tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-44443904479187568292024-03-13T10:11:49.967-07:00Cooperation in view of SustainabilityWorking to develop Non-Profit Cooperative Organizations with the explicit purpose of replacing antiquated For-Profit Organizations, in order to better serve the needs of the human race and the environment.Edward Helldanehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07860488167507422228noreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4444390447918756829.post-92088449922849032072011-12-12T09:09:00.000-08:002011-12-12T09:24:28.303-08:00Co-operative Research and Development<span class="Apple-style-span">Here's a story that vindicates the use of co-operative research and development systems. Unfortunately though, I can't tell from this story whether they are using a complete not-for-profit system. The speaker mentions a pending patent on designs at one point, but is it a open source/free use patent? Who knows? But it should be.</span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.ted.com/talks/britta_riley_a_garden_in_my_apartment.html?utm_source=newsletter_weekly_2011-11-29" target="_blank">TED.com: Britta Riley - A Garden In My Apartment</a>Edward Helldanehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07860488167507422228noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4444390447918756829.post-24346242178243504652011-12-08T06:46:00.000-08:002011-12-08T06:46:34.991-08:00the tides begin to turn, from the top down<span class="Apple-style-span" style="background-color: white; font-family: sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 19px;"></span><br />
Buffett Says:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="templatequote" style="margin-top: 0px;"><div>My luck was accentuated by my living in a market system that sometimes produces distorted results, though overall it serves our country well... I’ve worked in an economy that rewards someone who saves the lives of others on a battlefield with a medal, rewards a great teacher with thank-you notes from parents, but rewards those who can detect the mispricing of securities with sums reaching into the billions. In short, fate’s distribution of long straws is wildly capricious. (Buffett Says ‘Capricious’ Economy Requires Charity (Update1) by Hugh Son, Bloomberg, June 16, 2010 16:17 EDT)</div></blockquote><div style="line-height: 1.5em; margin-bottom: 0.5em; margin-top: 0.4em;">This statement was made as part of a joint proposal with Bill Gates to encourage other wealthy individuals to pool some of their fortunes for charitable purposes.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0.5em; margin-top: 0.4em;"><div style="line-height: 1.5em;">Bill Gates's wife Melinda urged people to learn a lesson from the philanthropic efforts of the family that sold its home and gave away half of its value, as detailed in <i><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Power_of_Half" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: initial; background-image: none; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; color: #0645ad; text-decoration: none;" title="The Power of Half">The Power of Half</a></i>. On December 9, 2010, Buffett, Bill Gates, and Mark Zuckerberg (Facebook's CEO), signed a promise they called the "Gates-Buffett <a class="mw-redirect" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giving_Pledge" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: initial; background-image: none; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; color: #0645ad; text-decoration: none;" title="Giving Pledge">Giving Pledge</a>", in which they promised to donate to charity at least half of their wealth over time, and invited others among the wealthy to donate 50% or more of their wealth to charity.</div><div style="line-height: 1.5em;"><br />
</div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="line-height: 1.5em;">Gates and Buffet have for many years been in the top three positions for richest men in the world--30 years for Gates. Like </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="line-height: 24px;">alcoholism</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="line-height: 1.5em;"> and other addictions, it has taken those who have amassed the most wealth and not only hit rock bottom but stayed there for years to realize the damage that their actions have caused and have begun working to correct them.</span></div>Edward Helldanehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07860488167507422228noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4444390447918756829.post-91870408933334372011-12-06T10:59:00.000-08:002011-12-06T10:59:20.938-08:00The High Price of Materialism<iframe width="480" height="270" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/oGab38pKscw?fs=1" frameborder="0" allowFullScreen=""></iframe>Edward Helldanehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07860488167507422228noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4444390447918756829.post-46051741974787002542011-11-28T00:37:00.000-08:002011-11-28T00:40:12.148-08:00Concerning the Police efforts to intimidate the Occupy Movement<div style="text-align: justify;">the US legal system is a religious institution run by profiteering gluttons--not a honest non-for-profit public service run by philanthropists--and like the religions of yore it has amassed a very large and strong army to ensure it maintains in it's position of power. though there are undoubtedly some honest 'peacekeepers' within our national police force, it is a police force... not a peacekeeping service. the police force is just a finger on the hand of justice, and it is the police forces' task to aid in the enforcement of laws and to help ensure those who threaten the sanctity of their religion are penalized, not to protect people from those who wish to harm others (though that happens too).