Earth Community Organization (ECO)
the Global Community
I am a retired scientist who would like to participate in your online discussion. I'm interested in all topics related to global community. firstname.lastname@example.org
for Discussion Roundtables 32, and 36
Listed as a Leader for all of the issues: http://globalcommunitywebnet.com/gdufour/leaders.htm
Participating in Global Dialogue 2006
Charter of the Global Community http://globalcommunitywebnet.com/GlobalConstitution/egcharterofthegc.htm
Participating in the development of the Global Constitution. The Global Constitution is found at:
Table of Contents|
Subject: Dear Mr. Dufour, concerning ECO
Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 16:08:20 -0500
Dear Mr. Dufour:
Great website! It seems that at the rate things are changing, these good things may all happen post-apocalyptically. We may need to act quickly if we are to survive. To act in sound bytes, as it were.
There is one simple and quick solution that would accomplish all your goals by addressing the root of all our problems--extreme and unnatural wealth/power concentration--in an attractive, non-violent and universally acceptable way.
That is by capping power by capping wealth. We have seen that it cannot be done by progressive taxation because them with the gold makes the rules.
We can do it in an incorruptible, non-burocratic way using a direct democratic system similar to the one that has given the Swiss the highest per capita income in the world. A yearly wealth/power cap can be decided on and activated by inserting a cancelbot in the world's banking and credit systems that deletes all personal electronic funds beyond the direct democratically established cap.
Deflation of currency will occur by its deletion, raising everyone's buying power. Alternately, wealth cap excesses can be given away, but only to individuals and counted in their personal caps along with assets. These excesses should only be given to individuals. Wealth including assets of ALL organizations, governments, institutions, etc. should lie in the hands of their members and counted in their individual caps.
Making the yearly cap inversely proportional to population growth would give the greatest incentive for people worldwide to have smaller families. The less people the higher the cap and vis.
As the world economy becomes democratized and people's needs are met, war, poverty, famine, dictatorship, overpopulation, pollution, loss of diversity and even taxes will vanish. All by the simple solution of capping wealth direct democratically.
I will note that monopolies are not limited to corporate ones. One person like Murdoch is a monopoly all by himself. Monopolies and monocultures go against nature's diversity. Like nature, the wealth cap limits the resources any one organism is able to hoard, thus enabling more organisms to compete in the process of natural selection.
I hope your group and other greens will consider the wealth cap proposal and make it part of your solutions.
love and peace,
Dear Mr. Dufour
Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 13:04:03 -0400
Your analysis is right on. However, Americans will hardly accept solutions from non-Americans. We only accept the solutions propounded by the patriots on FOX news who work for the plutocrats who own and control the world. We have been very effectively conditioned to believe that pundits have all the answers.
There really is no solution because at the root of all the world's problems is the concentrating money-power system. Plutocrats won't willingly share and have made revolution too difficult if not impossible. Sadly, it will take catastrophe's like Peak Oil and nukes to achieve some balance. (Read Jared Diamond's "Collapse" for the reasons why societies fail or succeed and apply it to the global society.) And to think that proven solutions like Direct Democracy could have fixed things:
With Direct Democracy and the Wealth Cap I wrote you about once, things could have been corrected without pain, suffering and ecocide. We can only hope that any survivors will learn from the mistakes of conservative ignorance.
Subject: Dear Germain Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 14:18:30 -0400
How about organizing a "Manhattan Project to Save the Planet", attended by non-industry scientists, ecologists, green energy producers, environmental organizations and perhaps chaired by the Green Party?
Here is my simple formula for Saving the Planet: b = w/p
b is the health of the biosphere. The higher the number, the healthier the biosphere and vis.
*Nature caps wealth/power resources for all organisms by not allowing each to hoard more than it can personally defend. With easily hoardable and self-multiplying money, humans have circumvented these natural processes, Processes that stimulate the diversity that leads to stable ecosystems and prevent the uniformity and monocultural entropy that comes with extreme wealth/power concentration.
A periodic cap w on the net worth of all people achieves nature's intent. This cap can be established by yearly direct democratic vote and should be high enough to preserve the profit motive (assuming that's important), but low enough to prevent extreme resource concentration.
All Wealth Cap excesses can be given away but only to individuals and this money should count toward their personal caps. Institutional, corporate and government assets must also lie in the hands of their members and be counted in their personal caps. This will prevent them from acquiring sufficient dictatorial power to take away our freedoms.
*Population growth is one threat from which almost all others are derived. Making population growth p inversely proportional to wealth/power resources w, provides an economic incentive to lower population growth. The lower the population growth p, the higher the Wealth Cap w becomes and vis. When the Wealth Cap w is high enough to provide the desired maximum to every person, population p will stabilize and the health of the biosphere b will be highest.
If the earth's population p is lowered to one billion and each person had one million dollars, it would require one quatrillion uninflated dollars to provide for one billion millionaires, an unrealistic figure.
Assuming that the point is reached where everyone has the same amount of money-power, it would require a lower total population to arrive at a more realistic figure unless we introduce inequality or reduce the total population even more. Here we can play with the numbers:
Assuming everyone has the same amount, if one billion people had 100,000 dollars each, it would take one hundred trillion uninflated dollars for one billion people making 100,000 each to have. That may or may not be a sufficient stimulus for a strong profit motive. (Then we might also ask, is the profit motive so important?) To raise the cap, we would have to lower the earth's population to under one billion.
If we lowered the earth's population p to 500,000,000, and assuming everyone was equally rich, the total per-capita would rise to 200,000 each, still perhaps not high enough for a strong profit motive.
The questions arising are:
1. What is the ideal number of humans on earth according to it's carrying capacity.
2. What is the total amount of money-power each should be allowed to hoard.
3. Should there be inequality to keep the profit motive?
4. How important is the profit motive for people who are already well-to-do?
5. How important is the profit motive to world progress?
6. Is there a need for progress in a world where everyone's needs are met?
Further ramblings will probably continue.
Back to top of page
Send email to email@example.com with questions or comments about this web site.
Copyright © 2004 Global Community WebNet Ltd.