Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Ownership

Expand Messages
  • scifiben
    I read the basic description of the Third Way, which is of course a wholesale global-economic-system proposal. It seems to apply to investment only in that
    Message 1 of 8 , Jul 27 6:27 PM
      I read the basic description of the "Third Way," which is of course a
      wholesale global-economic-system proposal. It seems to apply to
      investment only in that under their system, everyone could supposedly
      become a capitalist and thus, presumably, an investor.

      The "Third Way" also ignores what will be the most basic economic
      problem of the space-elevator era, namely, what happens when
      increasing rates of production collide with Earth's decreasing
      resource base. The SE can help by opening up new sources of some
      types of resources, but not biological resources, which (as I've
      pointed out before) we currently can't do without. So until we can
      terraform Mars or set up self-replicating hydroponic farms or
      whatever, I think what we most need to do economically is to find ways
      of SLOWING DOWN the rate of economic expansion, rather than increasing
      it to the point where everyone can be a capitalist.

      But actually, discussions of global economics should probably be
      relegated to a different group, except where they directly apply to
      the actual construction of a space elevator.

      If you were referring to the Community Investment Corporation or some
      other relatively minor aspect of the Third Way site, perhaps you
      should have put in a link to a specific page.

      Ben Sibelman


      > If this group is seriously concerned with the issue of socially
      responsible
      > investment, I would suggest the following;
      >
      > http://www.cesj.org/thirdway/thirdway-intro.htm
      >
      > This organization has been advocating a more responsible strategy
      for large
      > scale project development for a long time and the system outlined here
      > -first devised by the inventor of the Employee Stock Ownership
      Program- was
      > the foundation for Buckminster Fuller's Old Man River City community
      > project.
      >
      > A space elevator is, fundamentally, a kind of community formed of client
      > businesses and governments who would be sharing both its orbital and
      > terrestrial facilities. So it would be a logical candidate for this
      strategy
      > to development and investment.
      >
      > Eric Hunting
      >
      > hunting@t...
    • GEddieA95@aol.com
      Message 2 of 8 , Jul 27 6:29 PM
      • GEddieA95@aol.com
        In a message dated 7/27/2003 8:28:09 PM Central Daylight Time, ... There is a paradigm of static or slowing economies. It s called poverty. If most people
        Message 3 of 8 , Jul 27 6:32 PM
          In a message dated 7/27/2003 8:28:09 PM Central Daylight Time, Benjamin.Sibelman@... writes:

          SE can help by opening up new sources of some
          types of resources, but not biological resources, which (as I've
          pointed out before) we currently can't do without.  So until we can
          terraform Mars or set up self-replicating hydroponic farms or
          whatever, I think what we most need to do economically is to find ways
          of SLOWING DOWN the rate of economic expansion, rather than increasing
          it to the point where everyone can be a capitalist.


          There is a paradigm of static or slowing economies.  It's called "poverty."  If most people cannot be capitalists, what would you have them be, peasants?

          Biological resources are only a problem as long as human population rises.  If it goes stable in our century, we as humans won't need to worry about running out of biological matter before SE transportation becomes commonplace.
        • LĂșcio de Souza Coelho
          On Sunday 27 July 2003 22:27, scifiben wrote: (...) ... But I *do* think that an space elevator (read cheap access to space ) *will* increase biological
          Message 4 of 8 , Jul 28 11:43 AM
            On Sunday 27 July 2003 22:27, scifiben wrote:
            (...)
            > The "Third Way" also ignores what will be the most basic economic
            > problem of the space-elevator era, namely, what happens when
            > increasing rates of production collide with Earth's decreasing
            > resource base. The SE can help by opening up new sources of some
            > types of resources, but not biological resources, which (as I've
            > pointed out before) we currently can't do without. So until we can
            > terraform Mars or set up self-replicating hydroponic farms or
            > whatever, I think what we most need to do economically is to find ways
            > of SLOWING DOWN the rate of economic expansion, rather than increasing
            > it to the point where everyone can be a capitalist.

            But I *do* think that an space elevator (read "cheap access to space") *will*
            increase biological resources, in the not-so-long term. You don't need exotic
            things like terraformed planets or self-replicating hydroponic farms.
            Conventional hydroponic farms, "replicated by people" as the economic forces
            demands, will do it. Indeed, given enough time you'll have even
            *conventional* farms (with plants growing in the dirty) - if a High Frontier
            scenario is bootstrapped, eventually you'll have space settlements big enough
            (hundreds of square kilometers) to afford farming with "traditional"
            techniques. And space settlements are based on round-of-the-mill engineering
            concepts, they are not speculative as terraforming or self-replicating
            machines. They will only need to be demanded by the economy, and I think that
            eventually it will be cheaper for spacers to grow their own food than to
            import it from Earth.

            (...)
            > Ben Sibelman
            (...)

            LĂșcio Coelho
          • scifiben
            ... poverty. I ll just point out that that s not the only possible paradigm, just the one that generally occurs in the current global economic system. ...
            Message 5 of 8 , Jul 28 7:59 PM
              >
              > There is a paradigm of static or slowing economies. It's called
              "poverty."

              I'll just point out that that's not the only possible "paradigm," just
              the one that generally occurs in the current global economic system.

              > If most people cannot be capitalists, what would you have them be,
              peasants?
              >
              > Biological resources are only a problem as long as human population
              rises.
              > If it goes stable in our century, we as humans won't need to worry
              about
              > running out of biological matter before SE transportation becomes
              commonplace.

              Part of the problem is that today, most people basically ARE peasants.
              Even with a stable population, if you want to really improve their
              standards of living (say, enough so that they can afford a
              space-elevator ride), it's going to be a major strain on the
              environment. Furthermore, a stable population far from guarantees an
              end to the pollution and habitat alteration that threatens so many
              species, some of them vital to the overall health of the biosphere. I
              don't think we can afford to be complacent about this situation. But
              as I said, I suppose this isn't really the place for
              economic/ecological discussions.

              Ben Sibelman
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.