</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">the officers of our police forces work in close concert with those more closely intertwined with the judicial system to see to this. they regularly ensure that prosecutors are equipped with the right information and reports to guarantee a conviction, despite any factuality of the accusations against those charged with violations of law. this can be evidenced by the fact that almost all convictions result from guilty pleas, and most of those are from plea bargains... where a prosecutor oversells their case and threatens horrifically harsh treatment should the defendant not plea guilty; and now, not later (in order to get the conviction before the defendant can even attempt to prepare a defense, or even understand what is happening).</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">in return, a conviction--even one underhandedly coerced during plea bargaining--guarantees the arresting officer faces no risk of any retribution for lying in reports or arresting innocent people without due diligence, or probable cause. so, if they make an arrest, it's in their best interest to do whatever they must to help the prosecutor obtain a conviction. it is not in their best interest to remain honest, submit reports with only absolutely truthful statements, or to ever omit fault if they errored in any way, shape, or form (this is also true of various other State/Gov positions: social workers, accountants, basically anyone whose position is assessed by documented results they are responsible for producing, rather then by polling those whom they interact with or by monitoring their effectiveness via a disconnected third party/parties).</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">as a citizen, unless exceptionally wealthy, once you have been handcuffed or charged with a crime you might as well assume you'll be mistreated by the system and eventually convicted; whether you are guilty of the crime accused or not. after all, those responsible for acquiring those convictions are almost always voted into their positions, and they can lose their jobs if they don't meet their conviction quotas. fairness within the judicial system is neither openly monitored, nor used as a gauge to determine who deserves their position... be they judge, prosecutor, or police officer. otherwise, only voluminous public outcry or the reasonable suspicion of a severe crime can guarantee the exposure of those individuals guilty of the crimes described here.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">it's rather ironic that the very people most effected by the unfairness and dishonesty that occurs within our justice system are the same people either intentionally excluded from having any say in how it works, or are simply less likely to participate in deciding because of their social position in life.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">the system is designed, though probably not intentionally during it's inception, to encourage abuses to occur and to protect those who act abusively within the system.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">this all being true, and being well known for well over 30 years, it begs to be asked: how does the occupy movement suggest the situation--concerning the prominence of corruption within our society--be addressed? similar to an apology not being appropriate without a change in behavior to help assure the offense doesn't reoccur, pointing out a problem is pretty pointless if a solution is not offered alongside it.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">naturally, the solutions become as evident as the problems as soon as those interested begin to look for them rather than focusing on whining about the problems.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">the only problem i'm personally still unsure how to address is the problem of not having any of the money necessary to implement the solutions. i only have 400 dollars to my name at the moment, and in today's society none of our overall problems can be solved without some substantial cash being thrown at them. should i win the lottery tomorrow, i would be happy to donate the total amount to this one cause. pity i don't gamble.</div>Edward Helldanehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07860488167507422228noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4444390447918756829.post-86808347682311696292011-11-24T04:15:00.000-08:002011-11-24T05:19:23.920-08:00in response to an article on Grist<div style="text-align: justify;">on the subject of sustainability, and the need for our global societies values to be altered to not only allow for but encourage sustainability: for sustainable practices to be 'built in' to our every behavior. it seems to me that it's best to simply reverse the system that has allowed our values to become so skewed in the first place. it was capitalist ideals, greed, that drove the wedge between man and the earth, and it will be philanthropical ideals that will bring man back into natures fold.</div><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">cooperate, not for profit--as a corporation does--but to promote sustainability and equality in every aspect of life. build non-profit cooperative schools, car manufacturers, insurance providers, hospitals, automotive service centers, recycling plants, solar power plants, fisheries, farms, building developers, music labels, film producers and distributors, employment agencies, et cetera.</div><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">any necessary business can succeed at providing better products, at a lower overall cost, while also providing higher quality employment to more people, as a non-profit cooperative than as a greedy for-profit corporation. the only question is whether to build them as member operated or employee operated organizations; and that will most often differ in accordance to the customer/members contact with the org. a farm is best run by those who participate in it's functions personally, while a grocery needs the input from it's members to determine what products it should buy, and from where.