If not Global Captalism - then What? - 0 views
-
I posit an optimistic view of the potential for Society from the emergence of a new and “Open” form of Capitalism.
-
Open Capital
-
the concept of “Open” Capital is “so simple…. it repels the mind".
- ...162 more annotations...
-
Open Capital is defined as “a proportional share in an enterprise for an indeterminate time”
-
‘Enterprise’ is defined as ‘any entity within which two or more individuals create, accumulate or exchange Value”.
-
Value is to Economics as Energy and Matter are to Physics.
-
The Metaphysics Of Value
-
division between “subject” and “object”.
-
primary reality is “Quality”
-
formless and indefinable
-
not a “thing”
-
a non-intellectual awareness or “pre-intellectual reality”
-
but an event at which the subject becomes aware of the object and before he distinguishes it
-
Quality is the basis of both subject and object
-
distinguish between “Static” and “Dynamic” Quality
-
treating Value as a form of “Quality” as envisioned by Pirsig.
-
Riegel
-
defined “Value” as “ the Relativity of Desire” again implying indeterminacy.
-
Pirsig’s approach Capital may be viewed as “Static” Value and Money as “Dynamic” Value. “Transactions” are the “events” at which individuals (Subjects) interact with each other or with Capital (both as Objects) to create forms of Value and at which “Value judgments” are made based upon a “Value Unit”.
-
The result of these Value Events /Transactions is to create subject/object pairings in the form of data ie Who “owns” or has rights of use in What,
-
at what Price
-
accounting data
-
Neo-Classical” Economics confuses indeterminate Value with a market– determined Price –
-
Data may be static
-
This Data identifies the subject with objects such as tangible ‘Material Value’
-
Data may itself constitute ‘Intellectual Value’
-
It, too, may then be defined in a subject/object pairing through the concept of “intellectual property”.
-
Other forms of Value are however not definable by data:
-
“sentimental” Value
-
Emotional Value’
-
'Spiritual Value’
-
We may therefore look at the “transaction” or “value event” in a new light.
-
The creation and circulation of Value essentially comprises the concept we know of as “Money”.
-
Money / Dynamic Value
-
“The purpose of money is to facilitate barter by splitting the transaction into two parts, the acceptor of money reserving the power to requisition value from any trader at any time
-
money
-
value unit dissociated from any object
-
monetary unit
-
the basis relative to which other values may be expressed
-
The monetary process is a dynamic one involving the creation and recording of obligations as between individuals and the later fulfilment of these obligations
-
The monetary “Value Event”/ Transaction involves the creation of “Credit”
-
obligation to provide something of equivalent Value at a future point in time.
-
These obligations may be recorded on transferable documents
-
database of “Credit”/obligations is not Money, but temporary “Capital”
-
“Working Capital”
-
Static Value – which only becomes “Money”/ Dynamic Value when exchanged in the transitory Monetary process.
-
what we think of as Money is in fact not tangible “cash” but rather
-
the flow of data between databases of obligations maintained by Credit Institutions
-
or dynamic
-
Banks literally “loan” Money into existence
-
In exchange for an obligation by an Individual to provide to the Bank something of Value
-
Bank’s obligation is merely to provide another obligation at some future time
-
These Bank-issued obligations are therefore
-
claim upon a claim upon Value
-
The true source of Credit is the Individual, not the intermediary Bank
-
this Money they create from nothing despite the fact that it is literally Value-less
-
Thus there is no true sharing of Risk and Reward involved in Lending
-
issue in relation to Credit/Debt and this relates to the nature of Lending itself.
-
the practice of Lending involves an incomplete exchange in terms of risk and reward: a Lender, as opposed to an Investor, has no interest in the outcome of the Loan, and requires the repayment of Principal no matter the ability of the Borrower to repay.
-
Ethical problem
-
-
"The Lender has no interest in the outcome of the loan", i.e doesn't care what happens in the end. The Lender ins not interested in the economical outcome of the Lender-Loner relation. So in fact there is no real risk sharing. the only risk for the Lender is when the Loner doesn't pay back, which is not really a risk... In fact it is a risk for the small bank, who has to buy money from the central bank, but not for the central bank.
-
-
Money is not
-
an “Object” circulating but rather a dynamic process of Value creation and exchange by reference to a “Value Unit”.
