Crowd Control: Funding Freedom in Closed-Loop Production Aggregates
Patrick Anderson
with optional funding from traditional Venture Capital.
----
* Potential users pre-pay to fund the purchase
of land and capital to form a vertically integrated,
permaculture based system we call a Production Aggregate.
* This Aggregate is a set of carefully chosen plants, animals
and tools required to create the solutions needed by all
of those workers such as food/drugs, shelter, cloth, soap,
sanitation, health care, dental, eyes, etc.
* If a payer has skills needed by the Aggregate, they can
contract to work somewhere within the Aggregate in exchange
for the Aggregate supplying them with Products they need.
* Those workers receive co-ownership in the Aggregate in a
form we call "Use Shares" which are similar to full co-
ownership, but with some initial limitations on selling
or renting those Tools or Products.
* Use Shares are used by the holder to prove that he has the
right to use the Tools (limited by schedule) or consume some
of the Products (limited by % of holdings within that Unit)
of any restaurant, apartment, bus, hospital, etc. operating
within the Aggregate.
* The workers do not buy products from the investors, but own
those products already because of their Use Shares in the
Aggregate awarded for commitments to Work or from commitments
of Land or Capital.
* After some amount of time, or after some series of events
the Use Shares should vest more fully to the payer to
allow for selling and/or renting of those Sources or the
Products of those Sources.
* Initial stages of development might have some workers living
in mobile homes and eating food the Aggregate bought in bulk.
* Later, after the agriculture is installed and producing, the
system will become "self hosted", being able to operate
without requiring any external inputs.
* Soon afterward, the system will be producing surplus that can
be sold to outsiders to collect Profit.
* If Venture Capitalists helped fund the operation, part of the
Profit will be used as their ROI.
* We may want to distribute part of the Profit to the Workers,
since that is a popular thing to do.
* We may we to distribute part of the Profit to random charities,
since that is a popular thing to do.
* But we MUST handle some non-zero % of the Profits as though
that overpayment were an investment from the payer.
* We should charge Profit during those sales, for if we don't
collect the Profit, a middle-man will buy all that we offer
at Cost, and then resell it for a Profit anyway...
* So we will charge Profit against the Payer, but we will also
treat (at least part of) that magic value as Payer Investment.
* This causes these late-coming users to slowly gain ownership
and therefore to eventually stop buying that product too.
* Similar to how the GNU GPL enforces Copyleft through Copyright,
we propose to create a PropertyLeft document enforced through
Property Rights used to apply this requirement to the Aggregate.
* This social contract can be applied by co-owners of any
material assets to insure freedom for all users.
* Notice this is also a literal form of Insurance.
* These users must cover all the real cost of production
just as any owners do, but they do not buy the product
since they own it already - and they don't sell the
product because they need to use it directly.
* The product is not traded unless there is surplus, and
in that case the Payer must cover all the Costs of that
production so the owner of Sources can be compensated
for paying when they didn't need to...
* The Payer will usually also pay Profit, according to how
much the "market will bear". Some % of that overpayment
must be treated as an investment from that payer so the
growth of the Aggregate is incrementally autodistributed
to all those willing to pay for that growth.
* At some point, and under certain constraints, and mostly
to resolve disputes, subgroups must finally be allowed to
fork from the rest while retaining property ownership.