</div><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">also, like the for-profit business model today which uses the International Monetary Fund to promote the use of it's model globally, a Non-Profit or Cooperative Monetary Fund can be created with the pool of excess funds from the overall cooperative and non-profit community, which can then be used to fund the global development of yet more cooperatives: buying and converting for-profits when there isn't room in a current marketplace for what could be a very beneficial cooperative.</div><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">this, by the way, was how communism was supposed to work. only with communism a government was used as a middle man; with the job of acquiring property, businesses, and banks, and then redistributing ownership over these things to the people... however the greed and selfishness of those in government lead them to hold onto that which they acquired in order to promote and maintain their positions of wealth and power. the model i've described does not allow for such foolishness to occur; so long as all cooperatives are limited in size, and allowed to function as an individual entities; while still maintaining the support of the larger community.</div><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">billboards? manipulative or deceptive advertisements or commercials? copyrights? most business law? most gov regulation and oversight? unemployment? high crime rates? excessive drug use? excessive sales of antidepressants? high suicide rates? terrorism? these things have no place in a sustainable society.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.grist.org/green-living-tips/2011-11-21-ask-umbra-is-it-safe-for-occupy-groups-to-use-wooden-pallets" style="text-align: center;">[Click here to read reference article.]</a> </div>Edward Helldanehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07860488167507422228noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4444390447918756829.post-85046128889999044972010-03-11T12:06:00.000-08:002011-11-24T05:25:25.212-08:00The Basics<div style="text-align: justify;">In order to promote the overall well-being of humanity I suggest the mass adoption of Small Cooperative Non-Profit Organizations throughout the business world; not merely as schools, hospitals, credit unions, grocery stores, and basic service providers (power, water, waste), but also as goods manufacturers, food producers, insurance providers, cell phone carriers, internet service providers, automobile manufacturers and maintenance centers, et cetera.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">These would be Sustainable and Self-Regulating Democratic Organizations who's goal would be merely to provide quality services, products, and employment, and not to earn a profit. Having these as their sole purpose alleviates the need for individual governments to spend time and money regulating businesses in order to maintain their level of accountability: A non-profit organization's business charter, when properly designed, should account for it's overall responsible regulation and transparency, as well as it's requirement for intentional disbandment upon it's failure or it's lack of necessity.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Although one might contest that there are plenty of examples of successful credit unions and cooperative grocers, there are still few examples of successful non-profit goods manufacturers and entertainment or telecommunications focused service providers. I believe that if this were to change, the world over, surely there would be a steep incline in the health and happiness of people everywhere.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Considering that the goal of these organizations would be to develop and produce only the best quality goods, while also providing quality employment to individuals, not only would decent wages and full benefits obviously be made available to all employees, but customers would be able to take pride in paying the price of the goods; since they would know they were promoting the health and well-being of not only themselves but also the individuals that produced the goods. This is in contrast to today's market where general shoppers must navigate complex pricing schemes--carefully designed to confuse and manipulate the customers simply to promote the excessive wealth of only a few individuals--and who regularly find themselves doubting the value of the goods they purchase.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Also one of the most important reasons for intentionally adopting the Non-Profit Cooperative business model worldwide and throughout all industries is its innate ability to easily design environmentally responsible as well as socially responsible organizations. Aside from the obvious benefits, this would aid in greatly reducing the need for governmental regulation in regards to green house gas emissions and general pollution. The widespread use of these organizations could also aid in resolving one of the topics most highly debated currently within world politics. I'm fairly sure that had Cooperative Non-Profits been at the forefront of the Industrial Revolution what is now known as Climate Change could have been easily abated by the direct action of the communities who suffered most from the pollution produced: those who lived and worked near and within the factory centers.</div>Edward Helldanehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07860488167507422228noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4444390447918756829.post-55300469362133792722010-02-28T14:23:00.000-08:002011-11-24T05:32:41.142-08:00Producing International Cooperation<div style="text-align: justify;">[the following is an idea submitted to USAID.gov during an Open Government event, where a single website was developed to play host to the encouragement of participation in government by allowing the submission of ideas from the general public to many different government agencies, as well as the ability for participants to vote and comment on the ideas submitted.]