-
Capital/ Static Value
-
Capital represents the static accumulation of Value
-
Some forms of Capital are “productive”
-
An ethical question
-
in relation to Productive Capital relates to the extent of “property rights” which may be held over it thereby allowing individuals to assert “absolute” permanent and exclusive ownership - in particular in relation to Land
-
our current financial system is based not upon Value but rather a claim upon Value
-
Financial Capital consists of two types:
-
“Debt”
-
“Equity”
-
Interest
-
obligations of finite/temporary duration but with no participation in the assets or revenues
-
absolute and permanent ownership/participation (without obligation) in assets and revenues
-
discontinuity between Debt and Equity
-
at the heart of our current problems as a Society
-
The Enterprise
-
‘Charitable’ Enterprise
-
‘Social’ Enterprise
-
Value
-
exchanged in agreed proportions;
-
Value is exchanged for the Spiritual and Emotional Value
-
‘Commercial’ Enterprise
-
‘closed’
-
Value are exchanged between a limited number of individuals
-
Early enterprises were partnerships and unincorporated associations
-
need for institutions which outlived the lives of the Members led to the development of the Corporate body with a legal existence independent of its Members
-
The key development in the history of Capitalism was the creation of the ‘Joint Stock’ Corporate with liability limited by shares of a ‘Nominal’ or ‘Par’ value
-
over the next 150 years the Limited Liability Corporate evolved into the Public Limited Liability Corporate
-
Such “Closed” Shares of “fixed” value constitute an absolute and permanent claim over the assets and revenues of the Enterprise to the exclusion of all other “stakeholders” such as Suppliers, Customers, Staff, and Debt Financiers.
-
The latter are essentially ‘costs’ external to the
-
owners of the Enterprise
-
maximise ‘Shareholder Value’
-
There is a discontinuity/ fault-line within the ‘Closed’ Corporate
-
It has the characteristics of what biologists call a ‘semi-permeable membrane’ in the way that it allows Economic Value to be extracted from other stakeholders but not to pass the other way.
-
-
It is a way to extract value from productive systems. It is a system of exploitation.
-
-
Capital most certainly is and always has been - through the discontinuity (see diagram) between:‘Fixed’ Capital in the form of shares ie Equity; and ‘Working’ Capital in the form of debt finance, credit from suppliers, pre-payments by customers and obligations to staff and management.
-
irreconcilable conflict between Equity and Debt
-
xchange of Economic Value in a Closed Corporate is made difficult and true sharing of Risk and Reward is simply not possible
-
No Enterprise Model has been capable of resolving this dilemma. Until now.
-
Corporate Partnerships with unlimited liability
-
mandatory for partnerships with more than 20 partners to be incorporated
-
in the USA
-
it is the normal structure for professional partnerships
-
Limited Liability Partnerships
-
In the late 1990's
-
litigation
-
The UK LLP is supremely simple and remarkably flexible.
-
All that is needed is a simple ‘Member Agreement’ – a legal protocol which sets out the Aims, Objectives. Principles of Governance, Revenue Sharing, Dispute Resolution, Transparency and any other matters that Members agree should be included. Amazingly enough, this Agreement need not even be in writing, since in the absence of a written agreement Partnership Law is applied by way of default.
-
The ease of use and total flexibility enables the UK LLP to be utilised in a way never intended – as an ‘Open’ Corporate partnership.
-
‘Open’ Corporate Partnership
-
concepts which characterise the ‘Open’ Corporate Partnership
-
it is now possible for any stakeholder to become a Member of a UK LLP simply through signing a suitably drafted Member Agreement
-
‘Open’
-
supplier
-
employee
-
may instead become true Partners in the Enterprise with their interests aligned with other stakeholders.
-
-
-
no profit or loss in an Open Corporate Partnership, merely Value creation and exchange between members in conformance with the Member Agreement.
-
Proportional shares
-
in an Enterprise constitute an infinitely divisible, flexible and scaleable form of Capital capable of distributing or accumulating Value organically as the Enterprise itself grows in Value or chooses to distribute it.
-
Emergence of “Open” Capital
-
example of how ‘Temporary Equity’ may operate in practice
-
The Open Capital Partnership (“OCP”)
-
Within the OCP Capital and Revenue are continuous: to the extent that an Investee pays Rental in advance of the due date he becomes an Investor.
