Posted by Demos on November 27, 2009 at 09:31:58:
In Reply to: Re: community-based economic democracy posted by William Spademan on November 25, 2009 at 22:59:21:
PROFIT: CLARITY, LANGUAGE,MEANING
Your CommonGoodBank has so many good points & may indeed be another way to transform society....BUT I do have a basic problem with the inclusion & defense of 'profit'.
Why? Well, Lets agree that the word PROFIT may have several usages in our present language....in this way a 'little profit' seems reasonable, 'too much profit' unreasonable.
Ordinary conversation can even misuse it to imply it has no consequence and can come benignly into being.
But we need to be careful and think that thru.
For instance, is PROFIT -when an entire society is based on it as it is under Capitalism- OK?
The issue of what PROFIT IS AS A SOCIAL INSTITUTION is a much more crucial one than relative judgements, such as your otherwise well-done Common Good Bank example implies.
IS IT EVER REALLY 'OK'?
Profit, under Capitalism, has been institutionalized into a self-perpetuating power mechanism. It is a major component of how the system works. Under Capitalism, the vast economic/civic/socio-cultural system of legally sanctioned 'taking'--PROFIT(18th c. thinkers called it legalized theft)-- has a clear definition, identity and role.
It means 'some' (few)who control the industries & tools, property & means of creating wealth....can dictate and control what those who do the actual work,(the many) will receive back, given back in the form of a wage. THIS IS THE FUNDAMENTAL 'THEFT' (The Wage & Profit System) WE INSTITUTIONALLY LEGALIZE UNDER CAPITALISM. Without the ability to TAKE PROFIT, Capitalism would fail. IT IS THAT ESSENTIAL A FACT OF THE SYSTEM WE ARE BURDENED WITH. So we need to talk very deeply about it.
PROFIT is a very, very CRITICAL PART OF INJUSTICE & TYRANNY and for that reason, I want to ask you to consider how much a part it plays in the CommonGood Bank, its language and concept. Is it integral? Should it be?
I think it's not helpful to simply & vaguely lump the term 'profit' with an acceptance of it of 'as long as its small enough for me to feel comfortable". After all, isn't that exactly what the '1%' owners of 98% of the wealth feel? They'd even feel ok if it were a little bit more.
DOES SIZE MATTTER?
In fact, once institutionalized, size may not matter at all in defining whether profit is good or bad, because its potential gives bad results. Look at its institutionalzed character in our present economy. Protected by law and sanctified by the belief that 'as long as its fair, its good' and the guy who takes the profit is 'fair-minded'. Because it becomes a question of "In whose mind?"....and whose mind has the power to DECIDE.
In fact under Capitalism, for PROFIT to be GOOD and true to its NATURE at optimizing gain for 'he who has the power', it must be allowed to GROW. And that's where we get into trouble. Because, to paraphrase Napoleon's warning about History 'Whatever is most profitable becomes the way we have to live'.
PROFIT,NO PROFIT
So, lets just deal with 'profit' vs 'no profit' and see if using 'no profit' could work and be a fair and just way to organize. If BARTER (exchanging of goods and services of perceived & actual 'social use' value) can work, an exchange value-for-value, is there an intrinsic need for "PROFIT"? I would say 'no'. If a way could be developed to simplify and 'codify' a barter-like exchange on the 'Commonwealth Market' (as opposed to the 'Capitalist Market')wouldn't that free us from the concern of 'profit' becoming a relativistic nightmare as we have it today?
Lets go on...What if a system could be developed--without profit (the relative 'gain' you see as ok as long as its reasonable)--and moneyless since as you very nicely propose, money is only a symbol that has now become a weapon to prolong & protect Capitalism's stranglehold on those who actually create & make all the (real, social) wealth--- what if a model for democratic living could be devised that would be both profit-free and offer a codified equalitarian exchange system?
PeopleFor A New Society's model is about that. We feel it is critical to creating a just and democratic society to get rid of PROFIT and that allowing it as part of any 'better alternative' opens the gateway to what we now suffer.
Our model is simple. No profit. We believe the LaborTime CreditCard system (LTCC) of equating the time it takes to make goods & services...in exchange for the hours of labor we have individually contributed thru our work....that is, work that contributes to our collective social wellbeing & the common good. These electronically tallied credited hours...a soy-plastic credit card if you will...could create a profit-free and money-less REAL ECONOMY'.
Using "Hour of labor 'in' goods & services' exchanged for 'individual Hours of Labor credited' could rectify the harmful impact of PROFIT.
And that is where clarifying "PROFIT" becomes critical to understanding what we need to leave behind. Because, without relative judgements of 'big, small', ok, not ok....PROFIT is created by the 'surplus, UNEARNED value' that Capitalists skim --at the point of production as we say (the POP) from the labor of working people, you and me...).
Profit, to our way of thinking implies something potentially harmful that really has to be seen for what it is. A part of tyranny.
The Common Good Bank is an interesting concept that can offer lessons on using Capitalist Money to transform society into a more democratic union.
And maybe even become another 'transitional' mechanism much as politically electing Representatives to Congress would be.... towards creating in the next stage of human evolving, a cooperative wealth-sharing democracy at all levels of living.
But I think it would be better to forego & rethink the word or concept of 'profit' in its basic structure.
A Common Good Bank, to be 'for the common good', I think really must incorporate a 'profit-less' language & format to really be a clear way out of our current mess created by Capitalism...and yes, PROFIT.