</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">why not use US funds to promote international well-being by aiding in the development of Small Self-Regulating Cooperative Non-Profit Organizations; such as schools, hospitals, credit unions, coop grocery stores, coop goods manufacturers, coop service providers (power, water, waste), insurance providers, et cetera...</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">promoting the development of Sustainable and Self-Regulating Democratic Organizations who's goal is merely to provide quality services, products, and employment, and not to earn a profit, alleviates the need for USAID and individual governments to worry about and subsequently spend more money and energy regulating businesses in order to maintain their level of accountability. a non-profit organization's business charter, when properly designed, should account for it's overall responsible regulation and transparency.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">and it's important to note that, although there are plenty of examples of successful credit unions and cooperative grocers, there are few examples of successful non-profit goods manufacturers. if this were to change, the world over, surely there would be a steep incline in the health and happiness of people everywhere.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">considering that the goal of these organizations would be to develop and produce only the best quality goods, while also providing quality employment to individuals, not only would decent wages and full benefits obviously be made available to all employees, but customers would be able to take pride in paying the price of the goods; since they would know they were promoting the health and well-being of not only themselves but also the individuals that produced the goods. this is in contrast to today's shoppers who must navigate complex pricing schemes--carefully designed to confuse and manipulate the customers simply to promote the excessive wealth of only a few individuals--and who regularly find themselves doubting the value of the goods they purchase.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">and of course, because these Non-Profit Cooperative Organizations would be designed to be socially responsible as well as environmentally responsible they would be capable of greatly reducing the need for governmental regulation in regards to green house gas emissions and general pollution. one of the topics most highly debated currently within world politics--climate change--could be easily abated by the direct action of the communities who suffer most from the pollution that has generally taken place around factory centers: those who live and work there.</div>Edward Helldanehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07860488167507422228noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4444390447918756829.post-88982636189262411082010-02-18T17:06:00.000-08:002011-11-24T05:33:17.203-08:00profit = no right to protest<div style="text-align: justify;">from slashdot:</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">"The Federal Court has ordered an Australian distributor to pay Nintendo over half a million dollars for selling the R4 mod chip, which allows users to circumvent technology protection measures in Nintendo's DS consoles. The distributor, RSJ IT Solutions, has been ordered to cease selling the chip through its gadgetgear.com.au site and any other sites it controls, as well as paying Nintendo $520,000 in damages."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">[this device allows a person to store well over 300 DS games on one chip, which limits the need to even sell the games via cartridges. which could dramatically limit the cost of distribution, both financially and environmentally. R4 like devices also allow a person to create or use open source software to do things that the DS manufacturers did not intend, like run linux or ebook reader software.]</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><a href="http://games.slashdot.org/story/10/02/18/0646211/Nintendo-Wins-Lawsuit-Over-R4-Mod-Chip-Piracy" rel="nofollow" target="_blaket">Click here to see the original Slashdot post.</a></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">my response to the slashdot post:</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">i think, the issue is quite clear.... so long as the original developer and distributor 'of anything' makes a profit off their work they have no room to argue that someone else has infringed on their rights. basically, if they can stay in business, they ought to just shut up!</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">the whole idea of copyrights wasn't to give an industry ultimate control over their own ability to maximize profits, especially not indefinitely. and anyone who whines cause they think they 'should' be making more money, after making millions, should be taken out and put down.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">seriously, how petty must the corporate world get before things change? does Nintendo make games to make a profit, or does it make games so that people can enjoy them? if the earlier is true their right to do business should be revoked! making money may be required to stay in business, but making that the goal sets up a business to eventually act excessively selfish, greedy, or downright irresponsible--at the cost of actual human beings.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">case and point: they sued a smaller, nobody, company because the technology they produced was used for piracy--or could be, but they still refuse to provide adequate means for people to do the awesome things that device legally allowed a user to do.