-
Open Capital – a new Asset Class
-
create a new asset class of proportional “shares”/partnership interests
-
in Capital holding OCP’s
-
Property Investment Partnerships (“PIP’s”)
-
Open Corporate Partnerships as a Co-operative Enterprise model
-
A Co-operative is not an enterprise structure: it is a set of Principles that may be applied to different types of enterprise structure.
-
Within a Partnership there is no “Profit” and no “Loss”.
-
Partnerships
-
mutual pursuit of the creation and exchange of Value
-
Partners do not compete with each othe
-
the crippling factors in practical terms have been, inter alia: the liability to which Member partners are exposed from the actions of their co-partners on their behalf; limited ability to raise capital.
-
they favour the interests of other stakeholders, are relatively restricted in accessing investment; are arguably deficient in incentivising innovation.
-
The ‘new’ LLP was expressly created to solve the former problem by limiting the liability of Member partners to those assets which they choose to place within its protective ‘semi-permeable membrane’
-
However, the ability to configure the LLP as an “Open” Corporate permits a new and superior form of Enterprise.
-
it is possible to re-organise any existing enterprise as either a partnership or as a partnership of partnerships.
-
the revenues
-
would be divided among Members in accordance with the LLP Agreement. This means that all Members share a common interest in collaborating/co-operating to maximise the Value generated by the LLP collectively as opposed to competing with other stakeholders to maximise their individual share at the other stakeholders’ expense.
-
facilitate the creation of LLP’s as “Co-operatives of Co-operatives”.
-
he ‘Commercial’ Enterprise LLP – where the object is for a closed group of individuals to maximise the value generated in their partnership. There are already over 7,000 of these.
-
-
-
the Profit generated in a competitive economy based upon shareholder value and unsustainable growth results from a transfer of risks outwards, and the transfer of reward inwards, leading to a one way transfer of Economic Value.
-
This,
-
will very often impoverish one or more constituency of stakeholders
-
A partnership, however, involves an exchange of value through the sharing of risk and reward.
-
Whether its assets are protected within a corporate entity with limited liability or not, it will always operate co-operatively – for mutual profit.
-
Open Capital, Economics and Politics
-
continuity between Capital as Static Value and Money as Dynamic Value which has never before been possible due to the dichotomy between the absolute/infinite and the absolute/finite durations of the competing claims over assets – “Equity” and “Debt”
-
Open Capital Partnership gives rise to a new form of Financial Capital of indeterminate duration. It enables the Capitalisation of assets and the monetisation of revenue streams in an entirely new way.
-
It is possible to envisage a Society within which individuals are members of a portfolio of Enterprises constituted as partnerships, whether limited in liability or otherwise.
-
Some will be charitable
-
Others will be ‘social’
-
‘Commercial’ enterprises of all kinds aimed at co-operatively working together to maximise value for the Members.
-
the process has already begun
-
Capitalism
-
superior
-
to all other models, such as Socialism.
-
It can only be replaced by another ‘emergent’ phenomenon, which is adopted ‘virally’ because any Enterprise which does not utilise it will be at a disadvantage to an Enterprise which does.
-
The ‘Open’ Corporate Partnership is: capable of linking any individuals anywhere in respect of collective ownership of assets anywhere; extremely cheap and simple to operate; and because one LLP may be a Member of another it is organically flexible and ‘scaleable’. The phenomenon of “Open Capital” – which is already visible in the form of significant commercial transactions - enables an extremely simple and continuous relationship between those who wish to participate indefinitely in an Enterprise and those who wish to participate for a defined period of time.
-
Moreover, the infinitely divisible proportionate “shares” which constitute ‘Open’ Capital allow stakeholder interests to grow flexibly and organically with the growth in Value of the Enterprise. In legal terms, the LLP agreement is essentially consensual and ‘pre-distributive’: it is demonstrably superior to prescriptive complex contractual relationships negotiated adversarially and subject to subsequent re-distributive legal action. Above all, the ‘Open’ Corporate Partnership is a Co-operative phenomenon which is capable, the author believes, of unleashing the “Co-operative Advantage” based upon the absence of a requirement to pay returns to “rentier” Capitalists.
