Keith, you can never expect intstitutions established to work out issues that are complex and have international as well as domestic implications. The best you can hope for is that people come together to try to set rules and resolve problems whether they succeed in doing so or not.
Ed
----- Original Message -----
From: Keith Hudson
To: Ed Weick ; RE-DESIGNING WORK,INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION
Sent: Sunday, February 07, 2010 10:20 AM
Subject: Re: [Futurework] FW: [p2p-research] Santa Fe Institute economist:one
in four Americansis employed to guard the...
Ed,
Neither the WTO or the IMF are working very well. The Doha round hasn't been
resumed and the IMF has nowhere near enough funds.
WTO disputes are relatively small beer -- useful for governments to shelve
their own decision-making. The Doha round couldn't cope with the really
important issue (food). Most world trade is within multinational corporations
anyway. Most other deals involving reduced tariffs are bilateral. As for the
IMF, it can only receive its funds from the very countries which now have the
most need for it!
Neither the WTO or the IMF has any sort of assured future. I wouldn't bet on
either of them. I'm not saying that the Internet couldn't do with some sort of
Supreme Court of International Law jurisdiction. This would be useful in an
ideal world but as this hasn't yet developed within the field of human rights
or genocide (to which Internet problems are more closely associated), except
fitfully and partially, then I don't see how it could evolve given the still
fierce jingoism of nation-state politicians.
There was an immense effort by nation-states about 10 years ago to control
the Internet. But they failed because they couldn't cope with encryption. The
Internet is now far too complex for anybody to control and the only way for
good practice to develop is via the usual method of the growth of common law
across common cultures. Like international trade, aid and justice, the Internet
is a long way from this yet.
Keith
At 07:15 07/02/2010 -0500, you wrote:
Though they don't always work as originally intended or in everybody's
interest, the WTO or the IMF provide models. You don't have to own, you have
to agree and be able to work out problems as they arise.
Ed
----- Original Message -----
From: Keith Hudson
To: RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION,EDUCATION ; Arthur Cordell
Sent: Sunday, February 07, 2010 5:39 AM
Subject: Re: [Futurework] FW: [p2p-research] Santa Fe Institute
economist:one in four Americansis employed to guard the...
Arthur,
But how do you take over something that nobody owns?
Keith
At 20:42 06/02/2010 -0500, you wrote:
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0012_01CAA76C.E7F26710"
Content-Language: en-us
Not about safe for children, but safe to do traverse, transact and
explore. See abstract below to a forthcoming paper.
-----------------------------
Every economy requires a physical, institutional and legal
infrastructure, as well as understandable and enforceable marketplace rules, in
order to function smoothly. The building of such an infrastructure, which
provides trust and confidence for all those who operate in or are affected by
it, is a necessary condition for the development and efficient functioning of a
global, digital economy. While the Internet is often said to be different; in
one important respect it is like all previous infrastructures: a system of
governance, oversight and sanctions are needed if the Internet is to live up to
its full potential. The presentation also indicates one possible enormous cost
which could result if the global Internet economy has to deal with growing
distrust: A move away from open online networks to closed networks or back to
some amalgam of the bricks and mortar world.
The Internet is an open network where there is no outside body that can
administer sanctions. It appears to be unique in commercial history. One
characteristic of the public Internet is that, since it consists of many
thousands of autonomous networks spanning a large number of jurisdictions, it
has no well defined they. There is no global oversight body (a they) that can
intervene when wrongdoing occurs. Drawing upon the lessons of history and
historical analogies, the presentation outlines the uniqueness and fragility of
our current situation and emphasizes the need for international action to
provide remedies. For the Internet to achieve its maximum social and political
potential, there will have to be agreed upon and effective rules of the road.
There is a need for effective governance, both nationally and globally.
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of michael gurstein
Sent: Saturday, February 06, 2010 2:24 PM
To: 'RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION'
Subject: Re: [Futurework] FW: [p2p-research] Santa Fe Institute
economist:one in four Americansis employed to guard the...
As well of course, there are those who rather dislike the somewhat
anarchistic nature of online discourse and who (in the currently fashionable
jargon) look to create a "moral panic" sufficient to justify making the net
safe for "the children" or to control "piracy on the electronic high seas"...
through various kinds of over-reaching draconian moves (think airport
security...
MBG
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Arthur Cordell
Sent: Sunday, February 07, 2010 12:02 AM
To: 'RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION,EDUCATION'
Subject: Re: [Futurework] FW: [p2p-research] Santa Fe Institute
economist:one in four Americansis employed to guard the...
With increasing distrust on the net (arising from concern with
identity theft, cybercrime, etc.etc.) we will see increasing amounts of energy
and labour devoted trying to make the net a safe place to do business. This is
one of the costs of distrust.
arthur
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of michael gurstein
Sent: Saturday, February 06, 2010 4:17 AM
To: 'RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION'
Subject: [Futurework] FW: [p2p-research] Santa Fe Institute
economist: one in four Americansis employed to guard the...
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Kevin Carson
Sent: Saturday, February 06, 2010 3:57 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [p2p-research] Santa Fe Institute economist: one in four
Americansis employed to guard the...
Sent to you by Kevin Carson via Google Reader:
Santa Fe Institute economist: one in four Americans is employed to
guard the wealth of the rich
via Boing Boing by Cory Doctorow on 2/5/10
Here's a fascinating profile on radical Santa Fe Institute economist
Samuel Bowles, an empiricist who says his research doesn't support the Chicago
School efficient marketplace hypothesis. Instead, Bowles argues that the wealth
inequality created by strict market economics creates inefficiencies because
society has to devote so much effort to stopping the poor from expropriating
the rich. He calls this "guard labor" and says that one in four Americans is
employed to in the sector -- labor that could otherwise be used to increase the
nation's wealth and progress.
The greater the inequalities in a society, the more guard labor it
requires, Bowles finds. This holds true among US states, with relatively
unequal states like New Mexico employing a greater share of guard labor than
relatively egalitarian states like Wisconsin.
The problem, Bowles argues, is that too much guard labor sustains
"illegitimate inequalities," creating a drag on the economy. All of the people
in guard labor jobs could be doing something more productive with their
time--perhaps starting their own businesses or helping to reduce the US trade
deficit with China.
Guard labor supports what one might call the beat-down economy.
Community Action's Porter sees it all the time.
"We have based almost everything we have done on the idea that we
always need a part of our workforce that is marginalized--that we can call this
group into action at any time, pay them nothing and they will do anything that
needs to be done," she says.
More discouraging, perhaps, is the statistical fact that a person
born into this workforce has little chance of rising beyond it.
Born Poor? (via MeFi)
Previously:
a.. China's labor unrest worse than suspected - Boing Boing
b.. Which Side Are You On? Explaining what happened to labor in ...
c.. Questions from economics honors exam at Oberlin College Boing
Boing
d.. EVE Online's economist speaks -- economics as an experimental ...
e.. Max Keiser's curmudgeonly TV economics show: the Oracle - Boing
Boing
f.. Mackerel economics in prison - Boing Boing
g.. Economics of Malware - Boing Boing
h.. MP3s from "Economics of Open Content" conference - Boing Boing
i.. Boing Boing: Psychology, design and economics of slot-machines
Things you can do from here:
a.. Subscribe to Boing Boing using Google Reader
b.. Get started using Google Reader to easily keep up with all your
favorite sites
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
Keith Hudson, Saltford, England
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
Keith Hudson, Saltford, England
<<226edc7.jpg>>
<<226ee54.jpg>>
<<226eeb2.jpg>>
<<226ef00.jpg>>
_______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