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">in fact, i've copied and given away ALL of my DVDs, CDs, and video games/systems. i believe wholeheartedly that maintaining a large collection of disks, cartridges, and entertainment systems is beyond irresponsible in a time where the construction and shipment of those items consumes so many better used non-renewable resources. the tonnage of plastic used to make those things, and now sitting on a shelf unused or in a land fill somewhere, is beyond unbelievable. let's not even consider the environmental cost of the energy needed to make them or the transportation fuel needed to get them to my home. i now have one hard drive, and one back up drive, where all my media is stored--though i do often copy some files to other portable devices; like my phone which functions as an MP3 player, eBook reader, handheld gaming device, etc. and my computer can emulate just about any gaming system.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">furthermore, if the government had any sense at all, it would not only throw out any case brought against a company that allowed for the mass digital storage of otherwise individually sold items, but it would also sue the pants off the original developers for refusing to provide the same service. or simple provide the technology to the public itself via the development of a non-governmental non-profit organization, simply in the hopes of limiting the future distribution of waste to their already overfilling landfills. they could even use the money from the lawsuit to pay for the development of the non-profit manufacturer.</div>Edward Helldanehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07860488167507422228noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4444390447918756829.post-63199714842595371042010-02-03T10:54:00.000-08:002011-11-24T05:34:07.641-08:00salt - who knew<div style="text-align: justify;">around 81 b.c. the teenage emperor of a then unified china gathered 60 notables from around china to openly debate state administative policies. the central subject at the time was the government ruled monopoly over salt and iron, which was imposed and used mostly to fund military activities.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">this debate ended up covering many different issues. but i found it interesting that when confucians, inspired by mencius, were asked how a state should raise profits, they replied, "why must your majesty use the world profit? all i am concerned with are the good and the right. if your majesty says, 'how can i profit my state?' your officials will say, 'how can i profit my family?' and officers and common people will say, 'how can i profit myself?' once superiors and inferiors are competing for profit, the state will be in danger."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">as so it is.... like drr like drr people, 81 b.c., get with the program!</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">(for reference see "salt: a history of the world" by mark kurlansky, p33)</div>Edward Helldanehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07860488167507422228noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4444390447918756829.post-69652910027679684902010-02-01T11:36:00.000-08:002011-11-24T05:34:23.086-08:00government control over industry<div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">other persons comment: </span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">None of you brought up the efficency of mass transit or of rail to save gasoline! Disel-electric trains are super efficient. Electric rail can be powered with a solar suppliment. As for cars, all electric is perfect for short range (mass transit is better) and hybrid electric (using bio-disel) is old, existing technolgy. Save gas for air travel. The whole problem is willingness to demand change from the entrrenched business world. That's where government intervention is needed. who else speaks for the good of the people? Not business, they are too short sighted.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">my response: </span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-style: italic;">"The whole problem is willingness to demand change from the entrrenched business world. That's where government intervention is needed." </span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">how about instead of requiring glutinous corporations or a lazy governments to do our job for us, we do it for ourselves. The solution to who will produce stuff for us that we really need, but that doesn't guarantee a huge monetary profit for the energy, time, and money invested is obvious to me. Co-Operative Non-Profit businesses that can produce goods rather than just provide services, like most of the Non-Profits that exist today.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Most people know that when you want something that requires the effort of more than just yourself to build you can incorporate; you can join with and cooperate with others to build those things. I read once that he first corporation in the US was actually a non-profit arranged for the erection of a single bridge, then disbanded. However, today we build most things for profit. Possibly because each of us rarely needs more than one of each thing, but the tools we use to make each thing are often specialized and capable of making many such things. Or perhaps because we lack the skills necessary to build something and therefor need to trade for the assistance of a skilled builder, and money is easy to trade because it has a standard value. But I'm sure we also have a tendency to build many things for profit because we've been taught to be greedy; greedy beyond what could be considered natural or sustainable amount.