---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Great Transition Network <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 12:26 AM
Subject: Common Wealth Trusts: Structures of Transition (GTN Discussion)
To: [email protected]



>From Peter Barnes <[email protected]>

-------------------------------------------------------
I am very grateful for the many thoughtful comments that have been
submitted on my essay. Rather than respond to them by author, I will
highlight the major concerns expressed and respond to them generically.

Q: Are common wealth trusts a panacea?

A: Not at all. We need many other institutional innovations. But for the
crucially important tasks of administering a sustainability budget and
providing income security to everyone, common wealth trusts are the best
tools available.

Q: Are common wealth trusts guaranteed to work? Can’t they be corrupted?

A. Common wealth trusts are not guaranteed to work perfectly and in all
cases, but they will do many jobs we need done better than
profit-maximizing corporations and plutocratic government.

Of course, like any other human institution, they can be corrupted, but our
task is to build on the long tradition of trusts’ accountability to
beneficiaries to make them as incorruptible as possible.

Q: Can common wealth trusts be created by citizens acting independently, or
is government action—and hence a political movement—required?

A: Both methods are required. A trust for almost any purpose can be
organized under existing law. The challenge is gaining control over a
common asset. That requires either government assignment of property rights
and/or a lot of money (private or public) to buy them. In either case, a
movement is essential.

Q: If government action is required to assign property rights or finance
their acquisition, doesn’t the fact that government is dominated by
corporations make such action extremely unlikely?

A: At the moment, yes. But it is possible that, following a major crisis of
some sort, corporate domination will temporarily falter. At such a time,
there will be an opportunity for non-linear change. We must use that
opportunity to create institutions that can stand on their own after the
crisis ends and corporate domination of government returns. We need to
create such autonomous, accountable institutions because we can’t expect
government to be more than briefly free of corporate domination.

Q: What about the relationships between local, regional, national,
multinational and global trusts?

A: This is a murky area, but generally, the rule of subsidiarity should
apply.

Q: How do we think beyond wealth for humans and include the interests of
other species?

A: The short answer is by proxy. When trusts that manage an ecosystem are
legally accountable to future generations of humans, that means they are
responsible for leaving the ecosystem in as good or better condition for
the next human generation as it was when the living generation “inherited”
it, with the ultimate goal of making it sustainable indefinitely. “As good
or better condition” includes biodiversity. The determination of what that
means in terms of human usage limits and restoration would be based on
peer-reviewed science. Trustee decisions that fall short of this
responsibility (again, using scientific criteria to compare past and
present parameters of the ecosystem) could be challenged in court.

In other words, future generations of humans can serve as a pretty good
proxy for non-human species—certainly much better than corporate
shareholders, living voters, or wealthy political donors.

Q: Aren’t common wealth trusts just a “hack” of capitalism that fails to
adequately challenge the power of multinational corporations?

A: I think of common wealth trusts not as a “hack” of capitalism but as
evolutionary jiu-jitsu. It is true they leave a lot of power in the hands
of corporations, but (a) we need to give those corporations some room to do
business, and (b) the trusts would impose boundaries on corporate invasions
of the commons, boundaries locked in by property rights.

The trusts would also create an equal distribution sector of the economy
that partially offsets the wealth-concentrating effects of the corporate
sector. One can hope that, over time, the boundaries around the commons as
well as the size of the equal-distribution sector will grow.

Q: Wouldn’t it be better to use revenue from common wealth trusts for
public and environmental purposes than for dividends?

A: I am not opposed to using some of the value of common wealth for public
purposes, but I would rather do that by taxing dividends than by usurping
them. If dividends are taxed as ordinary income, and tax rates remain
progressive, the poor will keep most of their dividends while the rich will
surrender a higher percentage. Overall, tax revenue in the US would
increase by around 25% of the dividends, which our governments could then
use as they see fit.

There is no guarantee, of course, that the tax revenue would be effectively
spent. But in thinking about this, it is very important to remember that
the ecological effectiveness of common wealth trusts rests much more in
their boundary-setting power than in the use of their money.

Finally, let me say that there is much room for further work on the design
and implementation of common wealth trusts. What I have tried to do is
describe a basic architecture, while recognizing that the devil is in the
details. I hope many readers on this list will not only think more about
design details, but will contribute to the learning process through
real-world experimentation.

---Peter Barnes---

*********************************

Tuesday, June 30, 2015

>From Paul Raskin <[email protected]>

-----
Dear GTN,

Our JULY DISCUSSION will focus on a new GTI Viewpoint: “Common Wealth
Trusts: Structures of Transition.” In it, Peter Barnes forcefully indicts
capitalism as the driver of ecological stress and social disparity (the
C-word has barely been mentioned in recent discussions). But rather than
analysis or critique, Peter’s interests are practical: designing
institutional mechanisms for countering the profit motive and promoting
equitable sustainability. Specifically, he advances “common wealth trusts”
as an effective means for safeguarding the biosphere, and for sharing the
benefits generated from the natural and social resources that are our
collective inheritance.

Please read Peter’s constructive and provocative piece at
www.greattransition.org/publication/common-wealth-trusts, and share your
comments by replying to this message. The window of opportunity closes JULY
31.

Confused about how GTI works? See the primer below.

Looking forward,

Paul Raskin
GTI Director

PRIMER ON GTI PUBLICATION CYCLE: GTI publishes bi-monthly (in even-numbered
months). Three new pieces are displayed on our homepage (
www.greattransition.org), distributed to 10,000 subscribers, and publicized
through social media (and often republished on other websites). GTN
discussions are also bi-monthly (in odd-numbered months), taking up one of
the pieces prior to publication. Selected comments drawn from this
discussion are edited and published alongside the original piece (along
with a response from the author). You can review all GTN discussions at
www.greattransition.org/forum/gti-forum, and post comments to an active
discussion.

-------------------------------------------------------
Hit reply to post a message
Or see thread and reply online at
http://www.greattransition.org/forum/gti-discussions/165-common-wealth-trusts-structures-of-transition/1260

Need help? Email [email protected]





-- 
Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: http://commonstransition.org


P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net

<http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates:
http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

#82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/

_______________________________________________
P2P Foundation - Mailing list

Blog - http://www.blog.p2pfoundation.net
Wiki - http://www.p2pfoundation.net

Show some love and help us maintain and update our knowledge commons by making 
a donation. Thank you for your support.
https://blog.p2pfoundation.net/donation

https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation

Reply via email to