just the face of the 1%; they’re the face of the 0.000001%. The Waltons have more wealth than 42% of American families combined.]

http://walmart1percent.org/family/

Vic78 said...

That's good shit. It sucks that he stopped.