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Don't get me wrong, there are still areas where the for-profit business model can function successfully. I don't doubt that at all, nor am I interested in replacing all For Profits with Non-Profits. But when it comes to doing things like developing the best and most affordable electric vehicles, wind turbines, solar panels, or developing the most efficient insulation for homes; it just seems to me that a company run by those dedicated to the purity of their product and not concerned with ANY monetary value--beyond what's required to sustain themselves--are more likely to produce the best product, without question, at the most affordable price.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">They would also be more likely to adapt their industry as new technologies were developed while maintaining a merely sustainable income, rather then try and make as much money off their current designs before producing better products and then selling the new product at unreasonable costs.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Proper non-profits are also chartered to do fairly specific things, and limited from becoming for-profit businesses later on. So if, say, a non-profit co-op was arranged to design and construct efficient water catchment and retention devices, but discovered that all their products were toxic and should no longer be used, they would either adapt to known non-toxic products or disband their business; they would not legally be able to sell their business or property mind you, they would be forced to disband and to donate there property either to the state or other non-profits.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">I really don't see any other solution that is sustainable indefinitely. I believe our world currently requires the development of many small, local, yet associated, Non-Profit Co-Operative businesses that can design, build, and construct sustainable and environmentally safe products.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">If you require a sample of what I mean by small, local, but associated businesses, look no further than one of your local Credit Unions that's a member of the National Credit Union Association, or your local Food Coop that's a member of the National Cooperative Grocers Association. Both of these businesses provide services, more than goods, but they both aim at providing the best services, and have the support of a larger community to maintain their ability to do that.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">My favorite concept for this idea is that of Statewide Limited Electric and Hybrid Automobile Manufacturing and Recycling Centers that cater to the needs of their state alone, but share research and development resources with other State Limited Automobile Manufacturing and Recycling Centers. Having local manufacturers allows for the on-demand manufacture of cars, for customizations that better meet the needs of the vehicle users, as well as a drop in the amount of space needed to store unused vehicles, and the energy needed to transport the vehicles and materials.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Initially materials would need to be imported into the area, but because these manufacturers would also be recycling old cars the amount of imported materials would slowly become less and less. They could also adapt their designs specifically to make use of what materials they can easy obtain; like hemp woven cloth for car-seats in states where industrial hemp is allowed, or organic cotton in states where cotton is a primary export.</div>Edward Helldanehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07860488167507422228noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4444390447918756829.post-28710100315699978532009-01-14T13:14:00.000-08:002011-11-24T05:34:37.338-08:00Economic Stimulus Spending<div style="text-align: justify;">um, why are we throwing our money away on failing technologies and companies?</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">EVERYTHING can be built, designed, manufactured, maintained, and derived as open source via free use copyrights and non-profit organizations, especially cooperatives! this could allow for the free use of ideas to benefit society, by providing quality jobs, services and products all at cost (the lowest price possible).</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">all we would need is the initial start-up funds to get a non-profit business going and we could easily manufacture THE BEST cars, computers, hot water heaters, homes, food, and provide THE BEST health care, insurance, maintenance, ISPs, and recycling centers, et cetera; lets not forget to mention entertainment venues, and quality film and music producing orgs.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">look up the profit margins of all those big US companies and industries, and then imagine all those trillions of dollars being used to fund the initial development of other non-profit service providers and product manufacturing facilities via a massive Non-Profit Monetary Fund; which could also be used to fund the development of quality non-profit services and products in other nations, and thereby help develop a free, open, and peaceful planetary union.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">really, what are we doing? why not drop billions on revitalizing our country through the development of democratic public services and organizations that have the sole purpose of enhancing the health, happiness, and effectiveness of all the people in our society and on our planet!</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">are we really so greedy?</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">DON'T CAPITALIZE, CO-OPERATE!! AND FREE THE WORLD!</div>Edward Helldanehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07860488167507422228noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4444390447918756829.post-55941304568234197092008-12-10T05:04:00.000-08:002011-11-24T05:35:18.032-08:00the Star Trek paradigm<div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="background-color: transparent; font-weight: bold;">[</span><span style="background-color: transparent;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">the following was a response to a comment on the exclusion of linux in schools and the importance of open source software in general, posted originally on Slashdot]</span></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="background-color: transparent;">ever seen star trek? i'm not like an obsessed fan or anything. but i'm seriously seeing things go the way of the federation. from what i gather, the story goes: after a major third world war, where most of the human population is killed, a survivor builds an interstellar craft with a light speed drive... using the ship draws the attention of aliens, and the whole remaining population joins together to rebuild earth as a single peaceful society so they can effectively take part in a universe filled with civilizations much older than themselves. to do this they create a free society, where people are simply taken care of, and value is placed appropriately on ingenuity and hard work; a whole do what you can / get what you need thing.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="background-color: transparent;">aside from a little capitalism here or there europe almost made it to that point after the whole nazi fiasco; most of the major players there have universal healthcare... but for some reason they never made it completely out of the primordial ooze.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="background-color: transparent;">the web and digital technology has proved peoples interest in a free open society--well beyond any doubt. all we need is for a major nation to collectively take it's head out of it's FOR-PROFIT a$ and encourage people to make use of the cooperative business model so they can work productively in groups merely for the sake of producing better goods and enriching everyone's lives, instead of helping maintain singular entities which work to enrich the lives of themselves or those closest to them at everyone else's loss.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="background-color: transparent;">seriously, consider cooperative organizations, employee governed or member governed... it just depends on the service provided. most people don't want to get there hands dirty anymore and grow their own food, and if they're a rocket scientist they shouldn't have too... so most farms would obviously be employee governed. but than people do want to have a say in what is directly available to them locally... so grocery and retail stores would be member governed. who cares if it's a warehouse like costco or a huge retail outlet like a wall*mart, as long as it's a non-profit cooperative distributor it should be all good... and if something is found to not be good the group can find a way to fix the issue.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="background-color: transparent;">consider how wall*mart was able to exercise their power over the manufacturers to get the amount of murcury in CFLs lowered; imagine what a nationwide union of cooperative retailers could accomplish! imagine localized non-profit electric automobile manufacturers and cooperative mechanic shops, construction companies, temp and employment service agencies. furniture manufacturers and bicycle shops (with built in storefronts and repair centers), colleges, hospitals, insurance agencies, dentist offices... who do you give all your money to and get piss-all in return for?</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="background-color: transparent;">a service providing business is the easiest to create as a non-profit cooperative; insurance agencies and money lenders should be a major priority for anyone who has a lot of money to play with and a philanthropic heart; then manufacturers--especially automobiles, or anything else that's mostly a direct to customer business!</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="background-color: transparent;">start something... do it today!</span></div>Edward Helldanehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07860488167507422228noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4444390447918756829.post-77898635379090724062008-10-07T13:04:00.000-07:002011-11-24T05:35:29.128-08:00Banking on The Environment<div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">[the following was my response to the discovery of e3bank.com, an environmentally savvy bank]</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">it's not a cooperative, or what is more often known as a credit union... although it is imperative that all people and businesses adopt environmentally and morally mature behavioral models, green banking is only half the equation.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">capitalism has no place in the future, if mankind is going to continue to thrive on this planet. with capitalism wealth is funneled into the hands of the few, at the cost of the many; and more often than not the environment as well. at this point, you can't just fix one, we need to grow up and fix both (our environment and the society that allowed the environment to become so corrupted).</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">cooperation is what is required: ownership of, and investment in businesses by the very people who use the services provided. and not for profit, but merely to provide the most effective means to whatever end, in the most responsible manner known to exist. this should be our goal from here.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: justify;">move forward!</div>Edward Helldanehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07860488167507422228noreply@blogger.com0